Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Featured log/June 2008

Main page	Articles
Video game consoles (seventh generation)	Nintendo DS - PlayStation Portable - PlayStation 3 - Xbox 360 - Wii

Obviously, I am nominating this topic for Featured Topic. I see that it meets all requirements, but feel free to leave any suggestions or things in need of improvement. I will try to fix it as quick as possible. --haha169 (talk) 23:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - looks good. Though I'd just call the topic "Video game consoles (seventh generation)" and miss out the history bit if I were you - rst20xx (talk) 13:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Ya, thats a good idea. I wanted to keep the article's name, but it would be less awkward your way. I've changed it.--haha169 (talk) 21:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I don't think these generations are well-defined though, are they? For instance, the following may also need to be included: GP2X, HyperScan, and Game Wave Family Entertainment System, depending on how stringent people are going to be. Gary King (talk) 06:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  Support Gary King (talk) 19:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  There may not be an official definition of video game generations, but I think there would be near-unanimous agreement among gamers about which consoles were contemporary with each other and which were big enough to be a part of each console war. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 16:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Support In response to Gary King, no, they and not well defined, but these five are the only big ones. Zginder 2008-06-05T13:02Z (UTC)
  • Yes, that's true. There is a huge list of remakes and other seventh gen. consoles, but most people don't even know them. The big five are good enough. It doesn't break criteria 1(d) because it isn't an obvious or notable gap. --haha169 (talk) 19:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yep, fair enough. I wasn't really on the edge with this one; I would love to see it as it is now, but I figured it was worth mentioning. Gary King (talk) 19:50, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Don't worry about it. I was wondering about that before I nominated this topic, but decided to just nominate it anyway. I don't think it will be a major issue. --haha169 (talk) 20:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • I would say that if something else were to be added, then Nintendo DS Lite and PlayStation Portable Slim and Lite would be the most obvious choices (though of course neither meets criteria) - rst20xx (talk) 20:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yeah, they don't really meet criteria. I've read both of those articles, and I still can't tell the difference between the Lite and the Originals. If they make it to GA, we can nominate for them to be added, but as of now, they really won't be missed. Literally, they're pretty much the same as the originals. --haha169 (talk) 20:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• OpposeSupport - I really really hate to do this, but there needs to at least be an explanation as to why all the systems in the "7th generation" category are not included here. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The main article only lists the others at the bottom and never discusses them. Zginder 2008-06-07T01:17Z (UTC)
    • Judge, it doesn't break criteria 1(d) because it isn't an obvious or notable gap. Nobody knows about those systems listed on the bottom, unless they actually check out the main article. I never even knew about those until I began editing the seventh gen. article. All the main consoles are listed, and that should enough. --haha169 (talk) 03:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I agree that there is an obvious gap, but Haha169, I think you need to back it up with a citation, in the main article's introduction I guess. That'll deal with any complaints, and hopefully one should be easy enough to find - rst20xx (talk) 10:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Here we go: Best citation there is. This will perhaps be one of the last things I do for a while... Seventh Generation Video Game consoles. The link includes financial data, sales data, brief summaries, history, and all that stuff. Only lists the 5 consoles listed above.--haha169 (talk) 18:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • OK, I've incorporated that citation into the lead, and given it a minor rewrite while I was at it. Is that sufficient to cover your concerns, Judgesurreal777? rst20xx (talk) 11:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, we can add the other systems when they reach GA status :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Judge. Sorry for replying as an IP, but I'm having problems logging in on a Chinese server. But I appreciate your work. Thanks! --222.35.61.194 (talk) 08:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I would think the topic would need to be larger, but it seems to meet the criteria. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone}
• Close as consensus to promote --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 04:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Main page	Articles
New York State Route 20N	New York State Route 20SY - New York State Route 92 - New York State Route 173 -New York State Route 174 - New York State Route 175

This is my first featured topic nomination to start it off. The topic itself is about New York State Route 20N and the roads that replaced it and/or were concurrent with during its length. Just as a little background, Route 20N was assigned in the 1930s over Routes 92, 173, 174 and 175 in Onondaga County, New York. Route 20SY came in later. In 1962, Route 20N (along with 20SY) were decommissioned, leaving just 92, 173, 174 and 175. Anyway, I spent several months working on the articles to create this topic. I have heard that the idea is a little awkward, but I'm going through with it. Thanks!^Mitch32^contribs 11:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Good, distinct topic. Includes all the possible articles, linked together by a template, seems to meet all the criteria. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 12:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Support I would have never thought this could be a topic, but it seems to fit. Zginder 2008-05-30T14:26Z (UTC)
• Support - Nice to see a groundbreaking Featured Topic.Judgesurreal777 (talk) 00:54, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Support rst20xx (talk) 00:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Looks good to me. Gary King (talk) 06:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Support A featured topic is a good choice for this collection of routes. — ComputerGuy890100^{Talk to me}_{What I've done to help Wikipedia} 00:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Promoted by Milk's Favorite Cookie 19:01, 19 June 2008