Page protected

MicroWiki:Good articles

From MicroWiki, the free micronational encyclopædia
  (Redirected from MicroWiki:GA)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Good articles are considered to be the best articles on MicroWiki as determined by MicroWiki's editors. Before being listed as a good article, articles must be nominated and voted upon for accuracy, neutrality, comprehensiveness, structure and style. This project is designed to help improve article quality on MicroWiki and reward good article editing and creation. At present, there are 118 good articles out of a total of 38,184 articles on MicroWiki, meaning roughly 0.309% have achieved good article status. A small blue symbol (This symbol symbolizes good content on MicroWiki.) on the top right corner of an article's page indicates that the article is of good quality.

Users that wish to be notified about new Good Article submissions are welcome to add Template:Userbox GA notifications to their userpage, to receive automated notifications periodically.


A good article is one that is:

  1. Well-written: its prose is engaging, coherent, clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct. There should be a minimal number of red links.
  2. Comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details, is of substantial length but does not go into unnecessary detail, remaining focused on the main topic.
  3. Accurate: it is well-researched and its claims are verifiable and not in dispute.
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
  5. Illustrated: it should, where possible, be illustrated with appropriate images with succinct captions.
  6. Well-structured: it should have a concise introduction that summarises the topic and a system of hierarchical section headings with a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents.


Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by asking an administrator. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter to deal with objections during the GA process. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult the author and/or regular editors of the article prior to a nomination. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make an effort to address objections promptly.

If a nominator feels that an article satisfies all the criteria, the article can be nominated by any user on the nomination page making sure that they provide the title of the article, a link to it and the signature of the nominating user. A user should only nominate one article each month. The article will then be reviewed by the community and voted on over a period of seven days after being nominated, with nominators and authors of the article being encouraged to respond to constructive criticism and to address objections promptly. While the number of votes in support or opposition are the main thing taken into account, the arguments on each side will also be considered. A nomination with several blank "support" votes and only a few "oppose" votes may still be rejected if those "oppose" votes make very good arguments against it. Neither will a simply majority be considered; broad consensus needs to be reached, which will be decided at the discretion of the administrator who closes the vote.

Following the seven day period, an administrator will determine consensus of the community and it will either be approved or rejected. If an article is approved, the community deems that it satisfies the criteria, and it will officially be listed as a Good Article. If an article is rejected, the article does not satisfy the criteria and an explanation of why will usually be provided by the reviewing users. Rejected articles should only be nominated again after one month following the previous nomination, and only if improvements have been made to improve the article since.

In the last week of each month, all Good Articles approved that month or the previous month will be voted on by the community. The approved Good Article with the highest number of votes (with admin consensus providing a deciding vote in the case of a tie) will be Featured on the Main Page for at least the first fourteen days of the new month (the Featured Article for the remainder of the month will be a previously approved Good Article decided by consensus of the admins, to ensure articles are not only ever Featured once).

How to nominate an article for good article status


Republic of Yusienia

Nominator: Xuanyi (talk) 13:03, 20 November 2022 (UTC) Comment by nominator: I know it's far from being a good article, but I want to bring it up to par. So I'm here for advice.

  • COMMENT Visa Policy section is atrocious, don't list forty different nations like that. Miscellaneous grammar and spelling throughout. Devinpurcell (talk) (contribs) 15:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

ǃkhās Street

Nominator: ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 23:01, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Comment by nominator: This is technically not a road!!

Democratic Republic of Subejia

Nominator: Qadri223 (Talk) 03:03, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Comment by nominator: My micronation has been three-year development and the article seems to be good at this point. Qadri223 (Talk) 03:03, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

  • COMMENT In terms of content, the lead is sufficient, and the images are good; but many of the sections are fairly short. I would remove the 'December 2021 floods' and 'Post-floods era' headers and just merge that text into the above; also, there is no need for a new space every sentence, merge the text to create a paragraph; perhaps add some text in 'Administrative divisions' summarising each of the states; 'Geography' can definitely be expanded (this is an extreme example of what kind of information could be added); and 'Culture' looks far too short as well. Additionally, Notes, Refs and External looks are properly formatted and relevant. Definitely a promising article with just a few expansions! ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 14:08, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

2020 Indonesian micronations shock

Nominator: Nabil nordamdie (talk) 08:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Comment by nominator: I think this page has been comprehensively and extensively documenting an example of interactions between micronations and the macronational media and how the general public will respond to any micronation, which remains something challenging for micronationalists. Nabil nordamdie (talk) 08:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

  • Very fascinating article; glad you nominated it! I will be able to review it later today. ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 14:31, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT Fantastic article—neutral, accurate and well-referenced. Very fascinating as well; thanks for writing it! The only issue I found was with the spelling and grammar of certain phrases but I copyedited it so it should be good to go now. @Nabil nordamdie: I have two small comments: "An expert in sociology" and "Former West Java police chief" should say their names. ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 16:29, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT great article, would make more people know about micronations in Indonesia, which most micronationalists don't know about them. As an Egyptian, the only Afro-Asian country, I think it is necessary to encourage people to know about more micronations in regions like Asia, Africa, and South America. :-)Mo:-) 18:05, 28 May 2023

Transport in New Eiffel

Nominator: ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 03:22, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
  • @The Republic of Satoshi: Well, it is a small micronation but I do believe I have covered everything. What do you think needs expanding? ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 15:55, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT Yes I do agree that it is a short article, but it's well organised and I really love the grammar in this article. The pictures in the article really attract my attention. Simplexify (talk) 11:07, 20 May 2023 (UTC)


Nominator: ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 13:21, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Comment by nominator: Historically significant :)

Commonwealth of Juniperia

Nominator: Westavia (talk) 00:07, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Comment by nominator: Advice please also comments.

  • Comment I echo my points with your other nomination—§ Government is really lacking prose and has two wikitables adjacent to each other that also intersect with two images, making it look really awkward. § Subdivisions too has no prose and § Geography and climate is short. For § Subdivisions, you can add brief summaries of each division, like their size, notable features that distinguish them from the other divisions, etc; Empire of Austenasia#Administrative divisions is a good example of what you could add. And Geography of New Eiffel, especially #Climate, is an extreme example of what type of information you could add to § Geography and climate to expand it. Explaining Juniperia's climate should be the easiest IMO. ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 23:31, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

2021 Georgienstinian presidential election

Nominator: Westavia (talk) 17:38, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Comment by nominator: Fire article

  • Oppose: The first few sections are pretty good, but after § Labour-Democratic Party nomination there are simply too many templates and wikitables without any prose, making it difficult to navigate and really awkward-looking. The sections could perhaps be merged and I do not really think the massive amount of those ticket templates are needed for every nominee, perhaps not unless more prose can be added. The first three subheadings under § General election campaign can honestly be removed since they each have barely any text; and § Certification of the election results could possibly be split into just two paragraphs instead of five. I do quite like § Issues and reckon it should be used as an example of what the other mostly empty sections should strive for if possible. In other words, this is definitely GA potential with a bit of new additions! ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 03:41, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Intermicronational organisation

Nominator: ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 16:29, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Comment by nominator: Boring but a significantly important topic nonetheless that MicroWiki would greatly benefit from if it was GA. Here for feedback; be harsh!

Aardvarks on Parade

Nominator: ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 16:29, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Comment by nominator: Music! This was originally approved during the old GA system. I briefly copyedited it and think it is again sufficient for GA status.

Comment: Just a quick note, it does say in the comment on the nomination section: "MAKE SURE YOU READ THE CRITERIA BEFORE NOMINATING AN ARTICLE. PLEASE CAN EACH USER ONLY NOMINATE ONE ARTICLE PER MONTH" (The uppercase letters was exactly how it was formatted). So... yeah. Sertor (Chat) 10:52, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Yes, Strubber told me about this a few days ago ): ZabëlleNB ♥︎ (formerly Z Luna Skye) (talk | edits) 02:51, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Featured article voting

Voting on which article will be featured on the Main Page. Voting has been pushed back to 20 May due to lack of comments.