Alternative History:Featured alternate history

Nominations for Featured Alternate Histories are the proper way of nominating the best alternate histories that we have here at the Alternate History Wiki. These alternate histories must meet the following criteria:
 * Well-written: the prose of the alternate history is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard;
 * Comprehensive: the alternate history neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context; more then one article is used to convey the alternate history
 * Plausible: the POD and the altered events following the POD are logically what would happen if history was changed
 * Neutral: the alternate history does its best to give an objective view of the altered history without being overly influenced by politics, religion, nationalism, etc.; it is not a "wankfest"
 * Peaceful collaboration: the alternate history is not subject to ongoing edit wars.
 * Portal Page: the alternate history has a portal page that summarizes the work and prepares the reader for the detail in the connected articles;
 * Appropriate structure: the majority of articles in the alternate history have a system of hierarchical section headings, a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents and a lead section to describe the article
 * External sources: the alternate history provides OTL sources to support the events after the POD either on the portal page or a separate article
 * Supplements: the alternate history makes use of pictures, flags, maps, tables, videos, etc.

Any registered user can nominate an article. You may nominate an article by yourself, or with other users. You will need to sign the nomination, so a confirmation can be completed.

If an alternate history receives a nomination, the  template will be placed on the portal page until a decision is reached.

If an alternate history becomes a featured article, the  template will be placed on the portal page and the alternate history will be added to the list. The nomination discussion will be moved to the archive.

Nomination Process

 * 1) First chose an alternate history, and explain why the alternate history would be a good candidate. Also, you can explain what needs to be improved on the article.
 * 2) Add the  template to the article.
 * 3) The alternate history should be adjusted if anyone opposes it.
 * 4) The alternate history will be added to the list if there is no more opposition and at least three (3) editors (other then the nominator) support its nomination.

Sample Nomination
Please copy and past this format for your own nomination. ===Portal Page of alternate history===

*Supporters

*Objectors

*Discussion

Note: Please put new nominations at the bottom of the page.

British Louisiana
It's been featured before, and has maps and other extras. Louisiannan 15:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Supporters
 * Mitro 23:28, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
 * Emperorjames 15:41, November 15, 2009 (GMT/UTC)
 * --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 20:04, November 18, 2009 (UTC)


 * Objectors
 * there are many others TL that has a lot more extras --Ed9306 23:38, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Check you spelling FireFootball 01:37, November 11, 2009 (UTC)


 * Discussion
 * @Ed: The quantity of extras shouldn't matter. I mean how many maps, pics, etc. does a TL need to be featured?  Any number chosen would be arbitrary and what should be most important is the qaulity of the extras. @FF: Though the quality of the writing is important when it comes to whether a TL should be featured, it is easily corrected.  Are there any specific articles in the TL that need to be copyedited? I would be willing to do that. Mitro 03:34, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

Cabotia and Brasil
It's been featured before, and has maps and other extras. Louisiannan 15:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Supporters
 * Mitro 23:28, November 12, 2009 (UTC)


 * Objectors
 * FireFootball 01:36, November 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * Discussion
 * FIrefootball, if you're objecting because of spelling, that's a very small thing on the scale of things, and really should just be noted here in the discussion section. It's not a reason against a timeline, especially since this timeline was written by a non-native english speaker.  Louisiannan Dr. Cayne Armand 19:06, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Rebellion of 61
It's been featured before, and has maps and other extras. Louisiannan 15:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Supporters


 * Objectors


 * Discussion

Papatlaca
Thoroughly well researched and imaginative, and very well written besides. A little short, but it does have a small body of pages to support it. Benkarnell 22:36, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
 * Supporters
 * I don't think size is really that much of an issue with this timeline. The question marks however are, and I think they should be addressed (preferably by the original author if he's still interested). Intriguing timeline and therefore gets the benefit of the doubt. --Karsten&#160;vK (talk) 20:09, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * Objectors
 * It is certainly an intriguing TL, I can't deny that. However I think its size is still an issue, as are the number of questions marks on some of the articles.  Mitro 04:18, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * Kind of short FireFootball 01:41, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
 * Normally I would agree with the kind of argument Karsten presented, but I can't fully understand this TL unless it gets expanded just a little more. Riley.Konner 20:54, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
 * Discussion

Basileus' Interference Timeline
It has been featured before. Mitro 13:41, December 13, 2009 (UTC)
 * Supporters


 * Objectors


 * Discussion

Finland Superpower
Nomination by Iamtheggman.
 * Supporters
 * it has a nice portal page with good photos and a timeline and it has good links--Owen1983 22:59, December 21, 2009 (UTC)


 * Objectors


 * Discussion
 * Well it was expanded quite a bit since the last time I took a look at it, I am still not though whether to support or object. Riley.Konner 10:29, December 25, 2009 (UTC)