Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Drafts/OtherWikis

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The largest Wikis are: Deutsch · Español · Français · Italiano · Nederlands · 日本語 · Polski · Português · Русский (German, Spanish, French, Italian, Dutch, Japanese, Polish, Portuguese, Russian)

Spanish

  • Runs a Featured article (Artículo destacado), Good article (Artículo bueno), Picture of the Day (Imagen del día), Phrase of the day (Frase del día), Did you know (¿Sabías que...), In the News (Actualidad), On this day (Efemérides) and Portals. The TFA does not change daily.
  • Browsing the list and candidate pages reveals that many are translated from en.wiki, sample. Or this one, where they rather slam the en-wiki FA!
  • Stats: Mid-November, 697 featured out of 417,120 total, 1 in 598.
  • Basic structure (1a, 1b, etc.) almost identical to WIAFA.
  • But, below the basic criteria, there are longer descriptions of a few of the components: 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d and 2.
  • 1b, Es completo: Un artículo destacado debe cubrir todos los aspectos de un tema con base en su importancia. Ningún aspecto debe dominar el artículo a no ser que sea claramente el aspecto más importante del tema. Los detalles excesivos deben trasladarse a sub-artículos, y sólo los más importantes deben resumirse en el principal. Los aspectos más importantes requieren resúmenes más largos y detallados, mientras que los menos importantes los requieren más cortos. Implica priorizar constantemente qué información es la más importante, y llevar el resto a otros artículos. Esta es la parte de los criterios completo y punto de vista neutral en la que más se falla.
  • 1b, Comprehensive: Defer to Jbmurray for exact translation. This is basically a description of summary style. (Not entirely sure I'd translate "completo" as "comprehensive," especially in this context.) Rough and ready translation: "A featured article should cover all the aspects of a topic according to their importance. No aspect should dominate the article unless it is clearly the topic's most important aspect. Excessive detail should be moved to sub-articles, and only the most important should be summarized in the main article. The most important aspects need longer and more detailed summaries, while the least important need shorter ones. This means constant prioritization of the most important information, moving the rest to other articles. This is the part of the comprehensiveness and NPOV criteria that is most often breached."
  • They call it a vote
  • They have five elected admins who can close
  • Nominators and reviewers have to have at least 100 edits and a month since first edit
  • At least six "votes" required to close
  • 7 day minimum discussion
  • At least 21 days before a re-nomination
  • Same, 100 edit, one month suffrage
  • Same five elected admins can close
  • At least six "votes" needed to close
  • 21 days before re-nomination
  • 7 day minimum discussion
  • Two nifty little templates, much like the RFA one here, colour coded and with bombs and alarm clocks. Plus templates on FAC itself to say that an FAC is shortly to close with a fail unless there is further discussion.
  • Stats: 277 Featured images
  • No other featured processes.

French

  • Main page Accueil
    • Spotlighted article (Lumière sur…) may be either an article de qualite' (AQD=FA) or a bon article (BA=GA), list of portals, DQK (Le saviez-vous ? ), Featured picture (Image du jour) and On this day (Actualités et événements)
    • spotlighted article changes every day
    • No equivalent to TFA/R
  • FA: Articles de qualité
    • as of Nov 18, 502 articles at AdQ status (out of 728,218). Use a gold star on the article right-hand corner to identify them (similar to English WP but a different color star)
    • They spotlight the newly promoted articles on the main AdQ page with a brief blurb; below that is the list of all articles
  • Rules for FA/FAC/FAR Wikipédia:Articles de qualité/Règles Rules for nominators and reviewers
  • Criteria
    • Very similar to English version: must be well written, complete, verifiable, and neutral - uses correct language and grammar and meets the French MOS guidelines
    • treats the subject in totality and doesn't neglect any major fact or details; also limits red links
    • uses reliable external sources
    • Images are not required, but those that included should be pertinent illustrations with proper licensing. Appropriate licensing is stressed on many of the FAC-related pages.
    • of an appropriate length without going into unnecessary detail
  • FAC Proposition articles de qualité]
    • They call it a vote
    • articles are listed by date proposed (week-long ranges), with a separate page to vote on each article proposed that day. The individual voting pages are not transcluded. There is one line for each article that is up for a vote: link to the page, name of the article, and a very brief description of the subject of the article (example: Surtesy described as "a volcanic island")
    • IPs are not allowed to vote; must have been a registered user with at least 50 contributions before the article was nominated
    • The votes are fairly simple and divided into Support for Article de qualite', support as a Bon article (their version of GA), Wait (attendre) (doesn't meet either criteria right now), Neutral/other, and Discussion (where there are suggestions for improvement). There is a template for voting: {{pourAdQ}} In the nominations I reviewed there was minimal discussion. The wait section appears to have replaced a previous "Contre" section, so that one is no longer voting "against" an article - it's either ready or needs to wait.
    • user Gemini1980 appears to be the only (or most active) delegate in closing these and clerking (moving invalid votes around). (S)He is also very involved in the Spotlight on... talk page.
    • All closed nominations have a summary with the number of votes for FA, GA, waiting, and other.
    • Nominations last one month. After that month, if the nom received at least 8 votes, and 90% of the total votes were support for AdQ, then it is promoted. If there are at least 8 votes, and more than 50% of the votes are for AdQ/BA combined, then the article is moved to a second category on the nomination page (the second round). This second round lasts another month. Previous votes are retained, although they can be stricken and moved if the article improves. If, after that 2nd month, more than 75% of the votes are for FA, it is promoted; if 2/3 of the votes are for FA and GA combined, it it promoted to GA.
  • FAR is called Contestations du label AdQ et retraits
    • essentially goes through another FAC and must meet current FAC numbers for approvals. If it doesn't get the appropriate percentage of votes that it meets the FAC criteria, then it is demoted. However, if the article is contested within a year of its first promotion, it only needs a 50% majority that it is an article of Quality to keep the label.
    • Required to place a notice on the article talk page 1 week before contesting it. At that time, should identify the authors and the projects and notify them as well
  • Any other featured processes ?
    • They have featured portals, which are nominated on the same page as articles de qualite' [1]. It has the same rules as the AdQ
    • I did not find a process for featured images or featured sounds

German

  • Runs an Article of the Day (Artikel des Tages), In the News (In den Nachrichten), Recently Deceased (Kürzlich Verstorbene), Did You Know? (Schon gewusst?), On this day (Was geschah am ...) and a Wikipedia update (Wikipedia aktuell)
  • The Article of the Day changes daily and may be either an Exzellente Artikel (Featured Article, lit. Excellent Article) or a Lesenswerte Artikel (Good Article, lit. Article worth reading)
  • As of 19 November 2008, the German Wikipedia had 1,461 Exzellente Artikel out of 827,969 total articles (0.18 percent).
  • The 1,400 Exzellente Artikel milestone was reached 2 September 2008 by Indogermanische Ursprache (Proto-Indo-European language)
  • Exzellente Artikel, like English Featured Articles, are identified with a star in the upper-right corner of the article page.
  • Exzellente Artikel promotions and demotions utilize the same process page.
  • The KEA process does not have precisely defined criteria (lesenswerte Artikel, curiously, do have criteria); Exzellente Artikel nominators, however, are expected to proof for Richtigkeit, Vollständigkeit, Stil und Rechtschreibfehler (Accuracy, Completeness, Style and Spelling) and use of the review process is recommended.
  • Nominators are requested to notify principle authors of the candidacy, but do not require their consent to proceed with the nomination.
  • Nominations last 20 days, during which time the article must receive at least three Pro-Stimmen (votes for promotion) and at least twice as many Pro-Stimmen as Contra-Stimmen (votes against promotion). Despite the use of this count, however, decisions are consensus based. The instructions note that one meaningful issue identified after 99 Pro-Stimmen would prevent promotion.
  • IPs and registered users of all tenures may participate so long as their statements are signed.
  • Nominations may be closed prematurely if, after a week, they have received 10 votes for promotion and no opposition or, conversely, 5 votes against promotion and no support.
  • There does not appear to be a director or group of directors. The presence of closure instructions suggests any user may close a nomination.
  • Certain users (e.g. ADK, Adrian Bunk, SchirmerPower and Vux) are involved more than others in the "paperwork" of the KEA and AdT processes (e.g. adding the star to promoted articles and updating the AdT).
  • Nomination discussions are archived to the article's talk page, not to a KEA subpage.
  • The Artikel des Tages appears to be chosen by the community; there is no indicated director.
  • Subjects in alternating subject areas (Themenbereiche) and with relevance to current events or anniversaries are preferred.
  • Multiple candidates for the same date may be presented at a time. There does not appear to be a time limit (e.g. there are already nominations for January 2009).
  • As of 19 November 2008, there are 610 Exzellente Bilder (Featured Images, lit. Excellent Images)
  • Featured images are not showcased on the main page.
  • Exzellente Bilder criteria include compositional and encyclopedic requirements.
  • Nominations last 14 days and must receive at least 5 Pro-Stimmen and twice as many Pro-Stimmen as Contra-Stimmen
  • To have one's vote counted, an editor must have a 6 month tenure or at least 60 edits. Editors not meeting either of these thresholds may still participate in the discussion and nominate candidates.
  • Lists and portals are eligible and become featured through the same process.
  • As of 19 November 2008, there are 211 informative Listen (Featured Lists, lit. Informative Lists) and 38 informative Portale (Featured Portals, lit. Informative Portals).
  • Portals and lists have separate criteria.
  • Nominations last 7 days, after which time the list or portal must have received at least three more Pro-Stimmen than Contra-Stimmen.

Dutch

  • Runs an "highlighted" article (Uitgelicht), In the News (Actueel), Did you know (Wist je dat...), Recently Deceased (Recente sterfgevallen), a This Day in History (...in de geschiedenis), a Portal of the week (Portaal van de week) and a picture of the day (Afbeelding van de dag)
  • As of 20 November 2008, the Dutch Wikipedia had 185 articles in the Etalage (showcase) out of 497,379 total articles (0.04 percent).

Portuguese

  • FA (Artigo destacado/Artigo em destaque), ITN (Eventos recentes), POTD (Imagem do dia, same as Commons), SA (Neste dia...), DYK (Sabia que...). The TFA does not change daily.
  • Several translated/adapted from English WP, many local efforts as well.
  • Stats: November 22, 376 featured out of 441,011 total, 1 in 1173.
  • Quite similar to WIAFA. Uses a numbered sublist (1.1, 1.2, 1.3 instead of 1a, 1b, 1c).
    • Main differences: explicitly requires at least one image (O artigo deve possuir imagens relacionadas com o assunto, The article must have images related to its subject, requirement is explicit in the FAC instructions); there is no requirement of consistency in citation style—instead, 2c refers to the article's table of contents; appears to allow external jumps in lieu of formatted citations; article information must be "correct", which is far more subjective than our "accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge"; no explicit 1e exception for changes made in response to the FA process.
  • Explicitly referred to as a "candidacy" process, but conducted as a vote. Votes are separated into "support" (A favor) and "oppose" (Contra) sections. Opposes must be followed by a rationale, while supports may be per nom (not recommended but acceptable).
  • The process may be interrupted at any time if the article is found to fail FA criteria.
  • The FAC process takes 30 days, no more, no less.
  • At least seven votes required to close. 75% supports required to pass.
  • At least 30 days before a renomination. Article must also have undergone "significant modifications".
  • Successful candidacies are added to the TFA queue in chronological order. In the Portuguese Wikipedia, TFAs are preemptively semi-protected for the duration of their mainpage stay (three/four days).
  • {{FAC}} template for the article Talk page: [2]
  • FAR: Known as Revalidação. Is not operational at the moment; under discussion, but there appears to be opposition. An FAR process was in place in 2007 ([3]), but is now marked as historical.
  • Other featured content: FP (same as Commons, no local process) and Anexos destacados (Featured "appendixes", roughly equivalent to the FL process). Thus named because there is a separate namespace for list-type content. FL criteria · FLC

Russian

  • The Main page пожаловать в Википедию,(Welcome to Wikipedia) includes; On This Day (В этот день), Do you know, that...(Знаете ли вы, что…), interestingly they have Collaboration of the week (Совместная работа недели). Also included are Selected Portals and Articles and the front page articles which they call Remarkably good article (Хорошая (примечательная) статья, and the day's Featured Article (Избранные статьи). They indicate FA status with this pretty little skewed star . My experience with the Russian Wikipedia is that it is less developed than the English one mainly with regard to citations although this one about a Moscow football club seems well cited, [4] but I can't tell how reliable they are. I have an account but I don't contribute very much, although this might look strangely familiar to some of you [5]
  • The FA criteria—a rough translation:
"Featured articles are articles that members of Wikipedia believe are the best. Before they can appear on this page, such articles must pass the procedure for the election at Wikipedia:Candidates for the featured article, where they are reviewed (discussed) for accuracy, neutrality, completeness and style. There is also a good article award for those that have not yet met all the criteria, but are close. All featured articles are marked with a small gold star in the upper right corner of your page, and a medal hanging at the bottom of the article. There are 260 featured articles on Russian Wikipedia." Graham.
Talk 22:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Here's some more details:

All FAs appear on the Main Page in turn. Candidates are promoted by admins every three days. The admins are expected to chose a candidate and follow the discussions. Candidates that are not considered fully ready for FA can be submitted to "fixers" without being archived first. One article currently being fixed is The Jimi Hendrix Experience. Here are the Russian FA criteria:

  • The article must be original and not copied.
  • The article should be no less than 15kb.
  • Neutral point of view
  • No original research
  • No errors or inaccuracies
  • Complete with no obvious omissions or missing sections
  • Stable and not protected during candidature
  • Must have a category and inter-Wiki(s)
  • Must have external links
  • All images must have clear licensing
  • Must have references and links to reliable sources
  • One or more images are desirable but not essential

Some of the current FAC are Catacombs of Rome, Halloween (movie 1978), Human rights in Korea and Henry IV (Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire). Editors should not nominate more than one or two articles at once because, "citicisms of one will probably apply to the others".

They decide by voting on whether the article is GA or FA. Here are the current "discussions" on Catacombs of Rome:

Catacombs of Rome

An article on Roman sights, which were forgotten for almost 600 years. The catacombs are famous for frescos of both ancient and Christian traditions. -- Testus 11:06, 18 Nov., 2008 (UTC)

  • I think it can be -- Serg2 15:57, 18 Nov, 2008 (UTC)
  • Certainly . JukoFF 18:59, 18 Nov, 2008 (UTC)
  • No doubt , impressive in content and design .-- Nikolai 98765 19:37, 18 Nov, 2008 (UTC)
  • No discussion, , such work and care .-- Shakko 19:49, 18 Nov., 2008 (UTC)
  • , taking into account the comments below - Dmitry Rozhkov 19:54, 18 Nov, 2008 (UTC)
  • No need to discuss, - Ghirla-trep, 19:58, 18 Nov., 2008 (UTC)
  • , lite 00:21, 19 Nov, 2008 (UTC)
  • , and without any doubts. Good luck! - Zoe 02:53, 19 November, 2008 (UTC)
  • , without any doubts - Dmitrij96 14:23, 19 Nov, 2008 (UTC)
  • - Gay North 09:31, 21 Nov, 2008 (UTC)
  • I agree with the previous comment,. Great art! - Volodimer 13:24, 24 Nov, 2008 (UTC)

Not a bit like

Talk 17:12, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Drafts/OtherWikis&oldid=1135964192"