Wikipedia:Four Award

MainDiscussionReviewing InstructionsRecordsHistoryTemplates The Four Award recognizes the persistence of Wikipedia editors who have taken care of an article from its humble beginnings through featured article status. The articles listed here have passed through all four stages of editorial development with the same author largely responsible for each stage. There are currently 672 Four Award–certified articles, written by 230 authors. Thus, about one in every 9,475 articles and one in every 9 featured articles is listed here. The project serves as encouragement for people who have a strong interest in and/or a deep understanding of redlinked topics to advance them to a very high level of quality. The way the display of recognized articles is formatted in a sortable table, it also encourages experienced editors to take the time to research and develop those articles that they have created in the past but have neglected. Read the criteria below for achieving the Four Award. If you believe you hold the requisites, you may apply for this award via the nominations section. If you have any questions, please review the frequently asked questions and then post on the award's talk page. Requirements You must start/create a new article, converting the article from a redlink to its very first encyclopedic content. You must have that same article that you started/created be displayed at the Did You Know... section of the Main Page. (You are not required to be someone who is credited for the DYK status, but you must be one of the people significantly responsible for the article meeting the DYK criteria.) The DYK nomination does not need to be made before the article becomes a Good Article. You must significantly help in improving that same article that you started/created and was displayed at the Did You Know... section of the Main Page to Good Article status. (You are not required to be the person who nominated the article for GA status, but you must be one of the people significantly responsible for the article meeting the GA criteria.) You must significantly help in improving that same article that you started/created, was displayed at the Did You Know... section of the Main Page and that you significantly helped achieve Good Article status, to Featured Article status, which it still retains. How to nominate an article If you believe an article meets all the requirements listed above, you may request the award following the instructions below. The article will be reviewed according to the reviewing instructions and the nomination will either be accepted or rejected. If any editor disagrees with the determination of a reviewer, please discuss the nomination on the FOUR talk page. New nomination instructions Copy the code below and paste it to the bottom of the current nominations section. The user and comments parameters will not be necessary for most nominations. {{subst:Four Award Nomination | article = ARTICLE NAME (no link brackets "[[ ]]") | dyknom = DYK NOMINATION PAGE (Template:Did you know nominations/ARTICLE NAME) | dyk = LINK TO RECENT ADDITIONS (Wikipedia:Recent additions/YEAR/MONTH#DAY) | user = USERNAME(S) (remove if you are nominating yourself) | comments = OTHER COMMENTS (optional; see below) }} Note: If your involvement in any of the article development processes (creation, WP:DYK, WP:GAN, WP:FAC) is unclear, please provide additional information (including diffs, if necessary) elaborating on your involvement and/or how you and the article meet the WP:FOUR criteria. Co-nominations A Four Award can be awarded to multiple editors who collaborated throughout the creation and development of an article. Co-nominations are eligible if multiple editors can show significant collaboration through each step of the Four criteria: article creation, DYK, GAN, and FAC. With regards to the article creation step, collaboration can be shown by all editors providing significant contributions to the initial development of the article. The easiest way to do this is by creating a draft (either in the draft namespace or a user page) and then moving it to the mainspace after it has been initially developed. In regards to all the criteria, if it isn't clear that all editors contributed through all of the article development steps, please provide additional information (including diffs, if necessary) elaborating the constributions from each editor. Delist nomination instructions If you have found a listed article that does not meet the standards that are currently enforced please open a subsection in the nominations area with the name of the article followed by the word delist as the subsection name. Then in the subsection note which of the credited stages is being challenged. E.g., Chicago Board of Trade - credit seems to have been given for DYK and GAC nominations ([1][2]), but involvement in both stages was minimal in terms of number of edits, content added and content improved. Current nominations The Four Award (clockwise from bottom-right: new article, did you know, good article, featured article) If this section is empty, no nominations are pending review. Panini! (talk · contribs) Article: Paper Mario (talk, history) New article: diff for creation DYK: Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/January#6 March 2021 and nomination GA: Talk:Paper Mario/GA3 FA: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Paper Mario/archive2 We had a discussion on whether creating an article from a redirect counts. Because I see no field to fill out for this, my startup from the redirect begins with this edit. Panini!🥪 14:44, 26 May 2021 (UTC) I'm sorry to do this, Panini!, but I think this one is a decline. I don't remember seeing the discussion here at the time, or I would have participated, but "very first encyclopedic content" doesn't appear to be met given that the page looked like this and was then redirected. If it was created as a redirect, never as an article, I would accept, but I don't think Ergo Sum was meaning to refer to this case specifically. I'll give Gonzo fan2007 another chance to look at this and see what they think too. If someone wants to overrule me, go ahead. This is certainly a really big achievement though, and the article probably wouldn't be here without you. — Bilorv (talk) 13:48, 1 June 2021 (UTC) Bilorv, thanks for the diff, not sure how I missed that in my talk page comment. I agree, that this doesn't meet the criteria set forth for the award. That said, it is still a great article and an impressive achievement! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:11, 1 June 2021 (UTC) Bilorv and I had a discussion about this on their talk page where I brought up some more points on why this could be eligible still. Is it worth a revisit? Panini!🥪 17:54, 9 July 2021 (UTC) I would support passing the article. I understand the redirect technicality, but the ultimate purpose of the Four Award is to incentivize the creation of high-quality articles, and that's exactly what's happened here. Morgan695 (talk) 06:41, 24 July 2021 (UTC) Sure, but lots of people create high-quality articles, and the FA is in itself a high honour recognizing that fact. There's no doubt that Oanini has done exemplary work in bringing the Paper Mario topic up to high quality polished prose. But the FOUR award is a very specific thing, in which the creation of the original encyclopedic content is key. In this case there was already encyclopedic content, linked to by the relevant redirect, and which once resided as a draft or perhaps an article, prior to it getting its own article.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:10, 7 August 2021 (UTC) Ergo Sum (talk · contribs) Article: J. Havens Richards (talk, history) New article: diff for creation DYK: Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/March#20 March 2020 and nomination GA: Talk:J. Havens Richards/GA1 FA: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/J. Havens Richards/archive1 Ergo Sum 00:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)