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.

Toyotomi Japan
It's been featured before, it's well written and well thought out with maps and other extras. Louisiannan 16:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Supporters
 * Mitro 15:10, September 4, 2009 (UTC)
 * Objectors
 * Not very plausible and lots of spelling mistakes User:Emperorjames 21:01, 30 August 2009 (GMT/UTC)
 * Spelling mistakes are easily correctable and not really grounds for objection, IMO -- please list in the discussion section why you don't feel it's a very plausible timeline, James. Louisiannan 15:23, September 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry I don't object very much but I just have to say your AH is just not that visual, you defiantly need to add more images and design some flags and symbols for your nations. User:Riley.Konner
 * I don't understand. Chaos had even less in the way of visual media (maps, flags, etc.) and you voted to approve that.  How can that now be a problem with this TL?  Mitro 16:10, October 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't vote to approve that actually I voted against it.
 * I'm assuming that was Riley, any and I quote: "It is well written and very detailed. User:Riley.Konner 9:47, September 25, 2009." Mitro 01:55, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Did I? Wow sorry I guess I forgot about writting that. User:Riley.Konner


 * Discussion
 * Some of the TL articles have the incomplete template on them. Are they really incomplete?  Mitro 17:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Good question. I'll have to look at them.  Could you link the template here? Louisiannan 16:11, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * See Category:Work in progress, that template appears on some pages. Mitro 01:42, September 18, 2009 (UTC)


 * It is highly unlikely that Japan would have expanded into North America, and it is even more unlikely that the Japanese would explore south of Indonesia! User:Emperorjames 16:40, 15 September 2009 (GMT/UTC)


 * Have you read the timeline? The premise is that the Japanese government changed early on and that they chose to venture further afield.  One of the purposes of Alternate History is to see what would happen if key things changed.  While the Japanese *here* were not wide-ranging explorers, it's suggested that in Toyotomi they were. What specific points that changed from our timeline to Toyotomi do you object to?  If it's just your feeling that the Japanese wouldn't do it, it's not really sufficient, IMO, to block the timeline. Louisiannan 18:19, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
 * The point of an Alternate History is for it to be plausible! I certainly know more about Sengoku and Toyotomi Japan than you, and the possibility that the events in this timeline could happen are extremely remote. Maybe you should read about this fascinating period of history before you make points about things you do not understand! User:Emperorjames 17:57, 14 October 2009 (GMT/UTC)

President Perot

 * Supporters
 * Objectors
 * This is only a single page with five small paragraphs! --DarthEinstein 22:42, October 23, 2009 (UTC)
 * Discussion

Vegetarian World
It's been featured before, it's well written and well thought out with maps and other extras. Louisiannan 16:04, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Supporters
 * Mitro - Though the idea of vegetarianism being so widespread seems a little odd, I can't think of a good argument to make it implausible. TL seems to be featured worthy to me.
 * Objectors
 * It has already been choosed...isn't fair Ed9306
 * The fact that it has already been chosen under an old system of voting shouldn't be objectionable. There is a new system and every TL should have a clean slate.  The quality of the TL should matter, not whether it appeared before.  Mitro 23:44, October 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * Discussion

Washington Shot at Murdering Town!
It's been featured before, it's well written and well thought out with maps and other extras. Louisiannan 16:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Supporters
 * Mitro
 * Tbguy1992 I have to say this is a very enjoyable to read, and seems so plausable.
 * Objectors
 * your argument is my objection....It has already been choosed...isn't fair Ed9306
 * We have criteria (see top of the page) for a reason. Just because it appeared before should not be a reason it never appears.  Mitro 23:45, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Discussion

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


 * Supporters

there are many others TL that has a lot more extras --Ed9306 23:38, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Objectors
 * Discussion

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


 * Supporters


 * Objectors


 * Discussion

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


 * Supporters


 * Objectors


 * Discussion

Finland Superpower
Iamtheggman 03:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Supporters
 * Objectors
 * Mitro - The alternate history needs a lot more work done to it. It currently only has one article of actual content.  The history needs to be flushed out more.  Also plausibility needs to be looked at, Finland just seems to expand too quickly and easily in this TL.
 * Louisiannan - it does need to have a larger number of pages to be considered for featured status, IMHO. 16:13, October 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * User:Riley.Konner - I'm pulling my support this article has been around for to long and has been expanded enough.
 * Discussion

Soviet defeat
User:Buk5 5:43, 12 October 2009 --Das Taub 01:17, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * Supporters
 * Objectors


 * Discussion

Fall Grün
This timeline is well research and in a word: epic. Great use of photos and maps. Also it already been featured on the main page in the past. Mitro 17:09, October 13, 2009 (UTC) --Riley.Konner: Its been featured before and it should be featured again.
 * Supporters

--Das Taub: Possibly the Best Alternate History in the Entire Wiki. i look forward to farther work on Deutschland Siegt

--YNot1989 01:43, October 23, 2009 (UTC): Arguably has the most detailed war page and geopolitical scenarios I've ever read. It has been my inspiration for many of my own war pages.
 * Objectors
 * Boring!!!!!! I like the ATL, but WWII ATL are always elected...it is becoming monotonous
 * I actually went and checked, only three WWII POD TLs have ever appeared on the main page over the more then a dozen that have shown up. That is evidence that they are not always elected, in fact there are no WWII TLs currently featured.  You also admit you like the TL and yet say its boring?  You contradict yourself.  Mitro 23:47, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
 * Discussion

Aztec Empire
I think this ATL is well written.......It has a lot of original maps making a realistic world on modern days.....no only being a large page with a lot of facts and years that are in fact boring........I also think is time to choose an ATL that is relationed with another kind of history...all featured timelines have been relationed with WWII history, USA history, ColdWar history, Nazis, Nuclear wars, etc..Ed9306


 * Supporters


 * Objectors
 * Discussion
 * Does a TL where the Mongols don't go conquering the largest land empire in history a part of that incredibly inclusive list of yours? What about a world where vegetarianism is more popular?  And now you are telling me that it is not cliche already in alternate history to have the Aztec Empire stay independent?  Just take a look at Uchronia to see what I mean.  I haven't read this TL yet, so don't take this discussion as an objections, but your reasoning behind why all of those other articles should be objected and this one should not is faulty.  Mitro 23:53, October 22, 2009 (UTC)