Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests

Here the community can nominate articles to be selected as "Today's featured article" (TFA) on the main page. The TFA section aims to highlight the range of articles that have "featured article" status, from Art and architecture through to Warfare, and wherever possible it tries to avoid similar topics appearing too close together without good reason. Requests are not the only factor in scheduling the TFA (see Choosing Today's Featured Article); the final decision rests with the TFA coordinators: Wehwalt, Dank and Gog the Mild, who also select TFAs for dates where no suggestions are put forward. Please confine requests to this page, and remember that community endorsement on this page does not necessarily mean the article will appear on the requested date. The article must be a featured article. Editors who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it for TFAR. The article must not have appeared as TFA before (see the list of possibilities here), except that: The TFA coordinators may choose to fill up to two slots each week with FAs that have previously been on the main page, so long as the prior appearance was at least five years ago. The coordinators will invite discussion on general selection criteria for re-runnable TFAs, and aim to make individual selections within those criteria. The request must be either for a specific date within the next 30 days that has not yet been scheduled, or a non-specific date. The template {{@TFA}} can be used in a message to "ping" the coordinators through the notification system. If you have an exceptional request that deviates from these instructions (for example, an article making a second appearance as TFA, or a "double-header"), please discuss the matter with the TFA coordinators beforehand. It can be helpful to add the article to the pending requests template, if the desired date for the article is beyond the 30-day period. This does not guarantee selection, but does help others see what nominations may be forthcoming. Requesters should still nominate the article here during the 30-day time-frame.

Featured content: Featured articles ← Featured lists Featured pictures Featured topics Featured article candidates (FAC) Featured article criteria Featured article log Featured article statistics Featured article review (FAR) Former featured articles Unreviewed featured articles/2020 Today's featured article (TFA): This month's queue About Today's featured article Recent TFAs and statistics Current TFA requests Potential TFA requests TFA oddities Most viewed TFAs Featured articles yet to appear as TFA Script to track TFA recent changes Featured article tools: Mentoring for FAC Nominators of featured articles promoted Recent changes to featured articles Random featured article

How to post a new nomination: I. Create the nomination subpage. In the box below, enter the full name of the article you are nominating (without using any brackets around the article's name) and click the button to create your nomination page. II. Write the nomination. On that nomination page, fill out as many of the relevant parts of the pre-loaded {{TFAR nom}} template as you can, then save the page. Your nomination should mention: when the last similar article was, since this helps towards diversity on the main page (browsing Wikipedia:Today's featured article/recent TFAs will help you find out); when the article was promoted to FA status (since older articles may need extra checks); and (for date-specific nominations) the article's relevance for the requested date. III. Write the blurb. Some Featured Articles promoted between 2016 and 2020 have pre-prepared blurbs, found on the talk page of the FAC nomination (that's the page linked from "it has been identified" at the top of the article's talk page). If there is one, copy and paste that to the nomination, save it, and then edit as needed. For other FAs, you're welcome to create your own TFA text as a summary of the lead section, or you can ask for assistance at WT:TFAR. We use one paragraph only, with no reference tags or alternative names; the only thing bolded is the first link to the article title. The length when previewed is between 925 and 1025 characters including spaces, " (Full article...)" and the featured topic link if applicable. More characters may be used when no free-use image can be found. Fair use images are not allowed. IV. Post at TFAR. After you have created the nomination page, add it here under a level-3 heading for the preferred date (or under a free non-specific date header). To do this, add (replacing "ARTICLE TITLE" with the name of your nominated article): ===February 29=== {{Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/ARTICLE TITLE}} Nominations are ordered by requested date below the summary chart. More than one article can be nominated for the same date. It would also then be helpful to add the nomination to the summary chart, following the examples there. Please include the name of the article that you are nominating in your edit summary. If you are not one of the article's primary editors, please then notify the primary editors of the TFA nomination; if primary editors are no longer active, please add a message to the article talk page. Scheduling: In the absence of exceptional circumstances, TFAs are scheduled in date order, not according to how long nominations have been open or how many supportive comments they have. So, for example, January 31 will not be scheduled until January 30 has been scheduled (by TFAR nomination or otherwise).

Summary chart

Currently accepting requests from November 2 to December 2.

The TFAR requests page is currently accepting nominations from November 2 to December 2. Articles for dates beyond then can be listed here, but please note that doing so does not count as a nomination and does not guarantee selection. Before listing here, please check for dead links using checklinks or otherwise, and make sure all statements have good references. This is particularly important for older FAs and reruns. view • • history • watch
Date	Article	Reason	Primary author(s)	Added by (if different)
November 3	1964 Illinois House of Representatives election	Why	Elli
November 6	Russian battleship Poltava (1894)	Why		harizotoh9
November 8	Mario Party DS	Why	The Green Star Collector
November 11	Mells War Memorial	Why	HJ Mitchell	Ham II
November 17	SMS Friedrich Carl	Why	Parsecboy	Peacemaker67
November 18	Donkey Kong Country	Why	TheJoebro64, Jaguar	TheJoebro64
November 19	My Little Love	Why	MaranoFan
November 21	MLS Cup 1999	Why	SounderBruce
November 22	Donkey Kong 64	Why	czar
November 27	Interstate 182	Why	SounderBruce
November 28	Battle of Cane Hill	Why	Hog Farm
December 2	Windswept Adan	Why	Joeyquism
December 3	PlayStation (console)	Why	Jaguar	Dank
December 8	You Belong with Me	Why	Ippantekina	Sheila1988
December 10	Shovel Knight Showdown	Why	The Night Watch	Gerda Arendt
December 13	Taylor Swift	Why (rerun, first TFA was August 23, 2019)	Ronherry	FrB.TG, Ticklekeys, SNUGGUMS
December 19	SMS Niobe	Why	Peacemaker67
December 20	Sonic the Hedgehog 2	Why	TheJoebro64	Sheila1988
2025:
January 1	York Park	Why		Harizotoh9
January 4	Liza Soberano	Why	Pseud 14
January 6	Maria Trubnikova	Why	Ganesha811	Dank
January 8	Elvis Presley	Why	PL290, DocKino, Rikstar	Dank
January 9	Title (album)	Why	MaranoFan
January 22	Caitlin Clark	Why	Sportzeditz	Dank
January 27	The Holocaust in Bohemia and Moravia	Why		Harizotoh9
January 28	Lewis W. Green	Why	PCN02WPS
January 29	Dominik Hašek	Why		Harizotoh9
March 10	Hotline Miami 2: Wrong Number	Why	NegativeMP1
March 12	2020 Seattle Sounders FC season	Why	SounderBruce
March 18	Edward the Martyr	Why	Amitchell125	Sheila1988
March 26	Pierre Boulez	Why	Dmass	Sheila1988
April 1	Pig-faced women	Why		Harizotoh9
April 12	Dolly de Leon	Why	Pseud 14
April 15	Lady Blue (TV series)	Why	Aoba47	Harizotoh9
April 18	Battle of Poison Spring	Why	HF
April 24	"I'm God"	Why	Skyshifter
April 25	1925 FA Cup Final	Why	Kosack	Dank
May	21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg (1st Albanian) (re-run, first TFA was May 14, 2015)	Why	Peacemaker67
May 6	Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories	Why		Harizotoh9
May 10	Ben&Ben	Why	Pseud 14
May 11	Mother (Meghan Trainor song)	Why	MaranoFan
June	The Combat: Woman Pleading for the Vanquished	Why	iridescent	Harizotoh9
June 3	David Evans (RAAF officer)	Why		Harizotoh9
June 8	Barbara Bush	Why		Harizotoh9
July 1	Maple syrup	Why	Nikkimaria	Dank
July 7	Gustav Mahler	Why	Brianboulton	Dank
July 14	William Hanna	Why	Rlevse	Dank
July 26	Liz Truss	Why	Tim O'Doherty	Tim O'Doherty and Dank
July 29	Tiger	Why	LittleJerry
July 31	Battle of Warsaw (1705)	Why	Imonoz	Harizotoh9
August 4	Death of Ms Dhu	Why	Freikorp	AirshipJungleman29
August 23	Yugoslav torpedo boat T3	Why	Peacemaker67
August 30	Late Registration	Why		Harizotoh9
September 2	1905–06 New Brompton F.C. season	Why		Harizotoh9
September 6	Hurricane Ophelia (2005)	Why		Harizotoh9
September 20	Myst V: End of Ages	Why		Harizotoh9
September 30 or October 1	Hoover Dam	Why	NortyNort, Wehwalt	Dank
October 1	Yugoslav torpedo boat T4	Why	Peacemaker67
October 3	Spaghetti House siege	Why	SchroCat	Dank
October 10	Tragic Kingdom	Why	EA Swyer	Harizotoh9
October 16	Angela Lansbury	Why	Midnightblueowl	MisawaSakura
October 18	Royal Artillery Memorial	Why	HJ Mitchell	Ham II
November 1	Matanikau Offensive	Why		Harizotoh9
November 19	Water Under the Bridge	Why	MaranoFan
November 20	Nuremberg trials	Why	buidhe	harizotoh9
November 21	Canoe River train crash	Why	Wehwalt
December 22 or 25	A Very Trainor Christmas	Why	MaranoFan	MaranoFan
December 25	Marcus Trescothick	Why		Harizotoh9
2026:
January 27	History of the Jews in Dęblin and Irena during World War II	Why		Harizotoh9
January 28	Lewis W. Green	Why	PCN02WPS	Harizotoh9
May 5	Me Too (Meghan Trainor song)	Why	MaranoFan
June 8	Types Riot	Why	Z1720
July 23	Veronica Clare	Why		Harizotoh9
September 20	Persona (series)	Why		Harizotoh9
November	The Story of Miss Moppet	Why		Harizotoh9
November 11	U.S. Route 101	Why	SounderBruce
October 15	Easy on Me	Why	MaranoFan
December 21	Fredonian Rebellion	Why		Harizotoh9
December 22	Title (song)	Why	MaranoFan
2027:
June	1987 (What the Fuck Is Going On?)	Why
August 25	Genghis Khan	Why	AirshipJungleman29

Date	Article	Points	Notes	Supports†	Opposes†
Nonspecific 1	Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo	0	promoted over 2 years ago	8	5
Nonspecific 2	Loggerhead sea turtle		promoted over 1 year ago	1
January 8	Elvis Presley	6	anniversary of birth, vital article, 1 yr FA	7	1

^† Tally may not be up to date; please do not use these tallies for removing a nomination according to criteria 1 or 3 above unless you have verified the numbers. The nominator is included in the number of supporters.

Nonspecific date 1

"Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo" is the tenth episode of the first season of the animated television series South Park. It originally aired on Comedy Central in the United States on December 17, 1997. In the episode, the Jewish character Kyle feels excluded from the rest of town during Christmas, and is comforted by Mr. Hankey, a talking and singing Christmas poo. Mr. Hankey does not come alive in front of anyone else, so everyone begins to think Kyle is losing his mind. Meanwhile, the townspeople remove all religious aspects of Christmas from South Park in order to remain politically correct and inoffensive. The episode was written and directed by series co-founders Trey Parker and Matt Stone, and was rated TV-MA L in the United States. The Mr. Hankey character was based on an idea from Parker's childhood; when Parker and Stone first conceived the South Park series, they wanted to make Mr. Hankey the lead character. Heavily influenced by the Peanuts Christmas special A Charlie Brown Christmas, "Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo" was the first South Park Christmas special and first musical episode. It served as a satire of political correctness and religious sensitivity. Parker and Stone felt the episode elevated South Park to a new level of popularity and relevance. (more…)

2 points - promoted over 2 years ago. I think it would be really fun if we had this article up for TFA for sometime during the christmas season. It's probably not too appropriate for the day itself, but would be perfect for that between-christmas-and-new-year no man's land when everyone has eaten and drunk far too much for too long, lost track of what day of the week it even is and has become sick of being at home with their family. Howdy Ho! Coolug (talk) 14:53, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

0 points until Jan 21. + 2 for old, - 2 for collission with chanukha, another animated TV episode. --Ettrig (talk) 08:46, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Support – As Coolug says, probably a bit strong for the day itself, but probably good for 29 December or thereabouts. Howdy Ho! —Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 15:28, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Support - dang, anything which convinces people to eat more fibre is a plus. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:47, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

• The Mr. Hankey character was based on an idea from Parker's childhood; when Parker and Stone first conceived the South Park series, they wanted to make Mr. Hankey the lead character. Bit of a non-sequitur there. What was the idea from Parker's childhood? Jezhotwells (talk) 11:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

• According to the article, the idea was Parker's father saying that if he did not flush the toilet, the poo, "Mr. Hankey", would come out of the toilet and kill him. 188.219.153.118 (talk) 10:43, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Support - It will be a perfect for Dec 29.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 03:09, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose - I know this is probably a completely irrelevant vote, but this is really pretty low, even by WP's standards. Oppose putting it up in any connection with the holiday itself... maybe in June or something. Juliancolton (talk) 04:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose for 25th, weak support for other dates.  An optimist on the run! 08:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey, considering this article is very likely not going to be scheduled for Dec 25th but on another date (if it is scheduled at all) should this not be counted as a support? I note the box at present shows 4 yays and 2 nays. Coolug (talk) 20:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

• Support for 25th, support for other dates. If Unicode 6.0 can host poo, we can too. Fifelfoo (talk) 08:50, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
• Extra Points for Christmas Day. Alarbus (talk) 09:31, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
  • moot. Alarbus (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
• Weak Oppose. I appreciate the effort that went into producing this article, but do we really have to feature such inane topics every week (TV shows, video games, and hurricanes)? It makes me slightly depressed. Kaldari (talk) 06:16, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support for the 25th. Nothing wrong with showing a bit of humour. Melicans (talk, contributions) 14:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose for Dec 25 or anything too close to Christmas, fine for another day, redundant to explain why. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:30, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Those sayings things like "oppose dec 25 support other days" - how should these votes be counted? In the opening I have said that I agree it isn't suitable for dec 25, this is also a non date specific nomination. It's not a nomination for christmas day. Coolug (talk) 14:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

• Support for the 25th or any date. —Ed!^(talk) 01:58, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Seeing as of the four opposes counted so far, only 2 are actual opposes, and the other 2 are just opposed to it being on christmas day itself, could the tally be amended to reflect that now the dec 25 tfa has been selected? Coolug (talk) 16:49, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I nominated this with the intention of it being TFA for either some time in the days leading up to christmas or the xmas-new-year no man's land of 27-30 dec when it would have been pretty appropriate. However, seeing as the tfa's slots for the rest of december have now been filled it wouldn't really be the end of the world if this wasn't stuck on the main page. I nominated it for a bit of fun, but the fun would be a bit pointless if it was tfa in january - it's a christmas poo not a new year poo! I'm not going to withdraw the nomination or anything but I won't be offended if it is removed by any other editors either. Howdy ho! Coolug (talk) 01:30, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Your nomination was POINT-y. Alarbus (talk) 01:51, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey. It's true that it was your post that inspired me to nominate this article, but I wasn't trying to make a silly point or offend the worlds christians! I just thought that in spite of your comments, it would actually have been pretty cool to have this article on the main page sometime during the christmas season. Coolug (talk) 10:49, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Think again and maybe they'll pay you the big bucks. Alarbus (talk) 11:36, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Is this a riddle? I'm not very good at riddles. Coolug (talk) 14:59, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Is this article going to be on the main page sometime during the christmas season? Alarbus (talk) 15:03, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Apparently not, but there's always next year. Howdy-ho! —Cliftonian (talk) 19:27, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

shit happens... Alarbus (talk) 03:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose...the Plot section has nary a single inline cite...the subject matter is immaterial to me and I remember this episode well when it first aired, but the article itself needs help.--MONGO 11:36, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

• Though I haven't checked for exceptions in this case, as a general rule plot sections are not required to have inline cites - it's assumed that the plot is from the episode/book/movie/whatever itself. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:07, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• Comment – this nomination should probably be taken down now, the next open date is 1 January and attempting to imply a connection to Christmas this late on seems to me a little bit tenuous. Perhaps this nomination should now wait until next year? —Cliftonian (talk) 17:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
• Comment - If you nominate it on December 17, next year, you could get a point for day relevance without having to nominate it on Christmas. With ancient FA status, that'd be three points if you're not ninja'd by another TV show. Emmy Altava 04:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Nonspecific date 2

The loggerhead sea turtle is an oceanic turtle distributed throughout the world. An adult weighs around 135 kilograms (298 lb), with the largest specimens weighing in at more than 454 kilograms (1,001 lb). The skin ranges from yellow to brown in color, and the shell is typically reddish-brown. Found in the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans as well as the Mediterranean Sea, the loggerhead sea turtle spends most of its life in saltwater and estuarine habitats, with females briefly coming ashore to lay eggs. The loggerhead sea turtle has a low reproductive rate and a lifespan of 47–67 years. Omnivorous, the species feeds mainly on bottom dwelling invertebrates. Its large and powerful jaws serve as an effective tool in dismantling its prey. Loggerheads are considered an endangered species and are protected by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. Turtle excluder devices (TEDs) have been implemented in efforts to reduce mortality by providing the turtle an escape route. Loss of suitable nesting beaches and the introduction of exotic predators has also taken a toll on loggerhead populations. Efforts to restore their numbers will require international cooperation since the turtles roam vast areas of ocean and critical nesting beaches are scattered among several countries. (more…)

Endangered. And we haven't had a turtle on the mainpage for a while. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:29, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I expect TCO will support.  :)--Wehwalt (talk) 02:36, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• Support—The article looks to be in good shape. Another nice contribution from the Tree of Life WikiProjects. Regards, RJH (talk) 19:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Date requests (5 max)

January 8

Elvis Presley (1935–1977) was an American singer and one of the most important figures of 20th-century popular culture. He is often referred to as the "King of Rock and Roll" or simply "the King". Born in Tupelo, Mississippi, Presley moved to Memphis, Tennessee at the age of 13. He began his career there in 1954 and became the leading figure of the newly popular sound of rock and roll with a series of television appearances and chart-topping records during the late 1950s. Conscripted in 1958, Presley relaunched his recording career two years later with some of his most commercially successful work. In 1968, after seven years away from the stage, he returned to live performance in a celebrated comeback television special that led to an extended Las Vegas concert residency and a string of profitable tours. In 1973 Presley staged the first concert broadcast globally via satellite, Aloha from Hawaii, seen by around 1.5 billion viewers. Prescription drug abuse severely affected his health, and he died suddenly in 1977 from cardiac arrest. With his versatile voice and unusually wide success encompassing many genres, Presley is the best-selling solo artist in the history of popular music. Nominated for 14 competitive Grammys, he won three, and received the Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award at age 36. He has been inducted into multiple music halls of fame. (more...)

Gotta choose one, and this one has a higher chance of eroding over time than does Bowie - be interesting to see how many hits it gets. Question is, whether to leave semiprotection on all day and what pic to use.. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:08, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Umm, vital article, anniversary of birth, one year FA I see for six points? There really aren't that many free use images are there? I'd suggest the Nixon/Presley one (well, I'm biased), or at least Presley cropped from that. It's high enough resolution to take it. The thing is, that darn shot is so iconic that everyone will know where it came from ... as for the semi protection, what did we do for Michael Jackson?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I've put that crop of Elvis in for now at least... I think the blurb needs quite a bit of trimming, it's looking very long at the moment. —Cliftonian (talk) 23:04, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Also, it doesn't say who Parker is. —Cliftonian (talk) 23:07, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

bloody hard to trim this one....all ideas appreciated.Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:00, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Have done quite a bit... thoughts? —Cliftonian (talk) 01:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

looks good. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• Support – Even though he did used to go around callin' himself the Tupelo, Mississippi Flash. —Cliftonian (talk) 22:59, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support – looks good. Regards, RJH (talk) 03:02, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support - Extremely high page view counts, and interwiki links, this is stuff that the world is interested in. --Ettrig (talk) 14:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Shall we run a contest to guess the pageview hits? :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Put me down for 547,000... —Cliftonian (talk) 20:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

• Support with a modest page view guess of 175K.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support: An excellent article and an important 20th centiry icon. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

350,001. Oh wait, this isn't The Price is Right.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:06, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

• Support Took awhile to read, but all looks clean and up to FA expectations.--MONGO 02:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• Query, leaning to oppose unless we hear from one of the significant contributors. Three editors brought this article to FAC, and only one is still active. I see that Ettrig was altering the lead, the significant contributor attempted corrections, and AFAIK hasn't been heard from since on the article or here. I'd like to hear from the signficant contributors that this article is mainpage ready before this is pushed up the line after Ettrig edited (he has unique views on FAC and TFA, see the talk page here, where he also has little experience). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

The comment above is clearly a personal attack. I ask you to collaborate in accordance with the Wikipedia policies. --Ettrig (talk) 08:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

oh, my. srsly. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Does this mean you don't understand that you made a personal attack? Then you need to read the link I provided to the relevant Wikipedia policy. --Ettrig (talk) 22:52, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Sandy made no personal attack here AFAICS, Ettrig; what specifically do you assert is an attack? That you have little experience? Nikkimaria (talk) 06:11, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

You did spot a clear one. The first two sentences of the linked policy say: Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Another is more subtle and more vicious. The thought that my editing might have caused remaining harm even after having been adjusted. This is not comment on content, it is comment on contributor. --Ettrig (talk) 10:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I've read the policy, thanks, and you're over-reacting - simply saying that you have little experience is not an attack. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I repeat, the first descriptive sentence of the policy is Comment on content, not on the contributor. Are we interpreting these words differently or do you not recognize that SandyGeorgia commented on my person and not on the content? Sandy points out that I have unique views on FAC and TFA. In my view this is a clear case of commenting on the person. Nothing is said here about what the article contains or what changes I made to it. I am simply pointing out a breach of Wikipedia policy. Why do you call this overreacting? --Ettrig (talk) 15:04, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Calling a spade a spade in not an attack and neither is saying you have little experience. If someone pointed out I have little experience with compiling bots that wouldn't be a personal attack either. Interpreting it as such is nonsensical and repeating yourself won't change that. Stop wikilawyering. Nev1 (talk) 15:26, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Is this still going on here? I suggest it would be better to remove all of this to a talk page (either WT:TFAR or mine or Ettrig's) so that he can be properly educated without taking up more space here. IF that is done, then I'll go look for the diff where he himself mentioned that he has little experience in this area, but this faulty assertion of a personal attack is disrupting the discussion here that we should be having, which is why articles are being pushed up the TFA line when they have issues, and why this page has fallen into decline since this trend was started-- by Ettrig. The page is becoming useless because of the trend started towards only TFAing high page view FAs, and a faulty assertion of a personal attack is additionally taking up bandwidth there. Take it outside. Does no one have anything to say about 15,000 word FAs on the mainpage, where most readers can't load the file? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:49, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

There's two sides here. Sandy rightfully would like to hear from a significant contributor before this is main page'd. However, simply having non-mainstream views on TFA is far from your typical warning sign. Sandy, you know I love you, but let's not assume too much here, okay? Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 09:51, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Sadly, both PL290 and Rikstar appear to have disengaged from the project, leaving me as the article's sole remaining nominator. Overall, quality has been maintained since it achieved FA status in February 2010. Increased byte count is due largely not to expansion of primary text (though there have been three terse update additions to the "Since 1977" subsection), but to addition of 22 citations and perhaps half as many sources and this recent formatting "cleanup" by Alarbus, which added more than 5 KB. Specifically, Ettrig's edit of the lead was not unreasonable; I did feel it eliminated valuable information, and my partial revert met with no controversy. I believe the article is mainpage ready. DocKino (talk) 16:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Doc ... that addressed my concerns, but raised another-- are you saying that Alarbus altered the citation style (without consensus?) and that added 5KB, which could slow down load time? If so, that's exactly the sort of thing that's been happening wrt TFA lately that concerns me, and shouldn't be happening at all. Pls fill us in? Struck my leaning to oppose, since you're on board, but would like to see this push to TFA certain articles according to the preferences of a mere handful of editors (against broad consensus) curtailed, and significant contributor and FA writers' needs taken into consideration-- they did the work, and if they are increasingly disregarded, motivation to write FAs will likely decline (as has, in fact, the use of this page since this push took hold). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:55, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Followup, for some reason I can't make Dr pda's prose size script work on that page (can anyone supply the data?), but the page is very slow to load from here-- did the citation style alteration slow down load time, and what are the prose and ref size stats? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:00, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Oopsie, I just discovered that I raised a concern about the article size just after it was promoted and that the problem of citation loading time was raised on the FAC-- it doesn't appear that has been addressed, and if additional KB has been added due to a change in citation style (without or without consensus?), it's no wonder I've a problem loading this article. This is not good for our mainpage readers, who can't all be expected to have fast computers. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, the citation style wasn't changed... it looks like he was 'fixing' the old style, but it doesn't look like he actually changed anything besides converting a few CITEREFs to templates and adding a bunch of spaces. Weird. Anyway. The statistics you requested:

• File size: 483 kB
• Prose size (including all HTML code): 150 kB
• References (including all HTML code): 33 kB
• Wiki text: 178 kB
• Prose size (text only): 92 kB (15642 words) "readable prose size"
• References (text only): 1821 B Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 17:09, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

More data at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates#Prose size. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose, too large, needs to be cut down, and there are ongoing disputes on the talk page. Thanks Ed, but based on that data I must oppose (this article is outrageously GYNORMOUS, no wonder I can't load it) ... hmmm, it appears that vcite was implemented on the FAC, so why are we now using templates that slow down the article. At 15,000 words, this is just WAY too big, not to mention the load time issues coming from the refs. "Think of the children in Africa" (joke), but sorry, we just can't run articles on the mainpage that most people can't even access, and this article should have been cut down, not increased in size since its FAC. In fact, Presley is our longest FA, and most of the other oversized FAs on that list increased in size after their FACs and should be sent to FAR. Fifteen thousand words is not accessible per load time to most of our readers, and is roughly 50% too big for accessibility (see WP:SIZE)-- better use of summary style should be employed before this article is run on the mainpage. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)