I think you've misunderstood the concept of a Featured Article and the role of Main Page in showcasing them. You've also been horrendously rude to some extremely hardworking editors. --Dweller (talk) 15:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I hate it when human interest makes the front page. One day the featured article was about a computer program from ten years ago designed to test the functionality of Microsoft on the web, and the next day the featured article was about soccer uniforms. Perhaps I was crass in my expression, but I believe you can't really disagree with my position: these articles are about ridiculously obscure minutia. For them to be featured in any capacity outside of "Today in Ridiculously Obscure Minutia" is a waste. It is a waste of the time of someone who might check the main page specifically to see what the featured article is to find something like this there. If the editors are so hard working, then why couldn't they have found anything more interesting or relevant, like the history of peanut butter, or the drying times of paint? Really, given the days in question, something about Samuel Morse and his inventions would've been extremely topical, and is always interesting; but, there wasn't even a mention of him anywhere on the main page. It seems to me that someone dropped the ball; and, as editors, they ought to be thick-skinned enough to take the criticism when someone complains.
Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Body mass index are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. / edg ☺ ☭ 11:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Talk:Body mass index. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. / edg ☺ ☭ 11:28, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
I read your recent post at BMI. If you want people to stop deleting your talk page contributions, phrase them in a way that makes an explicit suggestion for how to change the article. If you think the article should make it more clear that no individual person should use BMI as the sole criterion to determine optimum weight, say so. I don't believe that doctors are telling fit people with high BMI's due to muscle mass that they are overweight. If you think that is occurring, that would be a very interesting problem to discuss in the article, but it would need to be sourced. Rracecarr (talk) 15:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)