Wikipedia talk:Featured articles

FACs needing feedback view •
La Isla Bonita	Review it now

Featured article removal candidates
Bart Simpson	Review now
Emmy Noether	Review now
The Notorious B.I.G.	Review now
Isaac Brock	Review now
Mariah Carey	Review now
Concerto delle donne	Review now

See also: Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles

Suggestions

Hi, starting off the list of suggstions, can you feature the South American tapir or Baird's tapir (tomorrow) please? 2601:206:8101:2F0:F5:9807:10BF:ED07 (talk) 01:42, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes Victor Baruch (talk) 13:52, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Im just start still learning how to edit the page. How to edit im always block. Thanks Palata752 (talk) 10:57, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured articles/sandbox

Greetings,

does Wikipedia:Featured articles/sandbox this page still serve a purpose? It spuriously appears in WhatLinksHere for FA articles. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:23, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes It does Victor Baruch (talk) 13:46, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: I agree with you re. "spurious". @Victor Baruch: can you expand on why the page still serves any purpose? The statistics are illuminating. It has had 175 edits in 13 years, of which 150 are by a bot; it was last edited 18 months ago, and its ast 50 edits go back to 2012. That is the definition of spurious! ——SN54129 11:33, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, any guide? How to edit? Do i need to removed some content or just add words? Palata752 (talk) 11:10, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Where do volcanoes belong in the list

Currently some volcanoes - such as Calabozos and Cerro Azul (Chile volcano) - are in the "Geology and geophysics" section whereas others - such as Ubinas and Wōdejebato - are in the "Geography and places" section. What is the correct section? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:24, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Some things fit well in more than one category. Others, like Underwater diving, get shoehorned into the least bad fit. Tricky. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 10:37, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

FA-Class Chicago articles

I just completed reading the articles in Category:FA-Class Chicago articles. I made some edits, most uncontroversial and a few contested, as well as some suggestions. On a whole they were good reads with only one that might have needed downgrading but I removed the controversial section and tag. Otr500 (talk) 13:37, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment#Improving how article assessments are presented to readers

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment#Improving how article assessments are presented to readers. Sdkb (talk) 22:47, 7 February 2020 (UTC)Template:Z48

Corona-related TFA?

See discussion at WT:TFA

Preliminary: Here I suggest to speedy make Virus a WP:TFA. When this is actually requested (having some support from WP:MED), the discussion should be on *this* page Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article @TFA coordinators (changed) IIRC. Initial support from TFA-minded people (like you, reading this) would help getting a good decision. -DePiep (talk) 14:45, 15 March 2020 (UTC) This is the wrong place for this discussion. See further discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine#Speedy Corona-related TFA. Once we get a better sense there, the proposal can be put forward at WT:TFA. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC) Plus can you give me any good reason not to block you on the spot since you openly admit you're canvassing people you think will give "initial support"? You have 200,000 edits, the "I wasn't aware of the rules" argument isn't going to wash. ‑ Iridescent 15:07, 15 March 2020 (UTC) Iri, you indented under me, but I assume your comment is aimed at DePiep. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:21, 15 March 2020 (UTC) (ec) User:Iridescent That reason is AGF. As you can read, I am proposing an idea on relevant WikiProjects Talk pages. Asking for Initial support is good practice, since there might be issues I myself do not see. Also visible is that I am clearly open for arguments on why it could be DOA. BTW already people have added good replies, bringing my proposal further. If you wish to furthen your personal attack, please read WP:CANVAS first, digest its purpose and intention, and be more specific. Is there anything else I can help you with? -DePiep (talk) 15:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC) Well, It's been over ten years since it was last featured on the main page, so that shouldn't be a problem. Maybe bounce Turpitz off from 1 April? I mean, it's clearly trading on that oh-so-very-important anniversary of its launch (when clearly what most people would be interested in is its sinking, D'OH). 'Tirpitz' is certainly not very April Fools-ish (good), but although viruses are equally unamusing, it could be cogently argued that the complete fuck-up that we're currently observing—AKA world leaders running around like headless chickens with none of them having the blindest clue as to what to actually do wrt COVID-19—is fractionally more suited to the day in question. YMMV of course. ——SN54129 15:12, 15 March 2020 (UTC) The April Fools idea is sick, and not in a funny way. This is the wrong page for this discussion; could we see what Graham Beards says about our virus articles, what the FAC coords say, and then launch a proposal on the correct page, WT:TFA? SandyGeorgia (Talk) Misunderstood... ——SN54129 15:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC) Got it. Why are we still discussing here? DePiep are you planning to start the discussion at WT:TFA or should I? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:50, 16 March 2020 (UTC) @SandyGeorgia: I'm fine with you starting that talk. Glad you dove into this. -DePiep (talk) 17:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC) @DePiep:, ok, will do, arming with sanitizer to do some errands, will post to TFA when I get home. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC) FYI/my afterthoughts: here Graham Beards suggests TFA'ing Introduction to viruses (TFA in 2012) or Social history of viruses (2013). Virus seems to have no degraded-issues. As for the speedy argument: usually a birthday is a strong TFA trigger on the calendar. We could consider coronavirus similarly calender-bound b/c of actuality. -DePiep (talk) 18:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

See discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Today's featured article#Proposal to re-run virus-related TFAs during Coronavirus pandemic SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)