Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Featured log/August 2018
Good topic candidates: view - edit - history
The Square Enix wikiproject (and the overall video game project) have quite a few good/featured topics on individual video game series, but with this nomination I'm trying something new. The Final Fantasy franchise has several subseries in it, which are usually linked by characters and plot. One subseries, however, is a bit different: Ivalice is a series of games connected primarily by the setting and themes. It consists of the Final Fantasy XII series, the Final Fantasy Tactics series, and the video games Vagrant Story and Crystal Defenders; at one point, Square Enix planned on marketting them as the "Ivalice Alliance", but appears to have lost interest in the idea soon after without defining what exactly that meant (this is par for the course for SE's subseries branding). Nevertheless, we are left with a set of games all linked together into a topic, and with the recent GAs for Defenders and Tactics A2, the topic as a whole is completed. Note that the Final Fantasy XII series has a subtopic already, while the Final Fantasy Tactics series is being nominating at the same time as this nomination: as these subseries are distinct (Final Fantasy XII, for example, is also included in the overall Final Fantasy featured topic) I don't think it makes sense to merge them into this topic. Thanks for reviewing! --PresN 02:53, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Great to see another Final Fantasy Topic ready for featured topic time! All the stories of Ivalice presented with the quality it deserves. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:01, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 18:17, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support Aoba47 (talk) 19:53, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
- Comment, I'm curious why you didn't include all video games set in Ivalice in this FT, considering that they're all recognized content of some sort. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:54, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Axem Titanium: Note that the FF12 and FFT items have subtopic links- that's because all of the unlisted games are included in those topics. --PresN 01:53, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Support. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:36, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- Support--Paparazzzi (talk) 03:19, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Featured Topic. - GamerPro64 01:09, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Contributor(s): TarkusAB
All the Clock Tower games, including the series article, have reached GA status. There are also two related games mentioned in the series article and the series navtemplate, but they are not official Clock Tower games. Haunting Ground is also GA, but NightCry is not. --TarkusABtalk 16:06, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support. Everything looks good. JOEBRO64 12:42, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support. I see no problem. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:14, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support. Never thought the third/second title would become a GA. TarkusAB is to be commended for his work. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:10, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Looks solid to me! ā š§š¢š šš¦š§š¢š šš¦š§š¢š šš¦ā š§šššā 20:15, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Can't see anything missing. Great job! Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:43, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
- Support Aoba47 (talk) 19:51, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic - GamerPro64 21:43, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- Contributor(s): Thanissaro, Wikiman5676 and Farang Rak Tham.
I am nominating this Good Topic because nine ten articles on this topic are Good Articles. I have been a main contributor to all of the articles here, though most of them were started by other editors in the early 2000s.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 10:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC) Updated number.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:26, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- Undecided On the fence on if Tantric_Theravada should be included in the topic, I'm leaning towards no overall, since if Tantric Theravada has to be included, it's not a GA status yet. įµįµįµįµĖ¢Tį“į“į“sāāāāā ā£āāā 14:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- that's interesting. I never thought of that. I wouldn't include tantric Theravada personally. I would argue the other way around. If tantric Theravada was a topic dhammakaya movement should be included. But since tantric Theravada includes other traditions including some outside of Thailand I wouldn't consider that necessary for the dhammakaya movement. Like Catholicism being a good topic and not including the Bible. Although relavent it's not specific to the overall topic. I am a contributor to this topic just so you know. Just sharing my opinion. Wikiman5676 (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- Tantric Theravada is a historical tradition that is no longer alive, but has affected Buddhism in many countries in South and Southeast Asia. I wouldn't mind bringing it up to GA level and including it, but sooner or later there will be some editor who will protest for sure. It is much broader than the specific Dhammakaya tradition, and much more ancient. Dhammakaya tradition is usually understood to have started in the beginning of the 20th century, whereas Tantric Theravada is traced by scholars such as Crosby and Skilton to at least the 18th century, and there is epigraphical evidence that points to earlier dates.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 18:21, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- Support Ah, that makes more sense. I'm not completely familiar with the topic, so I didn't know for sure. In that case, it seems all good to me. įµįµįµįµĖ¢Tį“į“į“sāāāāā ā£āāā 15:09, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- Tantric Theravada is a historical tradition that is no longer alive, but has affected Buddhism in many countries in South and Southeast Asia. I wouldn't mind bringing it up to GA level and including it, but sooner or later there will be some editor who will protest for sure. It is much broader than the specific Dhammakaya tradition, and much more ancient. Dhammakaya tradition is usually understood to have started in the beginning of the 20th century, whereas Tantric Theravada is traced by scholars such as Crosby and Skilton to at least the 18th century, and there is epigraphical evidence that points to earlier dates.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 18:21, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- that's interesting. I never thought of that. I wouldn't include tantric Theravada personally. I would argue the other way around. If tantric Theravada was a topic dhammakaya movement should be included. But since tantric Theravada includes other traditions including some outside of Thailand I wouldn't consider that necessary for the dhammakaya movement. Like Catholicism being a good topic and not including the Bible. Although relavent it's not specific to the overall topic. I am a contributor to this topic just so you know. Just sharing my opinion. Wikiman5676 (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: I'm not familiar with this part of the project (this is my first time here), but looking at the criteria I must say Phra/Luang Por Dhammajayo seems to be a glaring omission. I note that there has been uncertainty as to whether his biography should be a separate article as a lot of it is redundant to the temple's, but I think unless consensus to merge is established it will need to be separately developed into a Good Article for the topic to qualify. In any case, the contributors have indeed done excellent work on the topic. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:58, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
- From my understanding that article can't qualify for GA status because its so similar to the other articles. about 95% of that article was basically copied from the Wat Phra Dhammakaya or History of Wat Phra Dhammakaya page. If thats not an issue for GA status then yeah, I would agree it would be required unless there was consensus to simply merge it. Wikiman5676 (talk) 22:08, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
- Wikiman5676, i'd say we merge. Luang por's history is intertwined with that of Wat Phra Dhammakaya.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 16:16, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
- I'm still pretty unsure about the merging thing. I think I'd rather stay undecided on whether to merge those pages or not. Wikiman5676 (talk) 02:27, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
- No consensus on merging, but I don't think the article about Luang Por Dhammajayo is that similar to Wat Phra Dhammakaya. So I have nowe submitted Luang Por Dhammajayo for GA.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:01, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
- Luang Por Dhammajayo has now been passed for GA, and has been included. Let me know your thoughts, Paul 012.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:26, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- No consensus on merging, but I don't think the article about Luang Por Dhammajayo is that similar to Wat Phra Dhammakaya. So I have nowe submitted Luang Por Dhammajayo for GA.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 11:01, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
- I'm still pretty unsure about the merging thing. I think I'd rather stay undecided on whether to merge those pages or not. Wikiman5676 (talk) 02:27, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
- Wikiman5676, i'd say we merge. Luang por's history is intertwined with that of Wat Phra Dhammakaya.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 16:16, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
- From my understanding that article can't qualify for GA status because its so similar to the other articles. about 95% of that article was basically copied from the Wat Phra Dhammakaya or History of Wat Phra Dhammakaya page. If thats not an issue for GA status then yeah, I would agree it would be required unless there was consensus to simply merge it. Wikiman5676 (talk) 22:08, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
- Support now. Great work. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:00, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support. āVami_IVā 23:29, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic - GamerPro64 21:06, 23 August 2018 (UTC)