Content deleted Content added
→Splitting: new section |
→Splitting: reply |
||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
There's been some discussion of splitting a particular featured list. An editor raised a good question: what would happen to the original article's featured list status? Would it translate to both resulting articles? Would it stay with the article retaining the same name, assuming there is one? Or would neither article qualify as an FL and have to requalify on their own merits? Is there any precedent for this? --[[User:BDD|BDD]] ([[User talk:BDD|talk]]) 19:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC) |
There's been some discussion of splitting a particular featured list. An editor raised a good question: what would happen to the original article's featured list status? Would it translate to both resulting articles? Would it stay with the article retaining the same name, assuming there is one? Or would neither article qualify as an FL and have to requalify on their own merits? Is there any precedent for this? --[[User:BDD|BDD]] ([[User talk:BDD|talk]]) 19:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC) |
||
:Things like that have happened before, but I don't think it's much use looking for precedent in the legal sense. It'll depend on the individual case. When a list is split for mainly size reasons and the resulting lists differ only slightly from each other and from the original list, then a director could stick his or her neck out and just promote all of them. What's more likely to happen is, however, that the new lists will need their own FLCs and that the original list will have to go through an FLRC (and possibly an FLC on top). Just keep in mind that FL status is no valid argument against splitting or merging; the FL processes want to promote good content, not stand in its way. Ask a director (directly or at [[WT:FLC]]) once the split has gained consensus and has been performed. <tt>'''<font style="color:#2E2E2E">[[User:Goodraise|Good]]</font><font style="color:#2E2E2E">[[User talk:Goodraise|raise]]</font>'''</tt> 23:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:59, 29 January 2013
![]() | Lists Project‑class | ||||||
|
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
Quick question
Could Tommy Thompson presidential campaign, 2008 be considered a list in its current state due to the prominence of the lists of campaign events by month? --William S. Saturn (talk) 23:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
- Sure. There's no bright line between list articles and non-list articles. However, in practice we (the people who hang around at these pages, e.g. WT:FL, WT:FLC, WT:FLCR) tend to leave decisions on borderline cases like this one to the folks at WT:FAC. When they think an article is "too listy" to become a featured article, we take it. Goodraise 23:58, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Splitting
There's been some discussion of splitting a particular featured list. An editor raised a good question: what would happen to the original article's featured list status? Would it translate to both resulting articles? Would it stay with the article retaining the same name, assuming there is one? Or would neither article qualify as an FL and have to requalify on their own merits? Is there any precedent for this? --BDD (talk) 19:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Things like that have happened before, but I don't think it's much use looking for precedent in the legal sense. It'll depend on the individual case. When a list is split for mainly size reasons and the resulting lists differ only slightly from each other and from the original list, then a director could stick his or her neck out and just promote all of them. What's more likely to happen is, however, that the new lists will need their own FLCs and that the original list will have to go through an FLRC (and possibly an FLC on top). Just keep in mind that FL status is no valid argument against splitting or merging; the FL processes want to promote good content, not stand in its way. Ask a director (directly or at WT:FLC) once the split has gained consensus and has been performed. Goodraise 23:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)