FamilySearch Wiki talk:Featured Article Archive: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 11:07, 12 July 2011

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Featured Article Archive page.
Put new text under old text. Start a new talk topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to FamilySearch Wiki? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith Avoid personal attacks

Back to dates[edit source]

In looking at Wikipedia and WikiHow we find their archive articles are dated. We know that we are in our infancy but we want to feature new articles much more often than we have been, as I looked at the the history of this archive it seems to be desires to go back to what was done in early April of 2010 with dates and boxed articles because there will come a time shortly when we are adding new articles much more often. Can someone help us go to that again? Much Thanks, Dawne 18:41, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Dawne, I agree, I think it is useful to show when the articles were featured on the main page. I will rework the page using the layout last used in April 2010. --Steve 16:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Dates and featured articles[edit source]

Steve thank you that will be wonderful, l thank you so much for reworking it.

We are most grateful to you.

Dawne 17:03, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Awesome![edit source]

Steve-

you are grand!

perfect[edit source]

this is wonderful Steve thank you so much the archives look so good. The user box for those working on the featured artcles looks fine, yes go a head with it. again Steve thank you.Dawne 20:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

yes this awesome[edit source]

Steve this is very healthy and excited. What do you think of this, I had put some of this on forums for the criteria?

 Trustworthy - Do you feel this page has sufficient citations and that those citations come from trustworthy sources?
 Objective - Do you feel that this page shows a fair representation of all perspectives on the issue?
 Complete - Do you feel that this page covers the essential topic areas that it should?
 Well-written - Do you feel that this page is well-organized and well-written?
 Should have at least one internal link and one external link
 Gives sources.
 An image in the article with captions
 Divided by headings.
 If the article is about where records are the external link could take us there if possible.
 Compliant with Style guide
 Give comprehensiveness of collection, such as transcribed or user submitted
 When applicable dates included
 If there is a cost, state that there is a cost.
 Why is the record worth searching?
Dawne 17:07, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 Steve this is very healthy and excited. What do you think of this, I had put some of this on forums for the criteria?
- Trustworthy - Do you feel this page has sufficient citations and that those citations come from trustworthy sources?<br> Objective - Do you feel that this page shows a fair representation of all perspectives on the issue?<br> Complete - Do you feel that this page covers the essential topic areas that it should?<br> Well-written - Do you feel that this page is well-organized and well-written?<br> Should have at least one internal link and one external link<br> Gives sources.<br> An image in the article with captions <br> Divided by headings.<br> If the article is about where records are the external link could take us there if possible.<br> Compliant with Style guide <br> Give comprehensiveness of collection, such as transcribed or user submitted<br> When applicable dates included<br> If there is a cost, state that a cost is included.
+ Trustworthy - Do you feel this page has sufficient citations and that those citations come from trustworthy sources?<br> Objective - Do you feel that this page shows a fair representation of all perspectives on the issue?<br> Complete - Do you feel that this page covers the essential topic areas that it should?<br> Well-written - Do you feel that this page is well-organized and well-written?<br> Should have at least one internal link and one external link<br> Gives sources.<br> An image in the article with captions <br> Divided by headings.<br> If the article is about where records are the external link could take us there if possible.<br> Compliant with Style guide <br> Give comprehensiveness of collection, such as transcribed or user submitted<br> When applicable dates included<br> If there is a cost, state that there is a cost.<br> Why is the record worth searching?<br>[[User:HoleDL|Dawne]] 17:07, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
-[[User:HoleDL|Dawne]] 17:05, 12 July 2011 (UTC)<br> Why is the record worth searching?<br>````