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.

ANYONE can nominate a timeline (even its creator). You may nominate an article by yourself, or with other users. You will need to sign the nomination, so a confirmation can be completed. IMPORTANT: only registered users with 100 or more edits will be allowed to vote in the featured TL nominations.

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 timeline, 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) Objectors must explain why they are objecting to be valid.
 * 5) The alternate history will be added to the list if 2/3 of the votes are cast in support after two weeks since it was nominated.

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.

French Trafalgar, British Waterloo
A Napoleonic timeline by Tbguy1992. Much like King's Napoleonic timeline, this one is very large and growing almost daily in size. It covers much of the world at present, and Tb is currently expanding, with help from a few others, where it does not cover that well at present. It is well-written, and I was honestly surprised to find that it was not alreadly in the "featured" category. Lordganon 09:30, February 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * Supporters
 * This is a fine example of a timeline. Well-written, logically thought-out and filled with more than enough content to form a coherent image of its reality. FTBW should most definitely join the ranks of the featured timelines. Red VS Blue 14:21, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * Mitro 18:23, February 8, 2011 (UTC)
 * Fedelede 02:10, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Since Tbguy1992 and I share an interest in Napoleon's victory, this has always been one of my favorite TLs to follow. I think it is likely more plausible than my own and more focused on "hard" history, if that is the right term to use, since I often distract myself when I wander off on tangents about college football or Batman. I'm just as surprised as Lordganon that it hasn't been already been approved for featured status. KingSweden 20:04, February 10, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh my god... this thing is Fantastic. I want to write something like this one day. Michael Douglas 17:40, February 11, 2011 (UTC)
 * Absolutely one of the best timelines on this website. Ownerzmcown 03:59, February 13, 2011 (UTC)
 * Collie Kaltenbrunner 08:08, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Objectors


 * Discussion
 * @Michael Douglas: You Should! =]
 * not half shabby, it almost is better then mine Bobalugee1940 04:44, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

No Supernatural Intervention
A TL which wonders: What if God is just... Not there? This TL is not very large (Only 5 pages), but I think it is very well thought out and well written. SouthWriter is an experienced Alt-Hister, and I believe this TL has a lot of Potential. PitaKang 01:56, February 9, 2011 (UTC)


 * Supporters


 * Objectors
 * No offense to South or anyone, but I think this timeline is too Christianized to be featured. It's also pretty short and only realistic if you take all of the Bible to be literal. Fedelede 02:10, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just not complete enough. Lordganon 04:55, February 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * It doesn't seem very possible beacuse God (according to the Bible wich you take literally in this TL) made man and all creation to please and worship him so if he just disappeared what wld be the point of him making the universe. But just for the sake of argument and lets say he did just disappear he wouldn't have had created the Eden beacuse he knew that if he wasn't there man would eat of the fruit and perish, that and beacuse he made Eden ecspecially for Adam and Eve so if he just disapeared he wouldn't have made the garden or the fruit. But again for the sake of argument lets say he did, why did Adam and Eve not eat the fruit of the Tree of Life as well if God just wasn't there?Bobalugee1940 14:08, February 10, 2011 (UTC)


 * Discussion
 * Thanks Pitakang, for the nomination. Sorry I took several days to check here. I assume you support the article, so put your reason and signature under "Supporters." Also, it is not that God is "not there," but that he just doesn't communicate or interfere. This is the belief of the deist - the "clock-maker" God who creates the world and lets it run itself.
 * To Fed, the fact that it is taking the literal account of the Bible (Christianized?) is definitely NOT a reason to reject it as "featured." That is showing a bias and prejudice that is unbecoming of this community. I have explained that the purpose of the time line is to have readers actually look to the Bible to see how God worked in history. To assume that history continued without any intervention, leads to a deist approach and is fully in line with how most historians approach history anyway.
 * To LG. I laid out the outline of the history with hopes that contributors would offer ideas on how things would have gone if the secularists are right. I had other work to do, and beyond the that outline did not do much on it. There is an article on Abram, the Ancients, David, and a large article on the Renaissance. Pitakang is young, but appreciated the attempt so he nominated it.
 * To Bob. The fact that I take the history of the Bible as an outline is immaterial in this time line, actually. The original pair could just as easily developed from pre-human homonoids, I guess. The point is, they didn't, and I was not going to create a time line based on that premise. If you read the article, I dealt with the garden as a rainforest with the trees in its midst. Eve found the Tree of Knowledge first, and in picking the fruit failed the text of the unseen God. The tree of life was discovered later, and used by the Ancients to great advantage. The God of the Bible just isn't here in this time line. The purpose that He gives as for creation in the Bible is not the revealed, but can only be a matter of conjecture without supernatural intervention (Divine Inspiration). God did not "disappear" in this time line, He just never "appeared." He is, in fact there, but mankind just has natural revelation - His creation - to show that He exists. It is the "Intelligent Design" argument - many people who do not personally accept the God of the Bible believe that there had to be a creator. SouthWriter 15:37, February 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * The rules state that if three editors oppose, the banner is removed. I will personally remove the banner at the end of the day (Feb. 15), if the objections remain.  I did not campaign for this, and I can live with it not being considered any further. Have a good day. SouthWriter 15:46, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Featured Review Process
Sometimes timelines are elevated to featured status when they should not be. Also sometimes a good featured timeline is elevated, but later changes make it uworthy of being a featured timeline. If you think this has happened, you can put the timeline under review by following these steps:


 * 1) Use the nomination template above and explain why the timeline should no longer be featured.
 * 2) Add the  template to the article.
 * 3) If 3 editors support removing it's featured status, it will no longer be considered a featured TL.

IMPORTANT: By putting yourself down as a supporter, you are supporting the nomination to remove the timeline's featured status.