Comment. I would have given it my support if it weren't for the
Music of Anguilla article, which looks stubby. If it is improved to a reasonable extent, you will have my support. I don't know about comprehensiveness, but if the article deserves to exist (i.e. is notable), there should be more info present. —
Ambuj Saxena (
talk)
17:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)reply
I would give a weak support now. But we have a different problem at hand. Very few people know of the Featured Topic page. If there aren't four supports, the topic won't be promoted. —
Ambuj Saxena (
talk)
11:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Well, I'm the only one who's done any promoting here, and I haven't required four supports. (I won't pass this one without at least two more though, with no objects) Four supports will be difficult at this stage. I think this will get more attention as time goes on. Nobody will be interested until there's a significant list, and we won't have that without some time, especially since making a topic feature-worthy is so difficult. Still, over time, we will have a list of welldone topics and that will attract more contributors (who will probably raise the official standards, as well as the standards of what we consider consensus).
WP:FL took awhile to take off, IIRC, and so did
WP:FP.
WP:FAC only didn't because it was just a list of "brilliant prose" in the beginning, and there was no process.
Tuf-Kat08:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)reply