Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for improvement/Archives/Successful Nominations/January 2013

< Wikipedia:Articles for improvement‎ | Archives‎ | Successful Nominations
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Today's article for improvement/Archives/Successful Nominations/January 2013)


This page lists the TAFI nominations that were closed as successful in January 2013.

PASSED:

Popular support, added to schedule starting Feb 9. --NickPenguin(contribs) 01:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

The following Today's Article for Improvement nomination is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Statue

(Arts) A start class article with almost all pictures! Needs big help. Horai 551 (talk) 11:35, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Horai 551 (talk) 11:35, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Coin945 (talk) 18:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --NickPenguin(contribs) 00:48, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --∴ ZX95 [discuss] 07:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Wizardman 15:35, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Yes, definitely. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 16:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Ushau97 (talk) 10:10, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

Tomboy

Currently barely more than a stub. This article would be great for collaboration because it's mostly a blank slate and there are both academic and popular culture angles to write about. The article currently average 1328 page views per day, which is pretty high. Kaldari (talk) 22:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Kaldari (talk) 22:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:52, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Horai 551 (talk) 12:08, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. j⚛e deckertalk 16:52, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

Jungle

(Geography) A partially-developed article that would benefit from expansion. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --NickPenguin(contribs) 00:48, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Coin945 (talk) 12:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --j⚛e deckertalk 17:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Horai 551 (talk) 07:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Wizardman 20:33, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

Notability

(Arts) Here's a very general concept that's very poorly written about and has needed improvement for a very long time. Something for everyone: sociologists, philosophers, psychologists, PR men... St John Chrysostom Δόξατω Θεώ 17:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. St John Chrysostom Δόξατω Θεώ 17:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. The irony is delicious. Cannot think of a better article than this to help newbies get a sense of how to edit and what to include.--Coin945 (talk) 20:11, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. j⚛e deckertalk 23:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --NickPenguin(contribs) 07:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Horai 551 (talk) 11:11, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Northamerica1000(talk) 15:14, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Ought to be fun as well for any unemployed, underemployed, and/or recently laid off reporters who want to try and keep their WP:NPOV skills honed. -- ༺།།ༀ་ཨཱཿ་ཧཱུྃ།།འཚེར།།xeltifon།།སར་ཝ་མང་ག་ལམ།།༻  {say it}  {contribs} 06:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Wizardman 23:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

====Writer==== (switched to 16 February by TheOriginalSoni (talk)) (Arts) Superstub, very general topic — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:02, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:02, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Not sure what this article would include exactly, but it certainly can be improved. :)--Coin945 (talk) 12:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I have a general idea, I could post it on the talk page — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    On the talk page for Writer? Sure, go ahead! :)--Coin945 (talk) 12:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Added there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Just read it. Nice ideas. :D Sounds good to me.--Coin945 (talk) 15:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. —017Bluefield (talk) 20:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --NickPenguin(contribs) 07:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Horai 551 (talk) 11:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Wizardman 23:31, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:09, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

Salt (chemistry)

(Science) Start-class core article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Just about undeveloped enough for TAFI to be beneficial. —WFC— FL wishlist 05:46, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --NickPenguin(contribs) 00:48, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Horai 551 (talk) 02:17, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Nouniquenames 17:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Wizardman 23:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

Poaching

(Society) This is an incredibly neglected and empty article for such a huge subject. It doesn't even cover the scope of different types of poaching (like plants or animals), statistics, or global phenomenon and demands. It is a really undeveloped article for a subject that affects many things and needs a lot of attention. Turn685 (talk) 20:46, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Turn685 (talk) 20:46, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Northamerica1000(talk) 14:04, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --NickPenguin(contribs) 00:48, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Coin945 (talk) 12:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Nouniquenames 17:02, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. ༺།།ༀ་ཨཱཿ་ཧཱུྃ།།འཚེར།།xeltifon།།སར་ཝ་མང་ག་ལམ།།༻  {say it}  {contribs} 07:55, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Wizardman 23:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

The Today's Article for Improvement nomination above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
PASSED:

Popular support, added to schedule starting Feb 16. --NickPenguin(contribs) 21:19, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

The following Today's Article for Improvement nomination is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wonders of the World

(Geography/History) High-importance article in a bit of a mess atm. Coin945 (talk) 17:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, this isn't strictly about the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World (they have their own article for that). This is about the concept of "Wonders of the World" in general, and discussion the many different applications the term has had throughout history. Right now, it's just a bunch of random lists of world wonders with little to no prose at all.--Coin945 (talk) 09:55, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Coin945 (talk) 17:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --NickPenguin(contribs) 18:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. The article is rather developed, but there is definitely room for improvement, and the topic seems likely to appeal to a diverse variety of people. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Ushau97 (talk) 08:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Wizardman 05:36, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

George M. Dallas

Dallas was the vice president under James Knox Polk in the mid 1840s. For a vice president of the United States, his article is pretty bad. This is great for collaboration because it's a Start-class BLP (check that, general biography) with more coverage out there (if not on the web in reference books, but the web would be a start). Anyway, I think this would be a great candidate for TAFI. Thanks-- Go Phightins! (talk) 01:42, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Go Phightins! (talk) 01:42, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Although I must note that this is not a BLP. Dallas died in 1864. AutomaticStrikeout 02:31, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, meant general biography. He'd be pretty old to still be a BLP. Go Phightins! (talk) 02:33, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nouniquenames 17:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
4. Support. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
5. NickPenguin(contribs) 03:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

  1. Obscure topic, only gets about 100 pageviews per day. Kaldari (talk) 20:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Have to disagree that a former U.S. VP and Secy. of State is "obscure". Go Phightins! 20:34, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Slang

(Society) A start-class article with plenty of potential for improvements. The topic seems likely to attract viewers and editors. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  1. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --NickPenguin(contribs) 09:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Coin945 (talk) 09:08, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Horai 551 (talk) 07:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --∴ ZX95 [discuss] 07:42, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Comments

Energy crop (switched to 9 February by TheOriginalSoni (talk)) nomination unsigned Northamerica1000(talk)
Coin945 (talk)
NickPenguin(contribs)
༺།།ༀ་ཨཱཿ་ཧཱུྃ།།འཚེར།།xeltifon།།སར་ཝ་མང་ག་ལམ།།༻  {say it}  {contribs}
 (Technology) An underdeveloped article that covers several types of energy and renewable energy generated from crops. As of this post, the article has only three citations, and the article is easily expandable due to significant coverage that has occurred and continues to occur about this topic. (the unsigned nomination)

Gut feeling: this is a taxpayer subsidized industry's PR buzzword-titled article which needs opposing viewpoints acknowledged in the first place, let alone documented and independently verified, if it is to serve as anything more than a stand-alone informational cul-de-sac masquerading as an WP:NPOV encyclopedia entry aimed at a general audience. There is a spate of current complex controversies surrounding the subject matter of this entry, not a single one of which, at writing, has (to my eyes, anyway) been paid so much as lip service in the article itself. A total of three sources, all from industrial perspectives emphasizing overwhelmingly the "wow" aspect of so-called "clean" technologies with not a single mention of NGO perspectives is at very best a matter of pure, unadulterated WP:POV which strains credulity. Logical counterpart to this article might be something like Agribusiness. Might be extremely interesting to see how these two articles might merge. ༺།།ༀ་ཨཱཿ་ཧཱུྃ།།འཚེར།།xeltifon།།སར་ཝ་མང་ག་ལམ།།༻  {say it}  {contribs} 08:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agribusiness Northamerica1000(talk) 22:59, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply] Northamerica1000(talk)
Coin945 (talk)

NickPenguin(contribs)
༺།།ༀ་ཨཱཿ་ཧཱུྃ།།འཚེར།།xeltifon།།སར་ཝ་མང་ག་ལམ།།༻  {say it}  {contribs}

(Technology) Another agriculture-related article that would benefit from more sourcing and expansion. As of this post, the entry has only two citations. The topic has received a great deal of coverage, making the article easily-improvable. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:59, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flip side of this coin is Energy crop. A paucity of both sources and substance on an NGO activist buzzword-titled article. Energy crop and Agribusiness alike strike me as "preaching to the choir" inside separately soundproofed echo chambers in extremely close proximity. Very little helpful information is actually conveyed here to a general audience. TMI far too compressed comprising mostly buzzword definitions of other buzzwords, reading in the end like an awkwardly constructed dictionary entry in which separate specialist definitions "A" and "B" of the same buzzword "stand in", ineffectively, for actual WP:NPOV delineation of very real current controversies, not one of which is adequately explained within the article itself (although it is quite nicely wikilinked throughout). Ends in a bewilderingly unreadable alphabet soup conveying no sense whatsoever of the subject matter's actual notability, thereby begging the question of general readers not already well-versed in researching whatever subject matter might (or might not, even) be at hand: "why does this even matter?" ༺།།ༀ་ཨཱཿ་ཧཱུྃ།།འཚེར།།xeltifon།།སར་ཝ་མང་ག་ལམ།།༻  {say it}  {contribs} 09:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of alcoholic beverages —WFC— FL wishlist 08:15, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply] Northamerica1000(talk) 14:29, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
--NickPenguin(contribs) 03:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Might have the same detractors, as those who were against my Human body nomination, but to hell with that! Let's all learn more about alcohol!! :D--Coin945 (talk) 09:55, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply] 		Following on from the relative success of List of food preparation utensils, I think this is another viable candidate for improvement. A format similar to List of culinary nuts would seem the best way forward, given that most alcoholic beverages fall under sub-categories (such as wines, beers and spirits). —WFC— FL wishlist 08:15, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wii (video game series) Coin945 (talk) 15:07, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply] Looks good. Nice pick. (ignore the edit summary, it was a leg-pulling of this editor who has just opposed my nomination!) Tito Dutta (talk) 18:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Good find.--Horai 551 (talk) 07:35, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Northamerica1000(talk) 18:48, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
--NickPenguin(contribs) 03:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Too many ELs, See also recommendations, future sub-section.. these issues I have found after first glance. --Tito Dutta (talk) 18:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Today's Article for Improvement nomination above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_improvement/Archives/Successful_Nominations/January_2013&oldid=1088286483"