Wikipedia:Version 0.5 FA Review

This symbolises a Wikipedia 0.5 nomination

WP:V0.5FAR

This page is designed to facilitate the nomination and review process of Featured Articles (FAs) for Wikipedia:Version 0.5 (V0.5), the test CD release designed to pave the way for Wikipedia:Version 1.0. Reviewers from the review team are encouraged to sign up for subject sections that interest them. It is also possible to share responsibility for a section in order to split up the workload. Reviewers first check which article have already been passed. Then they will aim to review all FAs within their area of interest by August 31, 2006. This will allow FAs to bypass the general V0.5 nomination page going straight from this page to the main Version 0.5 page once approved.

Criteria

The criteria for importance and quality apply, but the group has (after much heated discussion agreed on this consensus view for FAs:

They should nearly all pass on quality, only failing on quality in exceptional circumstances - where we find one that is well below our modern standards.
The vast majority of FAs should also be allowed to pass on importance, only being rejected in cases of very low importance (like Spoo) with the agreement of three reviewers signing #Importance review.

Reviewer sign-up

Please sign your name up if you are going to work on a section - please aim to complete the section by August 31.

Art, architecture, and archaeology

Awards and decorations

Rlevse 15:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Biology and medicine

NCurse

Business, economics, and finance

Chemistry and mineralogy

Computing

Culture and society

Rlevse (would like to not do this one alone) Rlevse 15:25, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Education

Rlevse 15:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Engineering and technology

Food and drink

Geography and places

Walkerma 11:35, 20 July 2006 (UTC) (happy to share!)[reply]
Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 20:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geology, geophysics, and meteorology

Tito xd^(?!?) 05:05, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History

Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 20:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Language and linguistics

Law

Literature

Zzzzz 22:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Physics and astronomy

Tito xd^(?!?) 05:05, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NCurse

Politics and government

Psychology

Religion and mysticism

Royalty, nobility, and heraldry

Sport and games

Transport

War

Kirill Lokshin 15:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Purge page cache

Review process

Reviews should only be done by members of the review team (if you want to help sign up here).
Reviewers then pick an area of interest to them and sign up there.
The reviewer should not have been a significant contributor to the article under review.

As time allows, each reviewer will check articles on their list based on the criteria above. With most articles expected to pass, this should be a relatively straightforward review process, easy to complete by August 31 2006. Note that an article should only be removed from the list if it loses its FA status. After an article has been reviewed, the following process is carried out:

Pass

"Strikeout" the article name on this page, using <s> and </s>.
Place the {{V0.5|class=XX|category=YY}} template on its talk page. See {{V0.5}} for details of classes and categories.
List the article on Wikipedia:Version 0.5 under the appropriate section.

Fail on importance only

If the article is of acceptable quality, but on a topic outside the scope of the V0.5 release:

Leave a comment next to the article name on this page
Leave a comment below in the importance review section.
After a total of three reviewers (including yourself) agree and sign that the article should not be included, strikeout the article name, using <s> and </s> and leave a comment such as "scope" or "importance".
If consensus is not reached in the importance review section, and one reviewer believes strongly that this article should be included, then the article should be passed for Version 0.5 (see above).
Articles that fail on importanc are listed here Wikipedia:Version 0.5 FA Review/Archived nominations.

Fail on quality

If the article fails to meet the criteria because of quality issues:

Consider requesting a cleanup of the article using cleanup tags or requests on the talk page.
Consider nominating the article for WP:FARC.
Consider a clear reason on the article's talk page.
"Strikeout" the article name on this page, using <s> and </s>, and place a comment next to the article name indicating briefly why the article failed, and any action taken.

Importance review

If you think an article from your section is too obscure to be included, please list it here and sign. If two others agree and sign, and no one disagrees, strikeout the article name (using <s> and </s>) and leave a comment such as "scope" or "importance". If one reviewer disagrees, the article should be included in V0.5.

Amateur Radio Direction Finding

Too low importance Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 06:10, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree NCurse_work 20:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plano Senior High School and Caufield Grammar School and Stuyvesant High School

Not sure we should go down to the high school/grade school level on education, but if we do, these would be a good choice. Not voting either way right now, seeking consensus.Rlevse 15:26, 20 July 2006 (UTC) PS noticed Hopkins School was already selected and sinc it's got a unique and old history, I suggest we leave that one as a selectee.Rlevse 22:45, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Partialy agree Plano and Caufield I agree with, while Stuyvesant is very major Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 20:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stuyvesant is just a high school. We shouldn't include high schools. Anyway why this one? Because its american? What about high schools in China? They're probably bigger. What about high schools in England? You should think in global. I mean articles that will be included in Version 0.5 must represent the world not the USA. NCurse_work 07:48, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because it represents the magnet program and that separates it from the other non-college schools. There are no FAs on non-college level schools other than American ones.Rlevse 13:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree NCurse_work 20:04, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Partialy agree as I'm going to aggre with Jaranda, only leave out Plano and Caufield. Rlevse 02:24, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of Michigan State University

I feel we don't need this article when the main Mich. State Univ. article was already selected.Rlevse 21:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 02:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Borlaug

I could list dozens of scientists who are more important in biology, medicine than him. If we include him, we must include at least a hundred scientists. NCurse_work 20:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. He's a Nobel laureate; that doesn't strike me as "very low importance". Kirill Lokshin 20:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Georg Forster for the same reason as in the case of Norman Borlaug. NCurse_work 20:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. From the article: "His reputation as one of first and most outstanding German ethnologists is indisputable, and his works are seen as crucial in the development of ethnology in Germany into a separate branch of science." Kirill Lokshin 20:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]