MicroWiki:Good articles/Nominations

De Micropedia
Ir para navegação Ir para pesquisar

Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by asking Austenasia, Joseph Kennedy, or another administrator. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter to deal with objections during the GA process. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult the author and/or regular editors of the article prior to a nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly.

If a nominator feels that an article satisfies all the criteria, the article can be nominated by any user on the nomination page making sure that they provide the title of the article, a link to it and the signature of the nominating user. The article will then be reviewed by the community and voted on over a period of seven days after being nominated, with nominators and authors of the article being encouraged to respond to constructive criticism and to address objections promptly. While the number of votes in support or opposition are the main thing taken into account, the arguments on each side will also be considered.

Following the seven day period, Austenasia, Joseph Kennedy, or another administrator will determine consensus of the community and it will either be approved or rejected. If an article is approved, the community deems that it satisfies the criteria and it will be listed as a good article. If an article is rejected, the articles does not satisfy the criteria and an explanation of why will usually be provided by the reviewing users. Rejected articles should only be nominated again after one month following the previous nomination, if progress has been made to improve the article since.


Please familiarise yourself with the following criteria prior to voting. A good article is one that is:

  1. Well-written: its prose is engaging, coherent, clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct.
  2. Comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details, is of substantial length but does not go into unnecessary detail, remaining focused on the main topic.
  3. Accurate: it is well-researched and its claims are verifiable and not in dispute.
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
  5. Illustrated: it should, where possible, be illustrated with appropriate images with succinct captions.
  6. Well-structured: it should have a concise introduction that summarises the topic and a system of hierarchical section headings with a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents.


Sacro Império de Reunião

Bandeira do Sacro Império de Reunião

O Sacro Império de Reunião (em inglês, Holy Empire of Reunion) é uma micronação modelista lusófona fundada por Cláudio de Castro em 28 agosto de 1997, sendo o fato noticiado à época pelo Diário Portoclarense (edição de 1º de setembro daquele ano). É uma monarquia constitucionalmente absolutista com território baseado na ilha dos engomadinhos frescos enrustidos e porcos capitalistas. (mais...)

Reino do Manso

Bandeira do Reino do Manso

O Manso, oficialmente Reino do Manso, é uma monarquia constitucional parlamentarista sediada nos municípios de Cuiabá e Chapada dos Guimarães. O principal e mais notável aspecto do país é a personificação, por seus cidadãos, de uma "arcádia" mato-grossense, destacando uma vida em meio à natureza e a simplicidade e alegria do campo. (mais...)

Belo Horizonte

Bandeira do Principado de Belo Horizonte

Belo Horizonte, oficialmente o Principado de Belo Horizonte (em inglês: Principality of Belo Horizonte / deltariano: Fürtzentum Belo Horizonte), é uma micronação lusófona brasileira localizada no município homônimo e em outros territórios em Minas Gerais, na Bahia e no Espírito Santo, Brasil. Com forte influência progressista e caráter jurídico, é uma monarquia constitucional, um Estado de autonomias e uma democracia representativa. (mais...)