Battlestar Wiki:Featured articles/Debate for November 2006: Difference between revisions

From Battlestar Wiki, the free, open content Battlestar Galactica encyclopedia and episode guide
(+ support)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
== Notice ==
This FA will go on for till Friday. Get your votes in now. [[User:Shane|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane|E]])</sup> 23:38, 7 November 2006 (CST)
== Comments  ==
I've made it my mission to get a silly page as featured article. --[[User:BklynBruzer|BklynBruzer]] 08:43, 16 October 2006 (CDT)
I've made it my mission to get a silly page as featured article. --[[User:BklynBruzer|BklynBruzer]] 08:43, 16 October 2006 (CDT)
:I love the silly pages, and will defend their right to exist to the death, but I don't think they're appropriate for a featured article. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 18:16, 30 October 2006 (CST)
:I love the silly pages, and will defend their right to exist to the death, but I don't think they're appropriate for a featured article. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 18:16, 30 October 2006 (CST)

Revision as of 05:38, 8 November 2006

Notice

This FA will go on for till Friday. Get your votes in now. Shane (T - C - E) 23:38, 7 November 2006 (CST)

Comments

I've made it my mission to get a silly page as featured article. --BklynBruzer 08:43, 16 October 2006 (CDT)

I love the silly pages, and will defend their right to exist to the death, but I don't think they're appropriate for a featured article. --Peter Farago 18:16, 30 October 2006 (CST)
I have to concur with Peter, although Toaster is arguably our most humorous article. It seems more appropriate to have our encyclopedic articles stand out. --Spencerian 08:17, 31 October 2006 (CST)

Adama (TOS)

Support - How better to compare/contrast the new vs. old Adama than back to back features? I didn't nominate this article, but it would be nice to show some TOS love. --Steelviper 15:35, 31 October 2006 (CST)