Forum:Revamping Featured Articles

For the most part, nothing has changed about our Featured Articles for almost a decade. This can frequently lead to the blurbs we have cycling on the Main Page template incredibly outdated, and an overall bias toward subjects that were most relevant a decade ago. To freshen up our Featured Article presentation, I'd like to propose a new system to select a new featured article each month.

Our old system of users nominating and voting on featured article candidates has petered out multiple times, including on revival attempts. Given the general activity level of the community, I don't believe this is a sustainable way to keep the Featured Article section up to date.

Thus, I propose a more executive system where people simply need to nominate articles they feel should be featured, and if the article is judged to be feature-worthy, I (and any other admins and content mods who want to be involve) will select it to be featured in a certain month.

Here are the general guidelines for featuring I have in mind. Might make them a bit more detailed if this motion passes and we hold nominations.
 * Articles must be well-referenced.
 * Articles must not be lacking information.
 * Articles should not be new or have recently undergone a massive content addition or overhaul.

Feel free to discuss this below. If we do not have opposition, I'll open a nominations section in the next few days. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 13:16, September 13, 2020 (UTC)

Discussion
I agree with this. A lot of currently featured articles just aren't very well written. I would contest the content overhaul rule you suggested, Kaido, but only because I'm often the one overhauling pages ;). I think as long as something is will written and has been proofread thoroughly, it should be a viable contender. 14:34, September 13, 2020 (UTC)

By overhaul I more meant the page's content being substantially changed based on revelations in the story. Such as Pudding when she was revealed to be evil, or the Shichibukai when they were abolished. So what you're describing would be fine. Kaido King of the Beasts (talk) 15:58, September 13, 2020 (UTC)

I guess that should be fine as long as none of the current ones are removed. SeaTerror (talk) 17:11, September 13, 2020 (UTC)

Some of the current ones should absolutely be removed. We should put them under the same scrutiny as nominees, and some definitely aren't up to snuff. 00:43, September 14, 2020 (UTC)

What also should be considered is byte count. If the numbers are low it shouldn't be nominated and while judging we should consider what pages get merged, including subpages. Rgilbert27 (talk) 03:21, September 14, 2020 (UTC)