Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:Featured article removal candidates
This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was to not remove featured article status from articles.–SentryTalk 11:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
I think we need a section for de-featuring articles. First of all it's a must for every wiki, but also specifically here I see some featured articles that I feel are way below standards for FA status. Opinions? --UVnet 10:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- Definitely not. It would both be an insult to the people who had spent so much time working on the articles, as well as a lie to viewers. The articles, no matter what happens to them, will always be featured articles because they have been featured. —Jaymach Ral'Tir (talk) 11:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with Jaymach. De-featuring a FA would be a slap to the face of the people who spent a crapload of time working on it and had it pass our FA process. StarNeptuneTalk to me! 12:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'm going to have to jump on the bandwagon here, but for my own reasons. I don't think we should even have a process in place to de-feature an article. It would allow people to attack articles for silly reasons, and having a de-featuring process would make us too much like Wikipedia. If someone thinks an article shouldn't have been featured, they should fix it themselves or live with it. -- Darth Culator 14:59, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- I have to agree with the others on this. If it's not worthy of being a WP:FA, then bring up objections in the nomination process. After it's become worthy of FA status, if in your opinion an edit (or series of edits) drops it below FA status then improve it. WhiteBoy 15:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- Per Jaymach and the rest. On the other hand, it is true that some of the FA articles are not really FA status anymore — there's no reason for a collective effort to improve the FA articles, or nominating it for an Improvement Drive. Or alternatively, we could have an improvement drive for FA articles—I remember seeing something similiar at Wikipedia. —Mirlen 21:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.