Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
DASHBot (talk | contribs)
m Removing fair use file(s), per WP:NFCC#9 (Shutoff | Log )
Line 95: Line 95:
<div style="width:55%; background-color:#f5fffa; border:1px solid #cef2e0;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em; color: black">
<div style="width:55%; background-color:#f5fffa; border:1px solid #cef2e0;padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em; color: black">
<div style="float:left;margin-right:0.9em">
<div style="float:left;margin-right:0.9em">
[[File:GraceSherwoodCloseB.jpg|100px|Grace Sherwood, the Witch of Pungo.]]
[[:File:GraceSherwoodCloseB.jpg|100px|Grace Sherwood, the Witch of Pungo.]]<!--Non free file removed by DASHBot-->
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>

Revision as of 05:03, 28 October 2010

Template:FixBunching

The TFAR requests page is currently accepting nominations from January 1 to January 31. 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.

viewedithistorywatch

Date Article Reason Primary author(s) Added by (if different)
December 8 You Belong with Me Why Ippantekina Sheila1988
December 10 Shovel Knight Showdown Why The Night Watch Gerda Arendt
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 20 Andrew Jackson Why Wtfiv Sheila1988
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
February 9 Japanese battleship Tosa Why The ed17
February 10 Siege of Baghdad Why AirshipJungleman29
March 1 Meurig ab Arthfael Why Dudley Miles Sheila1988
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 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 6 American logistics in the Northern France campaign Why Hawkeye7 Sheila1988
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
February 27 Raichu Why Kung Fu Man
May 5 Me Too (Meghan Trainor song) Why MaranoFan
June 1 Rhine campaign of 1796 Why harizotoh9
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
October 15 The Motherland Calls Why Joeyquism


Template:FixBunching

Experimenting with alternate media

The above discussion got me thinking -- for a music-oriented article like L'Orfeo, would it be preferable to use a music clip instead of a picture? (I'm thinking specifically of this) Can someone please post a blurb so I can see what it would look like? (Both the wikitext and the user view) Raul654 (talk) 04:03, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Poke? Anyone?
Something like this? I used the template Did You Know uses when they feature audio files. Grondemar 06:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

L'Orfeo (SV 318), sometimes called L'Orfeo, favola in musica, is an early Baroque opera by Claudio Monteverdi, with a text by Alessandro Striggio. It is based on the Greek legend of Orpheus, and tells the story of his descent to Hades and his fruitless attempt to bring his dead bride Eurydice back to the living world. Written in 1607 for a court performance during the annual Carnival at Mantua, L'Orfeo is one of the earliest music dramas still regularly performed. (more...)

I wonder if there's any way that the audio bar could somehow go underneath the image? I have messed up the formatting of this template, because it's not designed to take an image, but something could perhaps be redesigned? Bob talk 15:58, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have had a go at this in my sandbox - it's not particularly good, really, but if it had the musical notation of the particular excerpt, it might work quite well. What do you think? It's a pity I can't get rid of the big information link in the text. Bob talk 16:17, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
...that in the 1974 BBC documentary A Passion for Churches, the Poet Laureate Sir John Betjeman compares the appearance of the Scottish church architect Sir Ninian Comper to Colonel Sanders?

L'Orfeo (SV 318), sometimes called L'Orfeo, favola in musica, is an early Baroque opera by Claudio Monteverdi, with a text by Alessandro Striggio. It is based on the Greek legend of Orpheus, and tells the story of his descent to Hades and his fruitless attempt to bring his dead bride Eurydice back to the living world. Written in 1607 for a court performance during the annual Carnival at Mantua, L'Orfeo is one of the earliest music dramas still regularly performed. In his published score Monteverdi lists around 40 instruments to be deployed, with distinct groups of instruments used to depict particular scenes and characters. Thus strings, harpsichords and recorders represent the pastoral fields of Thrace with their nymphs and shepherds, heavy brass illustrates the underworld and its denizens. Composed at the point of transition from the Renaissance era to the Baroque, L'Orfeo employs all the resources then known within the art of music, with particularly daring use of polyphony. (more...)

That looks good ... perhaps for some operas, the image can be of the scene where the passage is played ... should have thought of that with Tosca, but clearly if we can come up with a good way of doing it for L'Orfeo, it can be adapted ... perhaps for other articles where a sound file is used, not necessarily opera, too.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The code's here if anybody wants to have a go at refining it as a reusable template. Bob talk 16:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've scheduled it for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 15, 2010. What do you guys think about using a picture along with the music (ala Bob Castle's setup) instead of the DYK template as I've scheduled it? Raul654 (talk) 17:32, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like Bob's approach.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:40, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This looks great! Is there any way of tracking how much the embedded file gets played? Shimgray | talk | 18:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've switched it to use the layout suggested by Bob. Raul654 (talk) 19:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks odd to have two round blue icons stacked atop each other. How about linking "Toccata" to the file description page instead of using the "i" icon? – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 17:57, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I view the image from my work computer, the word "Play" appears to the right of the picture of Claudio Monteverdi, rather than below it. From my home computer, however, it looks fine, with all of the text appearing below the image. Anyway, I believe adding a "br" to the code between the image and the text would make it display correctly on my work computer, with the text all under the image. Calathan (talk) 18:22, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween FA

This thread is for suggestions and discussion of what the FA for Halloween (October 31st) should be. Please discuss. Raul654 (talk) 03:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


  • Well, this is my suggestion:
The story of the Cock Lane ghost attracted mass public attention in 18th-century England before being exposed as a hoax. Cock Lane is a short alleyway adjacent to London's Smithfield market, a few minutes' walk from St Paul's Cathedral, and in 1762 an apartment along the alley became the focus of attention over a reported haunting. The story centred on three people: William Kent, a usurer from Norfolk, Richard Parsons, a parish clerk, and his daughter Elizabeth. Following the death of his wife Elizabeth Lynes during childbirth, Kent had become romantically involved with her sister, Fanny. The couple were prevented by canon law from marrying, but moved to London, where they lodged at a property owned by Parsons. While there, reports were made of strange knocking sounds and ghostly apparitions. Kent also loaned Parsons a sum of money, which the latter did not repay, and Kent responded by suing him. Fanny became pregnant and the couple moved out, at which point the knocking sounds ceased, but she later died of smallpox. About 18 months later, once Kent had successfully sued Parsons for the outstanding loan, the latter claimed that his property was haunted by Fanny's ghost. (more….)

So, what do you think? Secret Saturdays (talk to me)what's new? 04:04, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Searching through the current list of FAs and archives of this talk page I was able to locate the following potential candidates:
Selected Halloween themed articles from prior years are Manchester Mummy (2009), Treehouse of Horror (2008), Halloween II (2007), and Night of the Living Dead (2006). As last year was a UK oddity and the previous three films/television specials, I would suggest either Grace Sherwood or the deadly mushroom. --Allen3 talk 12:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Per my previous comments on the subject, I oppose anything that doesn't have a specific connection with the October 31 date. We've spent a long time trying to shake off Wikipedia's (well-deserved) reputation for having a massive systemic bias towards the US and UK, and Halloween has virtually no significance outside North America and some parts of the British Isles. I can just about live with the April Fools thing, but I really don't want to see Wikipedia going down the "liturgical calendar" route, especially since (as I understand it) the DYK people are specifically saving up articles for the express purpose of spamming the main page on 31 October. It's a very short and slippery slope from "always run ghost articles on Halloween" to this. – iridescent 13:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was in the previous discussions as well and don't oppose having a specific article for the date. It is a more notable holiday than the "bacon debut". Also, it is just one day and a notable one at that, especially in the U.S. I have no problem supporting articles for notable dates specific to English speaking countries. I also doubt a lot of bacon related articles will make DYK on during the bacon debut.--NortyNort (Holla) 14:31, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any harm in having a "spooky" themed FA on Halloween - after all en.wikipedia is probably primarily edited by U.S./UK editors (he said without a shred of evidence, and probably offending some other people - do they not have Halloween in Australasia?). I think it would be best to avoid a film this year - my preferences would either be the Cock Lane Ghost (which also wins a fictional point for its "amusing" title) or Grace Sherwood. Bob talk 16:29, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Halloween in Australia is a very recent import which has never really caught on. We have a very brief stub about the failure of Halloween to penetrate Australia. I'm not aware of any English-speaking country other than the US, Canada, Ireland and Scotland in which it has any particular significance; it's an Irish/Scottish festival which was brought to the US and Canada by Scottish and Irish settlers. In Catholic countries it's too close to All Saints Day, in Latin America it's too close to the Day of the Dead, and in England and former English colonies it falls too close to Bonfire Night (5 November) to have made much impact. – iridescent 16:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It has some impact in England as well, when I've been there close to the date, I've seen Halloween stuff at Tesco.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with Bob. Halloween is a huge festival for a large percentage of our readers and I see nothing wrong with a Halloween-themed article on Oct 31. So I have to ask Iridescent, would you object to an article about All Saints Day on All Saints Day on the grounds that not all our readers are Catholic? Disclaimer: I am the primary author, with a huge help from Malleus, of Grace Sherwood. To me saying there should not be Halloween-themed article on Halloween on en.wiki smacks of political correctness (let's deny the desires of most people to pacify a small number of people, even just one). Now if we were trying to do that on the Chinese Wiki, that'd be another story. And yes, DYK folks have several Halloween articles saved for Oct 31. I say let's have a theme-related TFA on all these days important to the English speaking world (even non English speaking countries for that matter): Halloween, All Saints Day, Day of the Dead, Bonfire Night, etc. RlevseTalk 17:33, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will add my voice to that of Bob and Rlevse. It would be one thing if iridescent had a viable alternate for the day, but opposing a themed article just for the sake of not having a themed article on a date recognized by a large portion of the English Wikipedia's community smells of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. --Allen3 talk 18:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Read what I wrote again. I have no objection at all to running an All Saints Day article on All Saints Day, and I'd have no objection to running a Halloween themed article on Halloween. What you're proposing isn't a Halloween themed article—the date isn't mentioned once in the article. This is equivalent to saying that we should only run articles about Christianity on Christian festivals, only run articles on Indian topics on Diwali, only run articles on Australians on Australia Day. To my mind, this is exactly what Raul was talking about when he was complaining earlier about tenuous date connections. – iridescent 18:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Articles exist on more than dates, they also exist on themes, and the themes relate to Halloween. RlevseTalk 19:09, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand Iridescent's point, and I have some sympathy with it. The Cock Lane Ghost was a notorious hoax, therefore might be better for April Fools Day, and witchcraft is an impossible crime, so Grace couldn't really have been a witch. That being said I don't have a better suggestion for Halloween, which is celebrated to a degree by English kids trick or treating (a custom I suspect they picked up from watching American TV), and there's loads of Halloween getups for them to buy in the supermarkets. Malleus Fatuorum 20:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also inclined to suggest that with the hoax element, coupled with the silly name, the Cock Lane Ghost would be a more appropriate April 1st TFA. (Would it be a good idea to have a "TFA blurb vault" as a subpage of this subpage, so when something like this is written out, it isn't lost when it's replaced or rejected due to similarity and so forth?) Bob talk 19:29, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

October 31

Grace Sherwood (also known as the Witch of Pungo), was a healer, midwife, and farmer from Princess Anne County and Pungo, Virginia. Sherwood's neighbors claimed that she ruined crops, killed livestock, and conjured storms. She was tried for witchcraft several times, the first in 1697 when she was accused of casting a spell on a bull, resulting in its death. The following year she was charged again, for bewitching the hogs and cotton crop belonging to one of her neighbors. Her final trial took place in 1706, when she was accused of bewitching Elizabeth Hill, causing Hill to miscarry. The court ordered that Sherwood's guilt or innocence should be determined by ducking her in water. If the water rejected her and she floated, then she was guilty; if the water accepted her and she drowned, then she was innocent. Sherwood floated to the surface, and subsequently spent up to seven years and nine months in the jail next to Lynnhaven Parish Church. She was free by 1714 and succeeded in recovering her property from Princess Anne County, after which she lived quietly until her death in 1740 at the age of 80. (more….)
Four points. 1 pt for date relevancy (Halloween), 1 pt for underepresented topic (witchcraft), 2 for no similar topic on the MP recently (witchcraft, Colonial Virginia society). I haven't nom'd something here at TFA requests before (if I did it was eons ago), so pardon me if I goofed it up or misunderstood something.RlevseTalk 01:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is it okay if I trim some of the information on here? It's a bit long. Secret Saturdays (talk to me)what's new? 02:26, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. RlevseTalk 10:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if the point for underrepresented topic counts, but I think this is a good choice for Halloween and would support it. NW (Talk) 02:28, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're going to hate me. Two points No underrepresented point, as this is part of History at WP:FA, which is not underrepresented. And under the discussions we have had with Raul, there is no date relevance, this is certainly an appropriate article, but Halloween is not prominently mentioned in the article. In any event, Raul said on his talk page that he is going to ask for suggestions on what to select for Halloween, so why don't we pull both Oct 31 nominations and take it there when he starts the discussion?--Wehwalt (talk) 02:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • History is so darn broad that virtually everything falls under it. When was the last time we had a TFA on an alleged witch or colonial US history? Plus our totals FAs in those areas is abyssmally low, so I'm still claiming Three Points RlevseTalk 20:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • The other article is the Oakwood Cemetery of Troy, NY one, which Raul654 has put up for 16 Oct, after previously having a hurricane article there: Wikipedia:Today's_featured_article/October_16,_2010. The English soccer club one has already been pulled from this page. So I'm wondering what's left besides Grace Sherwood. It's also unclear where this discussion of Raul's about Halloween will take place. RlevseTalk 10:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Eschew political correctness. Where do you draw the line? No Christmas, Hannukkah, Boxing Day, or New Year's articles next? RlevseTalk 01:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(blinks) Do we have any Hanukkah articles? We'll need eight, you know!--Wehwalt (talk) 01:37, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you need help writing those 8 FAs for the next Hannukah, I know some people that can help. ;-) RlevseTalk 01:58, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hannukkah articles? Here are nine: Hanukkah, of course, Hanukkah music, Hanukkah menorah, Public menorah, Hanukkah gelt, Sufganiyah (donuts!), Hanukkah bush, White House Hanukkah Party, and the Hanukkah Eve wind storm of 2006 (yes, it's a real article!). Jonathunder (talk) 23:08, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This article makes no mention of 31 October. WP:BIAS, WP:NPOV, WP:OR all in effect here. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:20, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question about age and timing

I am looking to nominate Delrina for November 22, which was the date the company officially ceased operations and became part of Symantec in 1995.

The original Delrina article made it to the Feature status back in late 2005. It was revamped when the article came up for FA review just over a year ago. So would it qualify as two points or one under the revamped Age criteria?

In terms of timing, I see that multiple points are given to articles that hit the 10/25/50/100 anniversary mark. What about 15? TIA! Captmondo (talk) 13:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it appeared as TFA on January 4, 2006 so it is ineligible to be nominated. In answer to your question, a FFA that achieves FA status takes the most recent date that it achieved FA status for purposes of age, because that would be the time it's been "waiting" to appear on the main page. Fifteen gets no special points, just normal date connection.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:21, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Very confused by this response?? An FFA is simply not eligible, even if it achieves FA again, so there is no date for "purposes of age". The only article every run twice was Obama, as part of the Obama/McCain double feature, and Raul vowed that would not be a regular thing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:25, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying! I am also a bit surprised to hear that an article once featured on the main page cannot be re-nominated. Given that the last time the article was posted to the main page was almost five years ago I am surprised that there is no explicit "statute of limitations" that may apply. Also, since it has undergone significant revisions since then this is something of a discouragement to people seeking to update and maintain articles to FA status if they have already been on the main page before.
Don't get me wrong, I am not seeking special dispensation — to some extent maintaining an article to FA status is its own reward — but not being able to re-nominate an article at all seems like a detrimental policy in the long-term. Cheers! Captmondo (talk) 13:10, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the reason for the policy is because it makes no sense to give a second TFA to an article when there are still plenty of other FA's that haven't had even one TFA appearance yet. If at any time in the future we get to the point where there are no new FA's to choose from (which doesn't seem like it will be anytime soon, if ever), then changing the rule might be in order. Stonemason89 (talk) 00:07, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are to be applauded for salvaging a former featured article, which has been done only about 40 times, a drop in the bucket compared to the large numbers of FFAs. Unhappily, that is how it is. If it is any consolation, I brought Gough Whitlam back to FA, well knowing that it had run six years ago and I could never see it as TFA.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:32, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Understood, and thank you for the response. Captmondo (talk) 15:45, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles that haven't yet appeared on the main page

Is there some list or category or something of FAs that haven't yet been TFA? I have the idea there is but can't seem to find it. I'm wondering what the number of FAs that haven't yet been TFA is but I don't need a perfect answer so if it could be off by 50 or something that's fine. Going by total FAs versus total number of TFAs obviously doesn't work because of demotions and repromotions Nil Einne (talk) 16:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, it's at Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page. It's usually nestling somewhere at the bottom of a non-TFA'd FA talk page. Bob talk 17:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Much simpler: install this code to your own user monobook.css, and you can tell just by viewing the colors on WP:FA. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is also Wikipedia:Featured articles that haven't been on the Main Page, which has the number of FAs that haven't been TFA at the top, and which lists all of them. User:Dabomb87 seems to maintain that page, so as long as he keeps at it, it should be accurate. Calathan (talk) 17:21, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks the cat was what I was thinking of. I checked a FA that hadn't yet been on the main page but sillyly forgot I should look at the bottom to see the cats so only looked at the top and didn't see what I was looking for in the header. BTW either list is fine for my purposes but installing the monobook isn't easier since that way I have to manually count colours or set something up to do it since I primarily want the numbers :-) (Also I use vector.) The numbers BTW are for Talk:Main Page#Two TFAs per day? which people here may be interested in. Nil Einne (talk) 20:05, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To continue this, the line saying "Main page representation: A similar article has not been featured on the main page" probably ought to be made to pipe to Dabomb's list. I could be bold and change it, but thought it best to check. Bob talk 18:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not unless Dabomb confirms that he is maintaining it and will continue to do so-- I had stopped following that page because it used to be grossly wrong, but I feel better about it if Dabomb is on the job. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:21, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That was some weird edit conflict, and I can't decipher how to fix it-- Bob, could you refactor and restore whatever was supposed to happen? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I have a bit of a habit of looking back at a comment, and then realising I ought to clarify something. Although Dabomb is probably keeping it up to date, would the category be a better bet? Bob talk 18:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to fix the ec; please check. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it would make sense to the link to the list of FAs that haven't been TFA when checking to see if a similar article hasn't been on the main page. To determine if it gets points, you would want to know what articles have been on the main page recently, not which articles haven't been on the main page. However, a link to either the category or the list maintained by Dabomb might be useful somewhere at the top of the page, so people know what articles are available to choose from. Calathan (talk) 18:40, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why not put it above "Featured article statistics", which is another maintained page, and one fairly recent?--Wehwalt (talk) 19:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have been maintaining WP:FAMP for a while now, so I think it is pretty accurate. If you're looking for the actual number of FAs that have not been featured on the Main Page yet, then you're better off looking at the category, which is probably more accurate. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:09, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
RE:Calathan, that was kindof what I was suggesting, albeit in a roundabout way. How about something like this? Bob talk 21:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The article must not have been previously featured as Today's Featured Article. Articles yet to be featured are listed here."

No comment on the cat or list but I agree it would be helpful to have a link either or preferably both on the TFAR page and the FA stats (the later is OT here I know) Nil Einne (talk) 20:13, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Points question

I want to nom Flywheel, Shyster, and Flywheel on November 28. It's a radio comedy show starring Chico and Groucho Marx that premiered on Nov 28, 1933. How many points would it score for "Main page representation", considering that nothing radio-related has been on the main page in the last six months, but film and TV has? Is a radio sitcom series too similar to a TV series? Thanks, Matthewedwards :  Chat  00:53, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess three, although I haven't looked through the last six months to check. Good luck.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:03, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Four, adding the point for age (promoted over a year ago). Dabomb87 (talk) 01:27, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Four then, subject to anything that may run before then of course.==Wehwalt (talk) 01:40, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, both :) Matthewedwards :  Chat  03:10, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nexxxxxxxt ?

I thought we gave preference to the newer nom, since the older one will have plenty of time to come back? [1] Honestly, who are these IPs and what are they worried about? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:03, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If Hoxne has more supports, then they win the tiebreaker when tiebreak percentage is equal.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:30, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Someone should explain that Nov 16 is a long way off to that IP then. I'm tempted to add a Support to Nov 5 just because it's so goofy; right below it is a 3-pointer with only two supports! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:37, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Look at what was just left on TFA/R Sandy, it moved me to a comment, which as you know I usually don't.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:45, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Saw the edit summaries first and added my comment-- hate to see such behaviors taken (I don't we've seen an oppose like that before) on here. Also, in the collegial spirit of the page, it would probably be worthwhile to try to talk to that IP, but I don't know how to tell whether an IP is dynamic or static? Anyway, don't worry-- Raul rarely misses anything. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:58, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are being quite rude to that IP user. I don't see how you can possibly consider it a bad thing for someone to update the summary chart to accurately reflect which is the next article to be replaced based on the rules listed on the page. I also can't see what you could consider non-collegial about just maintaining the summary chart. Also, you did ask in your edit summary "why was this removed", which is probably why he decided to point out why and go ahead and update the chart at the same time. I was considering making the exact same edit to try to explain what User:TuneyLoon must have been thinking when he removed the "next to be replaced" label, except unlike the IP, I was too lazy to do so. Anyway, if you think the current rules for which is the next to be replaced are bad, then feel free to propose changes to them, but please don't disparage people for just keeping the chart up to date. (I do however agree that the oppose comments by User:Jeffwang16 are frivolous, but that has nothing to do with the IP updating the chart). Calathan (talk) 01:11, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What? Me worry?--Wehwalt (talk) 01:11, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sandy, I really think you need to reread the rules on the page for which is the "next to be replaced", as you just updated it incorrectly. Having a higher percentage of opposes applies before having more support votes. Again, if you don't think the current rules are good, feel free to propose changes to them. Calathan (talk) 14:39, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]