Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Today's featured article

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sceptre (talk | contribs) at 11:18, 25 February 2008 (→‎March 14: s). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcut

Featured content:

Featured article candidates (FAC)

Featured article review (FAR)

Today's featured article (TFA):

Featured article tools:

Toolbox

Articles suggested here must already be Featured Articles. Articles do not have to be suggested to appear on the main page. Requests must be for dates within the next thirty days that have not yet been scheduled. There may be no more than five requests on this page at any time.

Requests are not the only factor in scheduling Today's Featured Article; the final decision rests with the Featured Article Director (Raul654). Please confine date requests to this page, and remember that community endorsement on this page does not mean the article will appear on the requested date.

Generally speaking, preference will be given to requests for older featured articles (articles that have been waiting longest for a TFA slot, provided they clearly meet the current standard), articles whose nominators have multiple featured articles pending, core topics of widespread interest, subject matter that has not been recently on the mainpage, and requests that are particularly relevant to a given date (especially major anniversaries). When nominating, editors should describe the article in terms of these considerations.

Requests

March 14

Frank Lampard playing.
Frank Lampard playing.
Chelsea F.C. are an English professional football club based in west London. Founded in 1905, they play in the Premier League and have spent most of their history in the top tier in English football. They have had two broad periods of success, one during the 1960s and early 1970s, and the second from the late 1990s to the present day. Chelsea have won three league titles, four FA Cups, four League Cups and two UEFA Cup Winners' Cups. Chelsea's home is the 42,055 capacity Stamford Bridge football stadium in Fulham, West London, where they have played since their foundation. Despite their name, the club are based just outside the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham. In 2003, the club were bought by Russian oil magnate Roman Abramovich. The club's traditional kit colours are royal blue shirts and shorts with white socks. Their traditional crest is a ceremonial blue lion holding a staff; a modified version of this was adopted in 2005. (more…)


The date they play in the first league cup final at the new Wembley Stadium. Buc (talk) 16:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Relevant date. Epbr123 (talk) 20:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I actually made a draft of how it should on the main page, something that was missed by the nominator. Anyways I think it qualifies. (SUDUSER)85 06:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I never bother because I just don't see the piont. Raul always write his own for the main page. The only use it has is finding an image. Buc (talk) 09:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • But I have some confusion over which pic should be used. The crest pic, the 1905 pic or the Frank Lampard pic? (SUDUSER)85 06:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Lampard is better because he'll probably play in this game. Buc (talk) 09:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • OK, and I changed the image text. Like I said before, Support. (SUDUSER)85 11:31, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Surely there's a free pic of a player in Chelsea blue (their home colours)? indopug (talk) 16:07, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Per above. Cirt (talk) 12:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as a relevent date. I personally prefer the pic of the original team, and we can't use the crest. Your call. J Milburn (talk) 19:01, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Take your pick from the following:

Image:Chelsea4.jpg Image:Robbencech.jpg Image:Ashleycole.jpg Image:Alex makelele.jpg Image:Shevchenko Chelsea 2.jpg Image:Michael ballack chelsea.jpg Image:JohnTerry.JPEG Image:John Terry during a match vs Everton at Stamford Bridge in 2006.jpg Image:Terry lampard.JPG Image:Stamford Bridge.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bole2 (talk • contribs) 18:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose We now have a football FA 6 days after Bobby Robson is up, I don't think that is acceptable. (I understand the mitigating circumstances). I also think it is slightly inappropriate to "take sides" during a Cup final. Would it not be better to have this up on March 14, the clubs foundation? Woody (talk) 20:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, would support on March 14. JACOPLANE • 2008-02-13 21:29
Comment

I don't like the change of this subsection header to February 24 or March 14. It seems unfair to others to ask for one of 2 dates, instead of a discussion of just one date. Cirt (talk) 20:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not asking for it to appear on two dates. That's not allowed. Just either one or the other. Buc (talk) 21:30, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I removed February 24 from the request since the date has already been scheduled. Peter Isotalo 07:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, thoud I'd like the picture to be in the home colours. Will (talk) 11:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 28

The M62 crossing the Pennine hills in West Yorkshire.

The M62 motorway is a west-east trans-Pennine motorway in northern England, connecting the cities of Liverpool and Hull. The road also forms part of the unsigned Euroroutes E20 (Shannon to Saint Petersburg) and E22 (Holyhead to Ishim). The road is 107 miles (172 km) long; however, for seven miles, it shares its route with the M60 motorway around Manchester. The motorway, which was first proposed in the 1930s, and originally conceived as two separate routes, was built in stages between 1971 and 1976, with construction beginning at Pole Moor and finishing in Tarbock. The motorway also absorbed the northern end of the Stretford-Eccles bypass, which was built between 1957 and 1960. Adjusted for inflation to 2007, the motorway cost approximately GB£765 million to build. The motorway is relatively busy, with an average daily traffic flow of 100,000 cars in Yorkshire, and has several areas prone to gridlock, in particular, between Leeds and Halifax in West Yorkshire. Since the Stretford-Eccles bypass was opened, the motorway's history beyond construction has included a coach bombing on 4 February 1974, a rail crash on 28 February 2001. The motorway is additionally memorable for the farm in the Pennines which is situated between the carriageways, which exists due to the geology of the surrounding area and has since become one of the most known sights in West Yorkshire. The road passes the cities of Salford, Manchester, Bradford, Leeds and Wakefield. Between Liverpool and Manchester, and east of Leeds, the terrain of the road is relatively flat, while between Manchester and Leeds, the road crosses the hilly Pennines to its highest point on Saddleworth Moor, which is also the highest point of any motorway in the United Kingdom, at 1,221 feet (372 m) above sea level. (more...)

I would've much prefered it to be yesterday's TFA (Coach bombing anniversary yesterday), but the 28th is fine too (rail crash). Will (talk) 09:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Relevent date, and there hasn't been a road TFA for 3 years. Epbr123 (talk) 09:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Epbr123. Awadewit | talk 13:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm currently producing a spoken version of this article, which should be ready (and linked to it) by 28 February. Hassocks5489 (talk) 18:20, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support About time we had a road TFA. --Rschen7754 (T C) 03:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 3

The Crusaders are a New Zealand rugby union team based in Christchurch, New Zealand, that competes in the Super 14 (formerly the Super 12). They are the most successful team in Super Rugby history. The franchise represents the Buller, Canterbury, Mid-Canterbury, South Canterbury, Tasman, and West Coast provincial rugby unions. Formed in 1996 to represent the upper South Island of New Zealand in the Super 12, the team struggled in its first season and finished last. Their performance improved in 1997 and the team went on to win all three titles from 1998 to 2000 despite each final being played away from home. They again won the competition in 2002 after going through the season unbeaten. In the following two seasons, they again reached the final, although they were beaten on both occasions. 2005 was the last season of the Super 12 before its expansion. After finishing top of the table in that season, the Crusaders went on to host the final in which they defeated the Waratahs. As a result of winning their fifth Super 12 title, the Crusaders were given the trophy permanently. In 2006, the Crusaders hosted the Hurricanes in the inaugural Super 14 final and won 19–12. The teams colours are red, black and white and their home ground is AMI Stadium. (more…)

Twelve years since their inaugural Super 12 match on 3 March 1996. - Shudde talk 09:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also exactly one year since promoted to FA. - Shudde talk 22:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment February already has two sports TFA, and might possibly be getting a third. The last time we had a month without at least one sports TFA was February 2007. Peter Isotalo 15:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose 2-3 sports TFAs in the previous month does not subject diversity make. Awadewit | talk 15:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, in my defence, one article in Feb is on the history of an American sport, and the other the biography of an English footballer, if you include this article, then the three are hardly the same subject matter; all different types of articles, from completely different parts of the world, and from different sports. According to the criteria at the top, this request probably meets three of them; an article that's been FA a while (1 year), from a user with multiple FA's pending (me), and particularly relevant to a specific date. - Shudde talk 07:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • They are all related to sports, though. We have to think bigger when we think about topic diversity. Awadewit | talk 15:35, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • How many New Zealand related articles have been on the main page in the last year? - Shudde talk 12:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • The All Blacks were on the main page on June 25 2007. But even if we disregard that, sports articles are very well-represented, and most of the TFAs are about sports in English-speaking or Western countries. Peter Isotalo 19:42, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • June last year is a long time. I would say having articles from not just a wide variety of topics, but also a wide variety of countries, but things like that get forgotten on this page very often. - Shudde talk 22:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • I agree that having a diversity of nations represented is important, but Peter is right that the majority of our sports TFAs are about the Western world already (not to mention our non-sports articles). It is a serious problem. Awadewit | talk 15:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 11

Chrono Trigger (クロノ・トリガー, Kurono Torigā) is a console role-playing game developed and published by Square (now Square Enix) for the Super Nintendo Entertainment System video game console. It was released on March 11, 1995 in Japan and August 22, 1995 in North America. The game's story follows a group of young adventurers who travel through time to prevent a worldwide catastrophe. Chrono Trigger was developed by a group called the "Dream Team", consisting of Hironobu Sakaguchi, Kazuhiko Aoki, and composer Nobuo Uematsu—known for their works on the Final Fantasy series—and Yuuji Horii and artist Akira Toriyama, developers for the Dragon Quest series. Masato Kato wrote most of the plot, while composer Yasunori Mitsuda scored most of the game before falling ill and deferring his duties to Uematsu. Critics considered certain aspects of Chrono Trigger revolutionary, including its multiple endings, plot-related sidequests focusing on character development, unique battle system, and detailed graphics. Square re-released a ported version by TOSE in Japan for the Sony PlayStation in 1999, later repackaged with a Final Fantasy IV port as Final Fantasy Chronicles in 2001. It has never been released in PAL territories. (more…)

As you can see from here, Chrono Trigger's a very old FA (dating from summer 2006) that hasn't appeared on the main page. The date is the Japanese release of the game's 13th anniversary. I invested several hours of work in January to ensure it meets current standards, including a trimming of the plot. For comparison here is the old version. Still, if it has too many fair use images or if anyone has any other suggestions, I'd be more than happy to hear them to make sure Chrono Trigger is perfect for the main page. It's a little embarrassing how bad the article had become. ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 06:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - it's a great article, plus it has a date connection. I say it's fine for March 11, no problems with it going then.--Paaerduag (talk) 00:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Would be featured less than a month after the previous video game TFA. Epbr123 (talk) 10:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Is the picture really relevant enough to the article? I understand that time travel is an important part of the game, but a random picture of an antique clock seems a tad arbitrary. More importantly, I'm a bit skeptical to the PD license reasoning. Can a clock face, with hands, really be considered a "two-dimensional work of art"? Peter Isotalo 15:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I appreciate that the nominator has done work on this article, but I still have to oppose on topic diversity. We have been averaging about one TFA a month on video games alone recently. That is a high average for this one genre. Awadewit | talk 15:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, let's look at topics which received more than one article in January. We have two poems, ten biographies (half or more of them about British citizens), two governmental buildings, two geography / geology articles, three wars or battles, and two films. Oh, and only one video game article. Now let's look at February's multiple offenders under your belief: two animals, two biographies, two literary works, and two articles on language. Oh, but we mustn't stop there; let's look at what violates your rule by having one per month across both, excluding the ones mentioned above: two albums, two sports, and two governmental legal documents. It should be obvious now that protesting one video game article per month is an act of savage hypocrisy. I never thought WP:VG would still have to contend with this in 2008; it's as if we are subhuman editors because we write about video games. ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 19:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Zeality, your comment is more than a touch exaggerated and I'd suggest toning it down; I doubt there was any savage intent on Awadewit's part. See below for more. Marskell (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The severity naturally came from the expectation I've had since monitoring this page that Chrono Trigger would meet a lot of opposition when nominated. ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 21:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The problem here is that much broader subjects of generel relevance are equated with a much more specific one. In a hierarchy of topics, geology, languge or zoology would never appear on the same level as video games, and that has nothing to do with any bias against pop culture. The same thing applies to many other entertainment topics. Peter Isotalo 08:41, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Concur with Zeality, limiting article becuase of a previous appearence is the dumbest thing I have heard on this page in well over a year. The dates relevent and the article has been waiting two years, so put it up and let it shine. PS: for the record MILHIST articles are also major offenders of the "one month" concept, its not uncommon to see two or three articles on or relating to the armed services out on the main page within a 30 day span. TomStar81 (Talk) 19:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Limiting articles on the main page because of the medium of the subject is idiotic. I'ts a great article about a monumental game and the date is relevant. In the past month we've had numerous sports/fiction/film-related articles featured. Suggesting that those articles are somehow more worthy to be featured than video game-related articles is rather disrespectful to the users who put in such hard work to get these articles to FA. JACOPLANE • 2008-02-13 19:26
  • Support - People work damn hard on these Featured Articles, and to not include them because "I don't like video games on the main page" is absurd, as Zeality has just demonstrated, establishing some kind of rule about it specifically for video games is inappropriate. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral. Discussing previous appearances is not dumb, absurd, or idiotic. "Topic balance," as it's come to be called, has been a healthy addition to discussions here, supplementing a strict focus on dates. The fact is that a great many people view most video games articles as lacking widespread and long-term relevance. That we should limit them on the main page relative to their weight on the FA list is a defensible position. I was in favour of the last video game, so I don't think I'm being savage. Neutral here. I think more than a month is actually best, but Zeality does have four waiting. Marskell (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I admit that using "idiotic" to describe arguments opposing featuring articles based on the medium of the subject of the article was not helpful. I still maintain that articles on sports, films, and music have a much easier ride. Perhaps this is a generational issue, and I would contend that there are a great number of young people on Wikipedia who find video game-related articles much more relevant than film or TV-related articles. JACOPLANE • 2008-02-13 19:58
We don't need to unpack the full argument here, although perhaps it is time to have it out in full on some talk page. Of course, it's demographic and generational in part. Video games are especially relevant to teenage males and the aggregate of internet users skews in that direction. Hence we have a lot of video game FAs. (Video games are also relevant to some about-30 friends of mine, so there's no belittlement intended.) That a majority of individual video game titles lack long-term relevance is a plain fact. Just as most penny dreadfuls and B movies lack the same. It's not video games per se. It's "short term culture" (I include most individual TV episodes and agree we should limit those). Short term culture is something people are often immediately thinking about (not just teenage males) but something we should suppress, to a degree, on our main page. But we should still reward regular FAC contributors; thus my neutral. Marskell (talk) 20:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My argument has consistently been that video game articles should not be privileged more than any other subject. Those editors that want video game subjects to end up having some sort of de facto TFA subject dominance need to make a very strong case for why that should be. I am willing to listen to their arguments, but they have to make them. Awadewit | talk 15:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: Zeality has asked the video game WikiProject to support. I don't have a problem per se with notifying relevant talk pages but let's have thoughtful comments and not a pile-on. Marskell (talk) 19:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry but I can't agree with your assessment of that; Knut the polar bear? Cannibal Holocaust, a gloried snuff film? These are not world historic, extremely notable in the history of the world topics, but they get FA treatment. As I have understood it, all articles, except articles like the Missionary Position, will at some point go on the main page, and I think we should stick to that. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If literally all FAs are to get mainpage attention, we need to revamp the mainpage. If you have suggestions for how this should be solved, I think the talkpage would be a good place to start. With the current format, however, the expectaion that all FAs except those that are too controversial will get mainpage attention is completely unrealistic. Peter Isotalo 09:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • probable sock Support - In addition to the already-mentioned fact that March 11 is the date of Chrono Trigger's original Japanese release, the author has multiple FAs pending. A TFA of the caliber this author demonstrates can only encourage other contributors of videogame information to sharpen their own articles. Videogames are a major cultural phenomenon throughout the world, and as a regular visitor to Wikipedia I would not mind seeing one or two such entries per month. FaustWolf (talk) 19:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ohmigod! Editor's first edit. Do we actually have sockpuppeting on the date request page?! *Shakes head.* Marskell (talk) 20:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, using sockpuppets on this page *would* be idiotic, since this is a discussion, not a vote. I'm sure that Mark doesn't take the fanboy support "votes" into consideration anyway. Pointing people from WP:VG to this discussion is not a problem for the same reason: this is a discussion. If there are convincing arguments from either side of the debate those arguments will carry more weight than 50 video game-fanboys piling on their support. JACOPLANE • 2008-02-13 20:20
Broadly, this is a vote. (Do we need the wiki-theology discussion about the term?) And FaustWolf clearly appears to be a sock, stacking the vote. It's just a shame, because we haven't had it here. Marskell (talk) 20:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, I meant no offense -- I am merely a regular Wikipedia visitor and wished to chime in. Videogames being a personal passion, I was charged up enough to make an account so I could post. Does one typically need to have a certain number of contributions under his or her belt to participate in these discussions? FaustWolf (talk) 20:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No offense taken whatsoever FaustWolf! We're just wary of contributors using multiple accounts to tilt a discussion in their favor (see WP:SOCK). Since this was your first contribution to Wikipedia, I hope you can understand that some people might find it slightly suspicious: usually first-time contributors don't make their first edit in the non-article namespace. But we definitely welcome your contributions! JACOPLANE • 2008-02-13 21:03
I had a lengthy response half-typed, but realized it was mainly beans. Insofar as you appear a sockpuppet, you don't appear a very good one, so I don't want to hand out ideas. If you're not a sock, very sorry—you can prove me wrong by editing mainspace articles. If you successfully do so for a month or two, please call me a quick-to-judge asshole on my talk page. In the meantime, I don't think your vote (or !vote) should be considered. Marskell (talk) 21:14, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No offense taken on my end either. I am well aware of what a "sock-puppet" is and hope to prove my good faith in the coming years. As for my input here, let the cards fall where they may; I assumed it was an open-ended discussion and not a one-person, one-vote event. FaustWolf (talk) 21:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments: This may be more appropriate for the talk page, but since the discussion has come to this point it doesn't seem completely inappropriate.
    While I can understand the reasoning to which Marskell mentioned in limiting "short-term culture", I feel its main purpose is to help Wikipedia gain creditability as a reliable encyclopedia. I could be wrong, but that's my interpretation. And while I agree that Wikipedia should do what it can do bolster its image, I can't help but feel its created a negative view among editors towards "short-term culture" articles. In regard to the demographics Marskell commented on, I feel some data should be mentioned to get a better perspective on the audience interested in video games and how it falls into our culture.
    The Entertainment Software Association found that in 2006, the average gamer age was 33, only 31% of gamers were under the age of 18, only 23% of gamers were males under the age of 18, adult gamers have been playing video games an average of 12 years, and 69% of American heads of households play video games.[1] The BBC found similar results in the UK with the average age at 28 and 59% of all people ages 6-65 play games, with the two largest age groups being 25-35 (5.5mil) and 36-50(6.7mil).[2] Though I don't know the age demographics of internet users, I think the data shows that interest in video games is not relevant mainly to a male, teenage demographic/generation. Video games have been around for more than a few decades, and have gained in popularity and in notoriety. For example, the Writers Guild of America just started a Videogame Writing award.
    The point of my long winded comment is that video games may not be the childish play toys some people perceive them to be. They are growing more and more as a part of our culture, and I hope the various editors here keep that in mind when voicing their support/opposition. To sum up, flooding TFA with video game articles would be foolish, and you are right to limit that number. Though I don't think it is unreasonable to ask that the limit somewhat mirror the level of relevance video games have on society. My two cents. (Guyinblack25 talk 06:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]
  • Again, I emphasize that I, at least, am concerned about topic diversity. I am making no judgments about the value of video games. I think that people are ascribing views to me and my votes that aren't really there. Because wikipedia is an encyclopedia and covers such a wide range of topics, it should showcase that wide range on the front page. It should not repeat the same topics on the main page in quick succession. Awadewit | talk 15:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • One video game TFA per every thirty days is hardly quick. ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 16:35, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. In addition to the frequency argument, which I agree with (as an avid video game fan, it is inconceivable to argue that it's as of equal relevance to, say, geology), the content in the article itself is pretty weak, in my opinion. Nandesuka (talk) 01:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, it is, now? Then take it to WP:FAR. Right now. How the content of Trigger could differ from that of any other featured video game article is mind-blowing. Before one of five featured articles I'm waiting to get on the main page gets shot down, I want to see hard policy on frequency. Like the entire "no fair use images on the main page" thing, I don't want this to be an act of WP:JIMBO or a few controlling editors. Debate it, codify it, and ratify it. ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 03:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • If I may, I'd like to comment on the charge of weak content in this article since I came to the opposite conclusion in a previous entry here. The article clearly delineates where Chrono Trigger stands in the development of RPGs as a whole -- how it included features like the Active Time Battle System that were honed in Final Fantasy games released prior, and pioneered the New Game+ feature, which would quickly become a staple in future Square games. As an avid gamer I find the section on Chrono Trigger's development especially intriguing; in reading about the interplay among such notables as Yujii Hori, Akira Toriyama, and Yoshinori Kitase in addition to Masato Kato during plot development, the viewer gains insight into how incredibly complex and politically charged videogame design can become. Stylistically speaking, the article makes appropriate use of visual media, artfully dispersing artwork and in-game shots throughout the text without overwhelming it. Juxtaposing a sample from the original soundtrack with a contemporary acid jazz remix illustrates this game's cultural impact; few RPGs in the SNES pantheon have inspired fanworks that cover so many genres. Finally, it goes without saying but the article is impeccably well-documented. FaustWolf (talk) 04:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Zeality, try to imagine what would happen if proponents of all sub-topics of all disciplines and encyclopedic subjects demanded policy codification on how much TFA attention they were entitled to. This would include everything from architecture to zoology in the academic field. Add to that everything from board games to TV-programming from pop culture. I think we can safely say that the number of punters would be a far more than the mere thirty (the once-a-month ratio) we're hinting at here.
Peter Isotalo 07:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That is why we have this page, no? Then the system must be improved. If this nomination is removed, it's not hard to imagine that an album, TV show, film, or other video game will replace it in minutes. ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 07:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this page will ever be controlled by "hard policy", especially not when it comes to defining exactly how many TFAs individual topics are supposed to get. But if you wish to suggest changes in how the selecting process is done, you should take it to the talkpage.
Peter Isotalo 13:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Bureacracy gone mad. That's what I call this new trend to attempt to stop most, if not all, video game articles from appearing on the main page. These are articles just like any other, and there AREN'T THAT MANY that appear on the main page! we have more articles on movies/music etc than on video games, so I don't know why certain individuals (*cough* *cough*) seem to find it necessary to attempt to stop ALL video game TFA bids. These are FAs just like any other, and they deserve their time to shine.--Paaerduag (talk) 13:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong (self) Support. I actually tried to TFA this for Chrono Trigger's American birthday one year. I'll admit I'm a bit biased because I helped bring the article up to FA, but you can't deny the article is a damn excellent article. And this "topic bias and hierarchy" thing is a bunch of BS I think because no one will remember what was featured when anyway. And this article has been featured for a year and a half now, so I think it's time it got its due. And no one topic is more important than another; if I said something like that I'd sound like an elitist snob (which I can be from time to time and I regret doing that). --Sir Crazyswordsman 17:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I am concerned by all the video game articles appearing on the main page, I would much prefer for this to have to wait a while longer. Mattyness (talk) 21:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's already waited 1.5 years. Only four video game featured articles that haven't been on the main page are older than Chrono Trigger: 3D Monster Maze, Final Fantasy VIII, Final Fantasy X-2, The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker. This leaves Trigger 5th in a line of 44 games that haven't reached the main page. Three of the four before it are parts of franchises that have multiple main page appearances as well, leaving just 3D Monster Maze in the same league as Trigger. Chrono Cross is sixth in line. But let's expand it to all video game related topics—54 total. Only Macintosh is older than Chrono Trigger within these added articles, leaving Chrono Trigger sixth in line still. What shall we do; defer it until 2009? 2010? ZeaLitY [ DREAM - REFLECT ] 22:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Perfectly good FA, and has been so for an extended period of time. What more is there to say? -- Grandpafootsoldier (talk) 10:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 12

The Globe Arena in Stockholm
The Globe Arena in Stockholm
Melodifestivalen is an annual music competition organised by Swedish public broadcasters Sveriges Television and Sveriges Radio. It determines the country's representative for the Eurovision Song Contest, and has been staged, almost every year, since 1959. The competition is the most popular television programme in Sweden; it is also broadcast on radio and the internet. The festival has produced four Eurovision winners and sixteen top-five placings for Sweden at the Contest. The winner of the Melodifestival has been chosen by panels of jurors since its inception. Since 1999, the juries have been joined by a public telephone vote which has an equal influence over the final outcome. The introduction of semifinals in 2002 raised the potential number of contestants from around twelve to thirty-two. A children's version of the competition, Lilla Melodifestivalen, also began in 2002. Light, orchestrated pop songs, known locally as schlager music, are seen as so prevalent that the festival is sometimes referred to as Schlagerfestivalen by the Swedish media. However, other styles of music such as rap, reggae, and glam rock have made an appearance since the event's expansion. The introduction of a grand final in Stockholm has attracted considerable tourism to the city. (more...)

12 March 2008 is the fiftieth anniversary of Sweden's debut in the Eurovision Song Contest. It is also three days before the 2008 final, which gives it a current relevance. It will have been featured for nearly three months by then. There hasn't been a Eurovision-related article on the Main Page since the main Eurovision Song Contest article in May 2007. Swedish emigration to the United States was featured in January, but apart from the Sweden connection the two articles couldn't be more different. Chwech 16:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Being a Swede myself, my personal feelings about schlager music are ambivalent at best, but I do agree that the anniversary is very relevant. Peter Isotalo 16:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Don't worry, I'm not that crazy about it either: I don't even own a spangly jacket :) Chwech 20:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Excellent I'm going to produce a spoken version of this article and ensure its tainted with my chinky voice. .:DavuMaya:. 01:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Will (talk) 19:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Will. –thedemonhog talk • edits 06:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Wexcan  Talk  20:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Nice confluence of dates Awadewit | talk 21:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/requests&oldid=193904171"