[Every episode article (except one) from this season is of GA status or higher.
Homer's Enemy and
Homer's Phobia are both FAs,
The Simpsons (season 8) is an FL and every other page is a GA, with the exception of
My Sister, My Sitter, which recently failed its GA nomination. --
Scorpion
0422
23:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support. You've sold me! Witty Lama 23:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose until remaining non GA becomes GA. LuciferMorgan 01:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support My Sister, My Sitter seems to have failed mostly out of a difficult in finding material, not lack of completeness (although "currently scores" is unacceptable dated). Including articles slightly too short for Featured or Good status for thesake of completeness has a precedent with the List of Canadian elections FT. Circeus 01:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support - I don't mind one out of 26 articles being less than GA. Greeves ( talk • contribs • reviews) 01:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support - I've seen the Simpsons Wikiproject work incredibly hard with all their episode articles and support their work being recognised as FT, having passed much of their work to GA. Alientraveller 15:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - Right as one of the 3 primary editors of these articles I'm not going to support it. Not because it doesn't deserve a support, but just because our project has been falsely accused of "vote rigging" in the past, so we tend not to vote in our own articles candidacys anymore. Anyway, other primary contributers, aside from me and Scorpion, Maitch and JameiLei. Gran 2 16:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support - I have no connection to the Simpsons project, and I think its an awesome achievement. Judgesurreal777 22:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Just so you all know, pass or fail, we will be trying our best to get My Sister, My Sitter to GA status, but at the time being its a matter of lack of content and we can't find anything overly notable to add. We are working on it though. -- Scorpion 0422 03:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Clearly fails criterion 6. There is no reason to believe that the one episode My Sister, My Sitter is of more "limited subject matter" than the other episodes. There are other potential untapped sources for this topic that I will post shortly at
Talk:My Sister, My Sitter. Otherwise, this is an excellently covered topic and I look forward to its completion by the GAing of My Sister, My Sitter.--
Pharos
00:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Reply Several current featured topics have pages that are not GA or FA quality. For example,
Uranus, which is part of the
Solar System FT is neither a GA or FA. --
Scorpion
0422
02:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- The requirements at Wikipedia:Featured topic criteria have been quite clear for some time now. It is perhaps understandable if older FTs that came in under less clear guidelines are retained as legacy and will be reviewed in future, but this should certainly not be the case with new FTs. I will note that there are only two articles in the whole FT system currently against the letter of the criteria, Uranus and Michigan State Spartans ( List of Nunavut general elections would qualify as "limited subject matter").-- Pharos 02:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Reply Several current featured topics have pages that are not GA or FA quality. For example,
Uranus, which is part of the
Solar System FT is neither a GA or FA. --
Scorpion
0422
02:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Argument is nitpicky to an extreme, blocking the largest and most developed topic to date over one is absurd.
Judgesurreal777
02:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- How exactly is this nitpicky? It clearly violates the basic criteria of what an FT is.--
Pharos
02:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- "Each article is of high quality, including references. Several articles are of featured class, and the remainder all Good Articles or A class. Items that cannot achieve a high rating due to their limited subject matter have passed an individual audit for quality." - My Sister, My Sitter did fail its GAC because of limited content, so wouldn't it be excuseable? --
Scorpion
0422
02:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- It failed because the article was not sufficiently developed, not because it's a subject is of inherently limited breadth (like
List of Nunavut general elections). It is one of a series of half-hour television programs for a heavily-scrutinized series — there should be sufficient sources for this article. The analogy to 'List of Nunavut general elections' would be something like a two-minute short that aired in the eighth season of The Simpsons, which this is not.--
Pharos
02:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- My Sister, My Sitter is now a GAC.
Gran
2
16:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- And has now passed.
Gran
2
17:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. Congratulations to the project and its writers on this excellent accomplishment.-- Pharos 01:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- And has now passed.
Gran
2
17:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- My Sister, My Sitter is now a GAC.
Gran
2
16:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- It failed because the article was not sufficiently developed, not because it's a subject is of inherently limited breadth (like
List of Nunavut general elections). It is one of a series of half-hour television programs for a heavily-scrutinized series — there should be sufficient sources for this article. The analogy to 'List of Nunavut general elections' would be something like a two-minute short that aired in the eighth season of The Simpsons, which this is not.--
Pharos
02:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- "Each article is of high quality, including references. Several articles are of featured class, and the remainder all Good Articles or A class. Items that cannot achieve a high rating due to their limited subject matter have passed an individual audit for quality." - My Sister, My Sitter did fail its GAC because of limited content, so wouldn't it be excuseable? --
Scorpion
0422
02:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- How exactly is this nitpicky? It clearly violates the basic criteria of what an FT is.--
Pharos
02:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support, looks good to me. -- Phoenix2 ( talk, review) 19:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support, this is clearly covered extremely well. Congrats Wikipedia to have the best coverage of The Simpsons' 8th season of any general purpose encyclopedia. ;) Atropos 07:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support—there's nothing about "My Sister, My Sitter" that really stands out as bad (although the prose needs polishing), so I passed it. Interesting topic, and perhaps proof that individual episode articles can work for some of the high profile series. — Deckill er 16:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support — A whole bunch of related articles of GA class with similer structure, all linked together. I see no reason not to support. Even before My Sister got promoted, it was well-written and referenced. -- Arctic Gnome ( talk • contribs) 16:18, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support - All articles are of good quality or higher, and it meets the criteria.-- Danaman5 21:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- Promoted by Tompw 09:54, May 27, 2007 (UTC)
[Every episode article (except one) from this season is of GA status or higher.
Homer's Enemy and
Homer's Phobia are both FAs,
The Simpsons (season 8) is an FL and every other page is a GA, with the exception of
My Sister, My Sitter, which recently failed its GA nomination. --
Scorpion
0422
23:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support. You've sold me! Witty Lama 23:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose until remaining non GA becomes GA. LuciferMorgan 01:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support My Sister, My Sitter seems to have failed mostly out of a difficult in finding material, not lack of completeness (although "currently scores" is unacceptable dated). Including articles slightly too short for Featured or Good status for thesake of completeness has a precedent with the List of Canadian elections FT. Circeus 01:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support - I don't mind one out of 26 articles being less than GA. Greeves ( talk • contribs • reviews) 01:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support - I've seen the Simpsons Wikiproject work incredibly hard with all their episode articles and support their work being recognised as FT, having passed much of their work to GA. Alientraveller 15:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - Right as one of the 3 primary editors of these articles I'm not going to support it. Not because it doesn't deserve a support, but just because our project has been falsely accused of "vote rigging" in the past, so we tend not to vote in our own articles candidacys anymore. Anyway, other primary contributers, aside from me and Scorpion, Maitch and JameiLei. Gran 2 16:02, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support - I have no connection to the Simpsons project, and I think its an awesome achievement. Judgesurreal777 22:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Just so you all know, pass or fail, we will be trying our best to get My Sister, My Sitter to GA status, but at the time being its a matter of lack of content and we can't find anything overly notable to add. We are working on it though. -- Scorpion 0422 03:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Clearly fails criterion 6. There is no reason to believe that the one episode My Sister, My Sitter is of more "limited subject matter" than the other episodes. There are other potential untapped sources for this topic that I will post shortly at
Talk:My Sister, My Sitter. Otherwise, this is an excellently covered topic and I look forward to its completion by the GAing of My Sister, My Sitter.--
Pharos
00:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Reply Several current featured topics have pages that are not GA or FA quality. For example,
Uranus, which is part of the
Solar System FT is neither a GA or FA. --
Scorpion
0422
02:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- The requirements at Wikipedia:Featured topic criteria have been quite clear for some time now. It is perhaps understandable if older FTs that came in under less clear guidelines are retained as legacy and will be reviewed in future, but this should certainly not be the case with new FTs. I will note that there are only two articles in the whole FT system currently against the letter of the criteria, Uranus and Michigan State Spartans ( List of Nunavut general elections would qualify as "limited subject matter").-- Pharos 02:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Reply Several current featured topics have pages that are not GA or FA quality. For example,
Uranus, which is part of the
Solar System FT is neither a GA or FA. --
Scorpion
0422
02:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Argument is nitpicky to an extreme, blocking the largest and most developed topic to date over one is absurd.
Judgesurreal777
02:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- How exactly is this nitpicky? It clearly violates the basic criteria of what an FT is.--
Pharos
02:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- "Each article is of high quality, including references. Several articles are of featured class, and the remainder all Good Articles or A class. Items that cannot achieve a high rating due to their limited subject matter have passed an individual audit for quality." - My Sister, My Sitter did fail its GAC because of limited content, so wouldn't it be excuseable? --
Scorpion
0422
02:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- It failed because the article was not sufficiently developed, not because it's a subject is of inherently limited breadth (like
List of Nunavut general elections). It is one of a series of half-hour television programs for a heavily-scrutinized series — there should be sufficient sources for this article. The analogy to 'List of Nunavut general elections' would be something like a two-minute short that aired in the eighth season of The Simpsons, which this is not.--
Pharos
02:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- My Sister, My Sitter is now a GAC.
Gran
2
16:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- And has now passed.
Gran
2
17:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. Congratulations to the project and its writers on this excellent accomplishment.-- Pharos 01:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- And has now passed.
Gran
2
17:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- My Sister, My Sitter is now a GAC.
Gran
2
16:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- It failed because the article was not sufficiently developed, not because it's a subject is of inherently limited breadth (like
List of Nunavut general elections). It is one of a series of half-hour television programs for a heavily-scrutinized series — there should be sufficient sources for this article. The analogy to 'List of Nunavut general elections' would be something like a two-minute short that aired in the eighth season of The Simpsons, which this is not.--
Pharos
02:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- "Each article is of high quality, including references. Several articles are of featured class, and the remainder all Good Articles or A class. Items that cannot achieve a high rating due to their limited subject matter have passed an individual audit for quality." - My Sister, My Sitter did fail its GAC because of limited content, so wouldn't it be excuseable? --
Scorpion
0422
02:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- How exactly is this nitpicky? It clearly violates the basic criteria of what an FT is.--
Pharos
02:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support, looks good to me. -- Phoenix2 ( talk, review) 19:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support, this is clearly covered extremely well. Congrats Wikipedia to have the best coverage of The Simpsons' 8th season of any general purpose encyclopedia. ;) Atropos 07:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support—there's nothing about "My Sister, My Sitter" that really stands out as bad (although the prose needs polishing), so I passed it. Interesting topic, and perhaps proof that individual episode articles can work for some of the high profile series. — Deckill er 16:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support — A whole bunch of related articles of GA class with similer structure, all linked together. I see no reason not to support. Even before My Sister got promoted, it was well-written and referenced. -- Arctic Gnome ( talk • contribs) 16:18, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Support - All articles are of good quality or higher, and it meets the criteria.-- Danaman5 21:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- Promoted by Tompw 09:54, May 27, 2007 (UTC)