Wikipedia:Compare criteria Good v. Featured article

This is a summary and comparison of the standards for good articles and featured articles.

A good article meets a basic set of editorial standards and is all around decent. It has the following attributes:

1. Well written: prose and layout are clear; it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Accurate and verifiable: sources are reliable, listed, and cited; no original research, copyright violations, or plagiarism are present;
3. Broad: it covers the main aspects of the topic without going into unnecessary detail.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Images: it is illustrated, if possible and relevant, by images with acceptable copyright status and fair use rationales where necessary.

A featured article exemplifies our very best work and has the following attributes:

1. High and reliable quality—(a) engaging prose of a professional standard; (b) comprehensive coverage of major facts, details, and context; (c) factual accuracy, with citations for verification against high-quality reliable sources; (d) neutral presentation of viewpoints; and (e) stable content.
2. Style compliance: it follows the entire Manual of Style and has—(a) a concise, summarizing lead; (b) a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents; and (c) consistently formatted inline citations.
3. Media. It has images in accordance with image use policies; in particular, they have acceptable copyright status and fair use rationales where necessary.
4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail.