MyWiki:WikiProject Opera/GA-class criteria

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

A good article is an article that has passed through the Good article nomination process and been granted GA status, meeting the good article standards. This should be used for articles that still need some work to meet the criteria for featured articles. The good article criteria measure decent articles; they are not as demanding as the featured article criteria, which determine our best articles. Good articles that may succeed in FAC should be considered A-Class articles, but being a Good article is not a requirement for A-Class.

What is a good article? A good article is—

  1. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|1}}:
    (a) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|1a}}; and
    (b) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|1b}}.[1]
  2. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2}}:
    (a) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2a}};
    (b) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2b}};[2] and
    (c) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2c}}.
  3. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|3}}:
    (a) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|3a}};[3] and
    (b) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|3b}}.
  4. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|4}}.
  5. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|5}}.[4]
  6. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|6}}:[5]
    (a) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|6a}}; and
    (b) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|6b}}.[6]

What is not a good article?

[edit source]

See also

[edit source]
  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article. Science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows short articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and broad overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (including other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.