Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests: Difference between revisions
→February 25: oppose |
|||
Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
| 2 |
| 2 |
||
| Three and a half year FA. '''Next to be replaced''' |
| Three and a half year FA. '''Next to be replaced''' |
||
| |
| 5 |
||
| |
| 5 |
||
|- |
|- |
||
| [[#March 1|Mar 1]] |
| [[#March 1|Mar 1]] |
Revision as of 09:55, 14 February 2011
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.
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 article candidates (FAC) Today's featured article (TFA):
Featured article tools: | ||||||||
How to post a new nomination:
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.
Date | Article | Points | Notes | Supports† | Opposes† |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nonspecific | Climate of Minnesota | 2 | Promoted over two years ago. | 4 | 0 |
Feb 24 | HMS Indefatigable (1909) | 7 | Centennial of commissioning, first TFA | 5 | 0 |
Feb 25 | Voyage: Inspired by Jules Verne | 2 | Three and a half year FA. Next to be replaced | 5 | 5 |
Mar 1 | Posting system | 2 | Promoted over a year ago, anniversary | 4 | 0 |
Mar 3 | Round Church, Preslav | 2 | No church articles, 6 months | 8 | 0 |
March 8 | German women's national football team | 2 | International Women's Day | 2 | 0 |
† 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.
Nonspecific date (1 only)
The climate of Minnesota is typical of a continental climate with cold winters and hot summers. Minnesota's location in the Upper Midwest allows it to experience some of the widest variety of weather in the United States. Winter in Minnesota is characterized by cold temperatures as low as −60 °F (−51 °C). Snow is the main form of winter precipitation, but freezing rain, ice, sleet, and occasionally rain are all possible during the winter months. Common storm systems include Alberta clippers or Panhandle hooks; some of which evolve into blizzards. Annual snowfall extremes have ranged from over 170 inches (432 cm) in the rugged Superior Highlands of the North Shore to as little as 10 inches (25 cm) in southern Minnesota. Spring is a time of major transition; snowstorms are common early, but by late-spring as temperatures begin to moderate the state experiences tornadoes, averaging 24 per year. In summer, humid conditions help kick off thunderstorm activity 30–40 days per year. Summer high temperatures as hot as 114 °F (46 °C) are possible. Autumn weather in Minnesota is largely the reverse of spring weather; the jet stream—which tends to weaken in summer—begins to re-strengthen, leading to a quicker changing of weather patterns and an increased variability of temperatures. By late October and November these storm systems become strong enough to form major winter storms. (more...)
Two points as this article was promoted in 2007. Note that I didn't take into account similarity bonuses or penalties; there was a hurricane article in late January, but I don't know if it should be considered similar. This winter in New England reminds me of the climate of Minnesota, so I thought it would be a good idea to put this on the Main Page. –Grondemar 00:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
- Points look good I agree, climatology is a narrow enough field that the hurricanes have to figure into the mix.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
:* Oppose, but only because I was hoping this article would go up on the anniversary of Minnesota's statehood, May 11. Thoughts? I think the article looks great and have nothing against it...I was just hoping it could wait a little longer. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 07:39, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Will anybody be able to make the connection anyway, if this is about a weather-related article? Bob talk 16:58, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- May will be nice and warm though (since it's in the spring), which is not what people think of when they think of Minnesota. Better to have it run during the winter. This Minnesotan says support! Also, I don't think the hurricane article should be considered similar, as Minnesota doesn't get hurricanes. Stonemason89 (talk) 05:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support—Brr, it's cold there. I agree that winter is a better time for this article. It looks like an interesting and worthwhile read.—RJH (talk) 23:31, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. All right, y'all have won me over. Let's put this great article up. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 17:10, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. I'd love to see this on statehood day, but if we run it in March, it might be a day that has a little of everything mentioned in the article. Jonathunder (talk) 04:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Date requests (5 max)
February 24
7 points, 6 for the centennial of her commissioning and 1 because this is my first submission to TFA. The last warship TFA was 22 December. Feel free to edit the proposed blurb; I've trimmed it down, but I may have cut something worth keeping.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Comment—Linking to HMS Indefatigable (1909) would probably be better.—RJH (talk) 23:30, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Fixed. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Points look good--Wehwalt (talk) 20:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support - difficult choice, but I personally find this one a bit more interesting, and the 100th centenary is perhaps a more significant milestone. Bob talk 18:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support - probably better choice. PMG (talk) 22:25, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Comment: Just to say that a week ago I posted a potential upcoming date request for 24 February, in relation to a tercentenary article that has is still in preparation. I hope Raul will not select for this date until my article has a chance of being considered. Brianboulton (talk) 00:48, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support: seems like a better choice, especially on points, but I'm part of the Battleship Cabal, so... bahamut0013wordsdeeds 12:42, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support - more points than the other two possible options, and we can move the letter article above to the Alamo's anniversary. COI note, though - I'm a member of WP:OMT. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:26, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support per Ed. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 22:47, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
February 25
This article became a FA on 28 June 2007. Total = 2 points. --Paaerduag (talk) 04:16, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
- Comment I don't have any trouble with the two points. I don't much care for the third point, it was released in the UK on March 3, 2006, some months after the original release. I question the significance of the UK release for purposes of points.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:15, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
- Fair enough, I've changed it.--Paaerduag (talk) 05:02, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Just sayin' that if this changes to an unoccupied date it will cease to be the next to be replaced, which will then be the lower of the two February 24 articles.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:18, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up. Date changed.--Paaerduag (talk) 00:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Just sayin' that if this changes to an unoccupied date it will cease to be the next to be replaced, which will then be the lower of the two February 24 articles.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:18, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Fair enough, I've changed it.--Paaerduag (talk) 05:02, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose. No more video games, please. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 00:24, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Article is informative, subject matter isn't notable, but this has been an FA for over three years, so I support. --Shaanxiquake (talk) 02:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Weak oppose, it's not the best article I've ever seen, really. Nothing wrong with it (apart from too many fairuse images), it just doesn't feel like our best work anymore. Bob talk 18:23, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose. Too many featured video game articles. Kaldari (talk) 19:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Three years as a FA it deserves to be on the main page. This article shouldn't be neglected simply because video games have been represented before. It's a quality article, and therefore receives my support. tjkirk (talk) 23:11, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Well-written, informative and historically important in the genre of video game. --多幡達夫 (talk) 01:11, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose per SlimVirgin and Kaldari. --JN466 21:09, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. I fail to find SlimVirgin and Kaldari's arguments either valid or convincing. Stonemason89 (talk) 03:29, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose. Too many video games have been up on the mainpage.4meter4 (talk) 05:05, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
March 1
March 1st marks the end of the posting system's 11th posting period and the article was promoted over 1 year ago---Total: 2 pts. I really like this article. I think it's a good mix of sports and culture and is a relatively unknown part of baseball. --TorsodogTalk 06:16, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
- Comment points look good. I should note that the advocates of this article have been asking for it to run since 2009. Perhaps now is its time?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
- Support. High quality page, educational, encyclopedic, nice work. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 10:30, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Torsodog summed it up. I was oblivious to the details of this (and I am an M's fan) so thank you to the contributors on this one. I also love the layout of the images.Cptnono (talk) 10:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support, a shame we missed out on the 10th posting period, (I'm a fan of round numbers), but I don't see any problems here. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 20:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
March 3
The last church TFA was St. Michael's Cathedral, Qingdao in July 2010, over 6 months ago (2 points). 3 March is Bulgaria's most important national holiday, Liberation Day. The church is not related to the holiday, but it's the only Bulgaria-related FA we can potentially feature, not sure if this is enough for another point. — Toдor Boжinov — 22:32, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
- It isn't. Two points.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:40, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Let's hear it for Bulgaria. O.K. I admit, I am anti-video games (until someone creates me my own). I am voting to break the tie.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:08, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support as an excellent recent FA on an appropriate date. BencherliteTalk 06:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Nice article, and preferable to the video game, as per Tony. Bob talk 09:42, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Preferable to the video game, as above. Courcelles 21:11, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Looks good, SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 00:26, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Fascinating article.--Shaanxiquake (talk) 10:32, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Interesting article and it has been a while since a church was featured.4meter4 (talk) 04:37, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. About time for a Bulgaria-related article on the Main Page. Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
March 8
2 points. 2 points for promoted over 2 years ago. 1 point for date relevance: March 8 is International Women's Day. 2 point for widely covered: 21 articles in other languages. 1 point for subject under-representation: Women's sports. -2 points for Main Page representation. Kaldari (talk) 19:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- I think you've miscalculated the number of points. I would count 2 points for promoted over 2 years ago, 2 points for widely covered, 0 for date relevance (I understand that you would want to nominate this for March 8 because it is International Women's Day, but there isn't a direct connection between International Women's Day and a German football team), 0 for diversity (it isn't an underrepressented topic at FA, which is based solely on the category on the FA page, in this case "sports and recreation"), and either 0 or -2 points for a similar article being TFA recently. There is a football player article scheduled for February 15, and personally I would say anything on football is similar to anything else on football, though I don't know if players and teams are normally counted as similar. So I would say this has 2 or 4 points. Calathan (talk) 19:37, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- I agree, and there should be a deduction of 2 points, leaving 2. Any football article is going to be similar to any other football article. Otherwise, you could have Pele one day, History of Nowheresville United the next, a stadium the third, the ball the fourth, all solemnly stating they are dissimilar to each other.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Corrected. Kaldari (talk) 19:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- I agree, and there should be a deduction of 2 points, leaving 2. Any football article is going to be similar to any other football article. Otherwise, you could have Pele one day, History of Nowheresville United the next, a stadium the third, the ball the fourth, all solemnly stating they are dissimilar to each other.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Well, the Women's World Cup soccer championships will be held in Germany this year, and the Germans will obviously win ;) so we get the jump on that by having the article on International Women's Day. --WiseWoman (talk) 23:31, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- Weak support. We should definitely have an FA on March 8 that ties in with International Women's Day, but does it have to be football? --JN466 21:12, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests#International Women.27s Day for some other suggestions. Feel free to replace this one if another article has more points. Kaldari (talk) 00:00, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- I've made some additional suggestions (with better scores) on the talk page. --SkotyWATC 04:29, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests#International Women.27s Day for some other suggestions. Feel free to replace this one if another article has more points. Kaldari (talk) 00:00, 14 February 2011 (UTC)