Jump to content

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 Dabomb87 (talk | contribs) at 00:38, 18 June 2010 (→July 1: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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, Gog the Mild and SchroCat, 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.

Purge the cache to refresh this page

Shortcuts

Featured content:

Featured article candidates (FAC)

Featured article review (FAR)

Today's featured article (TFA):

Featured article tools:

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 January 1 to January 31.

Date Article Points Notes Supports† Opposes†
June 25 Michael Jackson 4 Vital article; promoted in July 2008; first anniversary of death 16 5
July 1 John Diefenbaker 5 50th anniv of his introduction of Bill of Rights, basic subject matter. 2 0
July 6 Expedition to the Barrier Peaks 2 30th anniversary of release month. Next to be replaced 8 0
July 7 Gustav Mahler 6 150th anniversary of Mahler's birth (born 7 July 1860) 12 0
July 16 Degrassi: The Next Generation 3 Day of a made-for-TV film airing in Canada and the U.S. 1.5 0.5
Nonspecific Privilege of peerage 4 Promoted over 5 years ago 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.

Date requests (5 max)

June 25

Michael Jackson
Michael Jackson

Michael Jackson (1958–2009) was an American recording artist, entertainer, and philanthropist. He debuted on the professional music scene as a member of The Jackson 5 and began a solo career in 1971 while still a member of the group. Referred to as the "King of Pop" in subsequent years, Jackson became an influential figure in popular music and the first African-American to have a strong crossover following on MTV. He donated and raised hundreds of millions of dollars for beneficial causes, and is recognized by Guinness World Records for supporting more charities than any other musician. Other aspects of Jackson's life—including his changing appearance and personal relationships—generated controversy. Though he was accused of child sexual abuse in 1993, the criminal investigation was closed due to lack of evidence and Jackson was not charged. In 2005, he was tried and acquitted of further sexual abuse allegations and several other charges. Jackson's achievements include multiple world records—including one for "Most Successful Entertainer of All Time"—the estimated sale of over 750 million albums worldwide, and dozens of awards, which have made him the most awarded recording artist in the history of music. (more...)

4 points - I believe this article gets 4 points; 2 for being a vital article, 1 for being promoted in July 2008 and another for being the 1-year anniversary of Michael Jackson's death. This is a date that will be marked around the world with vigils, fan gatherings, music video marathons, etc, so it is a great opportunity to display this article. Thanks, Pyrrhus16 17:19, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support only if it's semiprotected and possibly even full-protected for the entire 24 hours. The desperate effort to hold back the tidal wave of crap last time this was on the front page (in ITN when he died), and the fallout from that, led directly to at least one of our most productive editors (and primary author of the article) retiring from Wikipedia in disgust, and indirectly to at least one admin resignation. Whether it's TFA or not this will be Wikipedia's most viewed article on that day; we really don't want it showing in a vandalised version, however briefly, quite aside from the fact that it's the subject of near-permanent editwars with various obsessive fans demanding it include their favourite factiod. – iridescent 17:58, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Points look good. Gee whiz, not sure this is the forum to discuss protection.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:19, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where's more appropriate? I support it if it's protected, oppose if it isn't. That particular day (Pyrrhus will remember as well) really was a "you had to be there to believe it" moment (four million pageviews and an edit-rate of over 1000 in a day, and that was with semiprotection all day). – iridescent 18:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I remember it well, if you recall, there was a move on to get this article on for the day of the funeral. What about [[WT:TFA}}?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:34, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Normally, I would agree with you. Seeing, though, that Jackson was such a well-known figure and this is the first anniversary of his death, I would consider this an exception to the rule. Jonyungk (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your point about Jackson, but it is hard to see where the line would be drawn. I'm afraid we will be faced with the situation where, for example, a biography of a notable person who happened to die in the September 11 attacks, will be proposed for TFA on the tenth anniversay-- a tragic day for that person's survivors. We can feature articles on birthday anniversaries: it costs us nothing to be sensitive. Were there a separate article on a specific event (Assassination of N) the date relation is clearer, but we don't need to run general biographies on death dates. Kablammo (talk) 21:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point. BTW, did you see my suggestion on changing the date of the Hemmingway article to July 21, the anniversary of his birth? Jonyungk (talk) 21:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I find a death date a relevant date and this one is particularly fitting for the main page. There will be all kinds of publicity on the first anniversary of his death.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 01:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs). -- Cirt (talk) 01:57, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. SlimVirgin talk contribs 02:47, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I agree with Kablammo that the anniversary of a death—especially a first anniversary—is an inappropriate occasion to feature a biography on the front page. If someone is important enough for their article to merit this special treatment, certainly the anniversary of their birth is a far better day to celebrate. Featuring a biography article on the date of the death of a celebrity seems more appropriate to the National Enquirer than an encyclopedia. What's next, featuring Diana, Princess of Wales on August 31st?--Paul (talk) 02:18, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I have seen many featured articles in which the subject's death was on the day the featured article was shown on the main page. I do not think this (Michael Jackson's article) should become one of them. You want to show the Michael Jackson article on the main page, do so on an August 29. The next August 29 (in 2010), Jackson will have been born on that date 52 years ago. The 55th anniversary of Jackson's birth will be in 2013, and the 60th will be on 2018. Also, if someone nominates any random article that hasn't been shown on the main page on any given day, it would be either Michael Jackson or some other article about another pop star. Jim856796 (talk) 16:57, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral leaning towards support. I'm torn on this one. On one hand, featuring the article on the anniversary of his death seems a little insensitive and his birthday would seem a better, and more tactful, occasion to commemorate Jackson, while on t'other hand, I understand many, many people will be commemorating him on the date of his death and many people would wonder what we're doing featuring a plant or a city or whatever happens to come up on that date when we could be featuring something more relevant to the date and this article. As for the protection issue raised above, WP:NOPRO (although it actually suggested leaving pre-existing protection) was recently demoted from guideline status and the TFA shouldn't be treated much differently from any other article, so hopefully no admin will be stupid enough to remove the protection and if they did, the action wouldn't be supported by current policy. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:11, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As per Kablammo. Death of Michael Jackson would be the appropriate article for this date if it were featured. Resolute 00:38, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Kablammo. Also I don't see any point in Wikipedia (a non-commercial encyclopedia) participating in one of the all-to-frequent commercial media frenzies. I know that these opposes are essentially nominal - the MJ fanatics will get their way - but I think it is important to let folks know that there are people who don't like frenzied commercialism at TFAR. Smallbones (talk) 04:03, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 1

John Diefenbaker (1895–1979) led Canada as its 13th Prime Minister, serving from June 21, 1957 to April 22, 1963. He was the only Progressive Conservative party leader between 1930 and 1979 to lead it to an election victory, doing so three times, although only once with a majority of the seats in the Canadian House of Commons. Diefenbaker was born in southwestern Ontario in 1895. In 1903, his family migrated west to the portion of the Northwest Territories which would shortly thereafter become the province of Saskatchewan. Diefenbaker contested elections through the 1920s and 1930s with little success until he was finally elected to the House of Commons in 1940. In the House of Commons, he was repeatedly a candidate for the party leadership. He was finally successful in 1956, and led the Tories for eleven years. In 1957, he led the party to its first electoral victory in 27 years and a year later called a snap election and led it to one of its greatest triumphs. Diefenbaker appointed the first woman minister to his Cabinet and the first aboriginal member of the Senate. During his six years as Prime Minister, his government obtained the passage of the Canadian Bill of Rights (which he introduced on July 1, 1960) and granted the vote to members of the First Nations and Inuit peoples.(more….)

Five points, one for basic subject matter (six years as a PM of a nation will do that for you), four points for his introduction of the Canadian Bill of RIghts 50th anniversary, which was a major goal of his throughout his career. I wasn't going to nom this, because Raul's been very kind to my articles recently, but I was told that if I put it off until August, it would interfere with the upcoming nomination of Terry Fox. Anyway, it's a great Canada Day article, our only FA for a Canadian prime minister, a man who was one of the great campaigners in Canadian history, and very likely the worst prime minister.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:40, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 6

Gary Gygax

Expedition to the Barrier Peaks is an adventure module written by Gary Gygax for the Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game. While Dungeons & Dragons (D&D) is typically a fantasy game, the adventure includes science fiction elements. It takes place on a downed spaceship; the crew has died, but robots and strange creatures still inhabit the ship. The player characters fight monsters and robots, and gather futuristic weapons and colored access cards to advance the story. The adventure was first played at the 1976 Origins II convention. TSR published the adventure in 1980, updated for Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. The adventure is a favorite of many fans, including Stephen Colbert. Dungeon magazine ranked it the fifth-best D&D adventure of all time, and White Dwarf and The Space Gamer magazines gave it positive reviews. (more...)

Not sure how many points this one should get. I don't have an RS to back up the release date, but a Google search turns up a number of leads for that being the publishing date; this would put July 2010 as being roughly the 30th anniversary for the book's release. No D&D book (or any RPG book, as far as I know) has been a main page article, and the last D&D-related subject to be on the main page was Planescape: Torment (a computer game adaptation) on Dec 12 of last year. This article was listed as an FA slightly less than a year ago. BOZ (talk) 22:39, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then please change it in the caption. I do intend to nom Dief for July 1 as a five pointer but can do so because of the point value only 20 days in advance.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Given that we have a video game running today (June 4), it may be best to move this to July 6 to avoid the point deduction and because July 5 I think is spoken for.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
6th works for me. I guess anyone can take my spot if they want, since that puts me a day off the schedule, but we'll see if anyone catches on in the meantime.  ;) BOZ (talk) 04:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think under the circumstances we'll let it slide. I think this falls under the broad gamut of gaming, but would be willing to see it given the two points for 30th anniversary. There is precedent for our not being able to determine a specific date in a month, it was sometime around October 2008, Manchester Bolton & Bury Canal, we allowed the anniversary points even though we could not pin down a specific day to the month. Two points, then.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:36, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 7

Gustav Mahler (1860–1911) was an Austrian late-Romantic composer, and one of the leading conductors of his generation. After graduating from the Vienna Conservatory in 1878, he held a succession of conducting posts of rising importance in the opera houses of Europe, culminating in his appointment in 1897 as director of the Vienna Court Opera (Hofoper). During his ten years in Vienna, Mahler's innovative productions and insistence on the highest performance standards ensured his reputation as one of the greatest of opera conductors, particularly as an interpreter of the stage works of Wagner and Mozart. Mahler's compositions are confined to the genres of symphony and song. His symphonies were often controversial when first performed, and were slow to receive critical and popular approval; an exception was the triumphant premiere of his Eighth Symphony in 1910. After 1945 the music was rediscovered and championed by a new generation of listeners; Mahler then became one of the most frequently performed and recorded of all composers, a position he has sustained into the 21st century...(more...)

4 points I think (7 July 2010 is Mahler's 150th birthday). The last "similar" article was Tōru Takemitsu on 30 May; that's more than a month before my request date so no deduction there. Can't think of any other point entitlements. Sorry I had to erase Star Wars but maybe it'll make it anyway. Brianboulton (talk) 18:56, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

150th is 4 pts. Looks good.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
+2 points A vital article (Mahler is listed as a level 4 vital article) is worth 2 points --Paul (talk) 18:06, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, we distinguish between creators and creations. Like a book is not similar to an author.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:30, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that distinction makes much sense to me. I would say that a creator and something he created are always going to be similar. I think if most people saw choral symphony on the main page one day and Gustav Mahler the next, they would wonder why we had two articles that similar back to back, especially considering that Mahler is mentioned in the lead for choral symphony. As another example, consider what people would think if J.R.R. Tolkien and The Lord of the Rings were to run on back-to-back day (hypothetically, since they both already ran and one isn't featured anymore). I don't think many people would think "yesterday we had an author and today we have a book", but instead they would think "what's up with two Lord of the Rings articles in a row". While I don't think it will be a problem in this case since the articles will run a couple weeks apart, and Mahler will have more than enough points not to be replaced anyway, I really think the articles are similar. Calathan (talk) 04:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The example above is poor; it is not as if the Choral symphony nominated is Mahler's choral symphony; that might indeed be thought excessive. Nor are the nominations "back-to-back". However, I nominated Mahler as a 4-pointer. If it were to lose the extra two points it acquired along the way, that I knew nothing about, that would merely restore the initial situation, no harm done. I wouldn't like to see the choral symphony nomination dropped for this reason and would invite the nominator to restore it. Brianboulton (talk) 09:13, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was trying to give a more extreme example to show that a book and an author can be similar. I didn't mean to suggest that the two articles in this case are as similar as the example I gave. Calathan (talk) 13:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment An article on Gustav Mahler is "similar" to an article on choral symphony only in that they are both related to classical music. Using such a broad criteria for a definition of "similar" leading to point deductions would be saying that nothing in the 29-volume, 50,000 article Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians could appear on the main page too close together. To generalize a bit, it is just like saying that there could not be two biographical articles close together because they are both about people. That, of course, is absurd, but so is proclaiming the "similarity" of choral symphony, and Gustav Mahler. This really doesn't make any difference to this nomination, Mahler will appear on the main page on July 7th, but the nomination should stand with 6 points. Are we going to say that a biography of Johannes Kepler and an article on the genetics of fruit flies are too similar because they are both about science? The parallel is exact.--Paul (talk) 16:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think your comparisons are way off. In this case, Gustav Mahler is one of the most well known creators of choral symphonies, to the point where he is mentioned in the lead for the choral symphony article. When choral symphony runs as TFA, the name "Gustav Mahler" will appear right there on the main page, without someone needing to even go to the artilce itself. On the other hand, Kepler has absolutely nothing to do with fruit flies. Plus it is a real stretch to suggest that classical music is as broad a category as all of science. Calathan (talk) 17:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand your concern, Calathan, but I agree with Wehwalt and Paul that Gustav Mahler and Choral symphony is an apples-and-oranges comparison. One article is about a composer who wrote two choral symphonies (his Second and Eighth); the other article is about the choral symphony as treated by composers in general since its inception. Deducting points from Mahler would be a little like docking an article on Gregor Mendel because there is an article on peas appearing as a TFA. Sure, Mendel worked with peas, but his research on genetics covers very little on the history and development of peas in general. Had I thought there would be a conflict with Mahler, I would not have nominated the choral symphony article, and in my mind, there is still no conflict. Jonyungk (talk) 18:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll accept that reasoning. I honestly think I would consider all classical music articles to be similar (though not all artilces on music in general), but it definitely seems that most people don't share my opinion on that. I still do think people would find it odd if these two articles ran back to back, just because Mahler is mentioned in the blurb for choral symphony, but I don't think anyone will even notice with them running more than 2 weeks apart. Calathan (talk) 19:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 16

Some of the season eight cast
Some of the season eight cast

Degrassi: The Next Generation is a Canadian teen drama television series set in the Degrassi universe, which was created by Linda Schuyler and Kit Hood in 1980. Like its predecessors, Degrassi: The Next Generation follows a group of students at Degrassi Community School who face challenges common to teen life, such as self image, peer pressure, child abuse, sexual identity, gang violence, self-injury, teenage pregnancy, and drug abuse. The series was created by Linda Schuyler and Yan Moore, and is produced by Epitome Pictures in association with the CTV Television Network. The series is filmed at Epitome's studios in Toronto, Ontario, rather than on the real De Grassi Street from which the franchise takes its name. A critical success, Degrassi: The Next Generation has often received favourable reviews from Entertainment Weekly, The New York Times, and AfterElton.com. In its initial years, it was frequently the most watched domestic drama series in Canada, and one of the highest-rated shows on The N in the United States. The series premiered on CTV on 14 October 2001, and the ninth season will finish on 16 July 2010 with the made-for-TV film "Degrassi Takes Manhattan" on MuchMusic and TeenNick, the first time an episode has aired in Canada and the United States on the same day. Season 10 of the series began filming in March 2010, and marks a change in production style which will see the series switch to a telenovela/soap opera format. (more...)

Three points, two for being promoted in April 2008, and one for being the day a two hour made-for-TV movie airs in Canada and the U.S., 2010 is also the thirtieth anniversary of the franchise. A TV episode was featured on May 24, but I couldn't find any TV series being featured in the last six months. Just like Wikipedia, this series is popular with teens, so I suggest semi-protection pending protection level 1 for this article and the film's, (if its created by then,) for July 16 & 17. 117Avenue (talk) 14:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree on points, Dabomb87, you just beat me to it. I agree on the semi protection, not gonna happen.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:00, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well WP:NOPRO was recently downgraded from guideline to essay and there is now a consensus to protect as with any other article, but pages, not even the TFA, are not protected pre-emptively. It'll be move protected before it goes up, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Half-ass Support/Okay Sure, why not? Ever since the show's gone downhill and all the original characters left, I'm not all that attached to it any more, even though I think I'm still the primary contributor to this article and it was my first FA. An alternative date if this gets bumped could be July 19, when season 10 premieres in both Canada and US. Do we need to link teen drama and television series from the blurb, though? Matthewedwards :  Chat  15:41, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's something left to the discretion of the article's editors, including thou.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:12, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe not TV series, but teen drama should be, it isn't something usually mentioned on the main page, and not everyone is familiar with it. 117Avenue (talk) 18:12, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nonspecific date (1 only)

Privilege of Peerage

Ermine robe
Ermine robe
The Privilege of Peerage is the body of special privileges belonging to members of the British Peerage. It is distinct from Parliamentary privilege, which applies to those peers serving in the House of Lords, and members of the House of Commons, during and forty days before and after a Parliamentary session. The privileges have been lost and eroded over time. Only three survived into the 20th century: the right to be tried by other peers of the realm instead of juries of commoners, freedom from arrest in civil (but not criminal) cases, and access to the Sovereign to advise him or her on matters of state. The right to be tried by other peers was abolished in 1948. Legal opinion considers the right of freedom from arrest as obsolete. The remaining privilege was recommended for formal abolition in 1999, and may be retained, arguably, by peers whether members of the House of Lords or not. Peers have other rights that do not formally comprise the Privilege of Peerage. For example, they are entitled to use coronets and supporters on their achievements of arms. (more...)

Promoted in 2004: one of the oldest surviving unused FAs. DrKiernan (talk) 11:28, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

nomination expires June 27. (Should we find a usual place for this info?) Smallbones (talk) 15:25, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/requests&oldid=368699737"