Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Gaylactic Spectrum Awards

Gaylactic Spectrum Awards[edit]

Gaylactic Spectrum Awards

Featured topic

4 articles

Winners and nominees
for best novel

Winners and nominees
for best short fiction

Winners and nominees
for best other work

4 featured lists that together cover all the nominations for this award in each category. The main article describes the award and lists the winners, and 3 sub-lists give the nominations of the 3 currently active categories. The lists all have the same formatting, and are interlinked by the navboxes. So i think this covers the topic comprehensively, and meets "what is a featured topic".Yob Mod 07:29, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by rst20xx:

Could you list the winners/nominees for the now defunct awards somewhere? That's comics and People's Choice, right?
At the moment you have winners in light grey and finalists in white. On my monitor, these two don't look very different at all.
Seems a bit redundant to have the winners listed a second time in the lead. I think the lead should probably be an article and not a list, but having said that, I think that if you take the tables out of the main then what would be left would have no problems becoming a GA so I guess this is a bit of a non-actionable comment.

rst20xx (talk) 13:27, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The defunct awards & nominees are listed: People's choice winners are noted by superscript letters (as they only went to winners of other categories for 3 years and had no nominees, so no separate table needed), and comics was only split out for one year from other works, so the nominees are in the other works article with a note (see 2003) (i made redirects to both as appropriate).

I'll make the gray darker (although it is purely cosmetic - FL insist on colours always being redundant to other indications, in this case the result column). But you are right, that if there it should be visible :-).

I asked multiple places (GAN, FLC and WP:Awards) about whether the main article was more an article or a list, and there was no strong feeling either way and precedent for both - i went with list as i think most readers will be interested in the winners, and not so much in the award process or nominees. It's only redundant if readers clicked on the subarticles and sorted the tables, which is 8 clicks i think will rarely happen! The main article lists are also the only place that Hall of Fame inductees are all on the same page.Yob Mod 15:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support :) rst20xx (talk) 19:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- meets WP:WIAFT.--TRU CO 02:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support looks good, seems to meet the FT criteria.—Chris! _ct 07:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support: A consistent, comprehensive, universally FA/FL-class set of articles and lists that therefore meets the [Wikipedia:Featured topic criteria|FT criteria]]. Gonzonoir (talk) 10:12, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Close with consensus to promote - rst20xx (talk) 14:50, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]