Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates

Featured and good topics in Wikipedia

A featured topic (FT) is a collection of inter-related articles in which at least half are featured articles or featured lists. The remaining articles must be at least good quality.

A good topic (GT) is a collection of inter-related articles that are of a good quality (though are not necessarily featured articles) with a less stringent quality threshold than a featured topic.

This page is for the nomination of potential featured and good topics. See the featured and good topic criteria for criteria on both types of topic.

Before nominating a topic, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at the Featured and good topics talk page. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the FTC/GTC process. If you nominate something you have worked on, note it as a self-nomination. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the articles of the topic should consult regular editors of the articles prior to nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly.

The featured and good topics coordinators Aza24, MaranoFan and Kyle Peake determine the timing of the process for each nomination. For a nomination to be promoted to FT or GT status, consensus must be reached for a group to be promoted to featured or good topic status. If enough time passes without objections being resolved, nominations will be removed from the candidates topic and archived.

To contact the FGTC coordinators, please leave a message on the FGTC talk page, or use the {{@FGTC}} notification template elsewhere.

You may want to check previous archived nominations first:

Purge the cache to refresh this page

Shortcuts

Featured content:

Good content:

Featured and good topic tools:

Nomination procedure

To create a new nomination use the form below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Saffron/archive1) and click the "Create new nomination" button.

Once the nomination page is created, remember to transclude it in the appropriate section below, to leave nomination templates on the talk pages of the articles nominated for the topic. For detailed instructions on how to nominate topics or add articles to existing topics, see Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Nomination procedure.

Supporting and objecting

Please review all the articles of the nominated topic with the featured and good topic criteria in mind before deciding to support or oppose a nomination.

To edit nominations in order to comment on them, you must click the "edit" link to the right of the article nomination on which you wish to comment (not the overall page's "edit this page" link).
If you approve of a nomination, write '''Support''' followed by your reasons. Supports that clearly evaluate the criteria will be weighted more than those that do not.
If you oppose a nomination, write '''Oppose''' or '''Object''' followed by the reason for your objection. Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to fix the source of the objection, the objection may be ignored.
- To withdraw an objection, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.

For a topic to be promoted to featured or good topic status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. The FGTC coordinators are usually the ones to assess this consensus and close FGTC discussions. If there is a consensus to promote, the promote instructions are located here. If enough time passes without objections being resolved (at least one week), nominations will be removed from the candidates list and archived. Nominations will stay here for ten days if there is unanimous consent, or longer if warranted by debate.

Featured topic nominations

Good topic nominations

Java-class cruiser

The Java class was a series of light cruisers operated by the Royal Netherlands Navy during the Interwar period and World War II. Designed to defend the Dutch East Indies against the Empire of Japan, the cruisers were designed in 1916 to be the best in the world. However, a series of issues due to World War I, supply chain issues, worker strikes, instability in Germany, and a change in national policy delayed the ships for more than a decade. Of the three ships planned, one was canceled during a construction pause. By the time the remaining two ships were launched in the mid 1920s, their design was outdated and little work was done to address the issue. Both ships saw action during World War II. HNLMS Sumatra was in the Netherlands when the country was invaded by Germany in 1940, and the cruiser fled to the United Kingdom. Under British control, she sailed around the world, was disarmed, and sunk as a breakwater off Normandy. HNLMS Java was in the East Indies when the Pacific War began in 1941, and joined Allied efforts in attempting to repulse several Japanese invasions. During the Battle of the Java Sea, she was torpedoed and promptly sunk.

Java-class cruiser

3 articles

Sumatra

Java

Contributor(s): GGOTCC

Both ships of the class, and the class article itself, are rated as GA and contains information about the history of each ship and the specific situation that lead to the creation of the ships. While three ships were planned, Celebes was canceled before she laid down and as such does not meet the notability requirment laid out by Wikiproject:Ships. Thank you to everyone who reviewed these articles! --GGOTCC 00:17, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Idiosincrático (talk) 11:09, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:23, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Cos ^{(X + Z)} 18:56, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Medxvo (talk) 21:24, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Victorious 3.0: Even More Music from the Hit TV Show

Victorious 3.0: Even More Music from the Hit TV Show is the second and final extended play (EP) for the Nickelodeon television series Victorious. It features five tracks and peaked at number 159 on the US Billboard 200 chart.

Victorious 3.0: Even More Music from the Hit TV Show

1 articles

"L.A. Boyz"

Contributor(s): Shoot for the Stars

The articles all are GA status and are within scope. --Shoot for the Stars (talk) 04:29, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose –To be a Good Topic, the topic needs a MINIMUM of three articles per 1a of Wikipedia:Featured and good topic criteria. GGOTCC 04:51, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn’t see that rule. I withdraw this nomination. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 05:01, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No worries mate! Since Victorious 2.0: More Music from the Hit TV Show is another of your GAs, do you think you could throw those into a new topic? @Shoot for the Stars GGOTCC 06:55, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@GGOTCC: Yeah I totally can since there three articles that would be nominated for Victorious 2.0: More Music from the Hit TV Show. The thing is, do I have to make "Don't You (Forget About Me)" a GA article? I don't know since it is a cover. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 00:50, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I know nothing about music, so whatever makes sense to you. You could make a template with all of the music articles from the show to see what works, or ask the folks over on the talk page. GGOTCC 01:11, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apatosaurinae

4 articles

Amphicoelias

Apatosaurus

Brontosaurus

Contains the articles Apatosaurus, Brontosaurus, Amphicoelias, and Apatosaurinae. Nominating as it meets the criteria as all of its contingent articles and the Apatosaurinae article itself is a good article.

Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 07:01, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1989 South Florida television affiliation switch

On January 1, 1989, six television stations in the Miami–Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach, Florida, markets, exchanged network affiliations. This event, dubbed the "Big Switch", affected some three million TV viewers. The switch was initiated when the NBC network bought WTVJ, an affiliate of rival network CBS. CBS opted not to affiliate with NBC's old Miami affiliate, WSVN, and bought WCIX, an independent station whose signal for technical reasons could not adequately reach the northern portions of the Miami market. To solve that problem, CBS induced an affiliation switch to the north in West Palm Beach from WTVX to WPEC, previously an ABC outlet, which had a better signal in the same area. Because of its location in slower-growing Fort Pierce, ABC spurned WTVX in favor of the under-construction WPBF in West Palm Beach, whose owners also agreed to pay the network in the first ever reverse compensation affiliation in American television. The impacts on each station were substantial. WTVJ and WFOR-TV (WCIX after a 1995 channel change) remain under network ownership. WSVN, which obtained the Fox affiliation, adopted a news-intensive format and became nationally influential for its style of "if it bleeds, it leads" journalism. WPBF had to ramp up quickly to establish a previously unforeseen local news department in time for sign-on. Left to become an independent, WTVX's value declined significantly, and its existing news department closed after eight months.

1989 South Florida television affiliation switch

7 articles

Contributor(s): Sammi Brie, Nathan Obral

This is a major project in markets that have a lot of newspaper and some stations with very lengthy histories (the Miami ones especially — 5900, 8400, and 13700 words!). I produced or co-produced six of the seven pages, and Nathan produced or co-produced four. The 1989 South Florida switch had lasting repercussions for local viewers, but outside of South Florida, it's probably most notable for the response from WSVN, which arguably forever changed the character of television news in the United States. --Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 23:03, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support. It appears to meet all the criteria. Just one comment: where in the topic is the statement "WSVN [...] rose to number-one in its market" supported? I'm sure I'm missing something but I can't find it.

IAWW (talk) 08:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Revised. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 09:07, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Sometimes we get some unexpected topics. Any idea for an image? igordebraga ≠ 22:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 06:52, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Medxvo (talk) 21:20, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – [[User:GGOTCC|GGOTCC]] (talk) 00:57, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ithaca studio albums

The British metalcore band Ithaca released two studio albums during their existence from 2012 to 2025.

Ithaca studio albums

3 articles

The Language of Injury

They Fear Us

Contributor(s): Chchcheckit

All related articles are at the level needed. I dedicate this GTC to Ithaca (RIP 2012–2025), a better future, and the power of Elvanse 40mg. Extra thanks to Arconning for The Language of Injury review, and Launchballer for the extremely heavy copyediting and review on They Fear Us. --Chchcheckit (talk) 10:54, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Idiosincrático (talk) 16:00, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support (unusual dedication, I took that medicine in my last years of college) igordebraga ≠ 16:08, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:10, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- GGOTCC 15:30, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Medxvo (talk) 21:17, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who (2005–present)

The topic was promoted by Kyle Peake via NovemBot (talk) 08:10, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Doctor Who is a British science fiction television show which began in 1963 and resumed airing in 2005, after having ceased broadcasting in 1989. The revived version of the show, though a continuation, made many changes from the original series, most notably longer episodes and more self-contained episodes, interspersed with occasional multi-part stories, structured into loose story arcs, instead of multi-episode serials of shorter length. 14 series and various specials have been broadcast as of February 2025, with another series close to broadcast.

Contributor(s): Alex 21, Chompy Ace, DoctorWhoFan91, Glimmer721, OlifanofmrTennant, TheDoctorWho

A number of editors have improved the articles relating to the revived series to GA status. This topic is a comprehensive set of all of its series and quasi-series up till now, which together meet the criteria listed at WP:GT?.(~~Series 15 is at PR, but it's basically done, so I'll formally close it by tomorrow~~ edit-peer review done) They have similar layouts and are connected through, links, categories, and templates. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:05, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support as contributor. Fun fact of the six open GTCs WP:DRWHO has 3 of them. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:33, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

changes made, discussion became unhelpful, collapsed

Can this be moved to the title "Doctor Who (2005–present)", rather than "Doctor Who (2005-present)"? -- Alex_21_TALK 20:04, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any difference (if it's about apostrophes, then there was an issue with it regarding nom creation, so I had to do it without them). DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:17, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DoctorWhoFan91: "Doctor Who (2005–present)" has an en-dash, "Doctor Who (2005-present)" has a hyphen-minus. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:30, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. I actually pasted the notification on all the articles, so if it needs moving, it probably needs to be edited on every page too? DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 23:11, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That would be correct, yes. En-dash is the correct usage for date ranges. -- Alex_21_TALK 09:45, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that 20 article talk pages would have to be edited, so is there a faster way to do it than manually- if yeah, then the page can be moved at the same time. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 10:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20 article talk pages were already edited, I'm sure it'll be a piece of cake, though the community can support you with such a heavy load. -- Alex_21_TALK 20:08, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for moving the page- I forgot that the prev page would still be a redirect, so change is technically not required on the 20 articles. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:53, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20 talk pages still use "2005-present", an incorrect usage of dashes. Do you intend to correct this? -- Alex_21_TALK 07:10, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If this passes, then the bot will add it with an en-dash; if it fails, it will get removed. Given that the redirect is working, I do not intend to do it. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 08:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunate editing practices. I'll fix your mistakes for you once again. -- Alex_21_TALK 20:11, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would have done so myself if more than one editor said they had an issue with you. You don't need to be passive-agressive with the "I'll fix your mistakes for you once again". Or mention me 19 times in the edit summaries lol.DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:33, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Burden lies on the editor who made the mistake and is aware of it; you were cited on why we use en-dashes. -- Alex_21_TALK 23:43, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DoctorWhoFan91 is being helpful. Why are you so hostile? Cremastra (talk) 00:44, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not. I'm educating. What would be helpful would be fixing mistakes that are known, which I happily did. Thank you for your opinion. -- Alex_21_TALK 01:00, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What would be even more helpful would be waiting for someone else to also mention they have an issue with it, instead of leaving passive-aggressive edit summaries. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 06:49, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that it's an issue, it's that it's a standard Wikipedia MoS. -- Alex_21_TALK 07:46, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go ahead and fix hyphens to en-dashes across the whole of wikipedia while you are at it. Why wait to change a re-direct, especially ones that will be replaced with a pass or fail soon enough. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 09:31, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go ahead and fix hyphens to en-dashes across the whole of wikipedia while you are at it. There's bots that do that, how is that related to the issue at hand? -- Alex_21_TALK 20:21, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's related bcs you are editing 20 pages which are linking correctly via a redirect. And the 20 pages don't need to be changed with haste, bcs they are temporary until this passes or fails. You bring up MoS to say that those changes were needed-but we are not in article space, the pages were talk pages. I WP:IARed it for the time being, bcs only one editor brought it up at the moment. Maybe my mistake was not realising you would throw a temper tantrum once again, and leave 19 passive aggressive edit summaries. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 21:01, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IAR? I can see the basis of your argument here, I'm fond of THICK. Glad to have helped you out here. Happy editing! -- Alex_21_TALK 00:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Personal attack removed) DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unacceptable language on a featured/good topic candidate. I hope this doesn't continue. -- Alex_21_TALK 09:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have posted a GA concerns thread on the talk page of Doctor Who series 3. If these are unaddressed this article may be nominated at GAR. I would suggest that interested parties look at the article and ensure everything is cited according to the GA criteria. Z1720 (talk) 21:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are also some {{Citation needed}} tags on series 4, 8, 9, and 2023 specials that should be addressed. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:46, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I missed that, I'll fix series 3 and all the articles in the upcoming days. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 23:12, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed series 3 cn tags, and all the other mentioned articles too. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 08:17, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support since all outstanding issues seem to be addressed by the nominator. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:20, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 03:30, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support as contributor. TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw nomination the head article is going to be demoted, so I am withdrawing this nomination. DWF91 (talk) 13:09, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, but the head article is not getting demoted, so I do not see a reason this nomination should be withdrawn. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:31, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As a co-contributor I'd like to voluntarily take up overseeing any further issues with this nomination. It seems like most issues have been resolved and has been open for some time, so I don't think it should be an issue. TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:55, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also noting that I, as a FLC delegate, declined to demote the list which this nomination is based on at the promoter's request. If anybody is interested in doing so they should go through WP:FLRC. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:15, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just double checking on this since this has been open for two months with no comment and the only opposition is no longer an issue. I believe there isn't anything outstanding stopping a promotion? Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 20:48, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Quick ping to the coordinators: @FGTC coordinators: just in case they haven't seen this comment, because I have the same inquiry. TheDoctorWho (talk) 22:00, 9 May 2025 (UTC}
  - I had left this when the owner initially was withdrawing the nomination without having looked into it further, now that I have this article should be promoted since there has been no demoted main article. --K. Peake 08:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This topic has been Approved for promotion. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work. A bot will promote this topic within one hour. Please double check that {{Featured topic box |title= is exactly what you want the topic name to be, is short, and is unformatted. K. Peake 08:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Promotion completed successfully. Don't forget to add {{Wikipedia:Featured topics/List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present)}} to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Good topics. NovemBot (talk) 08:10, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Topic removal candidates

History of the New York Giants

5 articles

History: 1925–1978

History: 1979–1993

History: 1994–present

Financial history

History of the New York Giants (1994–present) was demoted on 19 December 2024, there is no effort to change that, and without it the topic fails criterion 3.b. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:50, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remove – Idiosincrático (talk) 03:01, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NWA World Historic Middleweight Champions

9 articles

Fails criterion 3.b as Flip Gordon is not a WP:GA, isn't being worked on, and is past the three month grace period (he won the title on 15 November 2024). Also Volador Jr. has been delisted on 17 April. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:07, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Idiosincrático (talk) 13:25, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Shame. Remove. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:34, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]