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 than 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 a timeline (except its creator/caretaker). 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 or to nominate candidates.

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

If an alternate history becomes a featured timeline, the {{featured}} 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.
   1. You cannot nominate your own timelines.
   2. Failure to follow the correct format and positioning will result in the nomination being removed.
2. Add the {{featured candidate}} template to the article.
3. The alternate history should be adjusted if anyone opposes it.
   1. Objectors must explain why they are objecting to be valid.
4. 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 paste this format for your own nomination.
===[[Portal Page of alternate history]]===

Enter your reason. Sign it.

*'''Supporters'''

Stepintime

*'''Objectors'''

*'''Discussion'''

This is what it should look like:

Portal Page of alternate history

I like this, because it is good. (sample, not intended for copying!) signed: wiki signature

• Supporters

• Objectors

• Discussion

Note: Please put new nominations at the bottom of the Nominations section.

Nominations

Cromwell the Great

Adopted and developed by Jorge GG, Cromwell the Great deserves featured status for the following reasons

1. Well Organized- Whole series has a filled out template which makes navigation to all subjects on the timeline easy and enjoyable
2. Immersion- The visuals of the articles, writing style and era relevant quotations bring the reader to feel the content. To experience the reading rather than just viewing the words. I believe Cromwell's model is unique to this timeline and above average
3. Content- No other Featured Timeline covers the subject of a alternate 17th century England concerning the subjects of the civil War and/or Cromwell.
4. Perspective- Cromwell's perspective (from 1700) and the writing style from the year's point of view contributes to the immersion listed above. The choice to stay specifically on 17th century England then spread out to the world has served the timeline well thus far.

Regardless of the results of this nomination do congratulate Lord GG for a job well done.

Thank you for your time and consideration of the timeline. Sincerely,

Stepintime

• Supporters
  • ​ Consvl Ioshva Vae victis! 02:32, April 16, 2017 (UTC)
• Objectors

• Discussion
  • It certainly is a good timeline. My issue is if it is large enough. It doesn't quite get that far into modern history in my opinion. Imp ^{(Say Hi?!)} 13:01, March 21, 2017 (UTC)
  • I see quality over quantity here. Its true this timeline stays within its era, and restricts the timescope, but this model allows the timeline to delve deep into the subject and create an atmosphere of actually being there. Like I said, actually looking inside this fictional world, than just reading it.- Stepintime
  • The nominator does not place a vote in the voting section. Scraw 02:04, April 16, 2017 (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 unworthy 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 {{featured review}} template to the article.
3. If 3 editors above the number of those who object, following a two week period, 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.