Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Acra (fortress)

Acra (fortress)[edit]

This is the archived discussion of the TFAR nomination for the article below. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests). Please do not modify this page unless you are renominating the article at TFAR. For renominations, please add {{collapse top|Previous nomination}} to the top of the discussion and {{collapse bottom}} at the bottom, then complete a new nomination underneath. To do this, see the instructions at {{TFAR nom/doc}}.

The result was: not scheduled by Ealdgyth (talk) 15:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Acra was a fortified compound in Jerusalem built by Antiochus Epiphanes, ruler of the Seleucid Empire, following his sack of the city in 168 BCE. The fortress played a significant role in the events surrounding the Maccabean Revolt and the formation of the Hasmonean Kingdom. It was destroyed by Simon Thassi during this struggle. The exact location of the Acra, critical to understanding Hellenistic Jerusalem, had been a matter of lengthy discussions. Historians and archaeologists had proposed various sites around Jerusalem, relying mainly on conclusions drawn from literary evidence. This approach began to change in the light of excavations which commenced in the late 1960s. New discoveries had prompted reassessments of the ancient literary sources, Jerusalem's geography and previously discovered artifacts. In 2015, the Israel Antiquities Authority announced the likely discovery of the Acra in a different location, south-west of the Temple Mount and north-west of the City of David. (Full article...)

Most recent similar article(s): Coldrum Long Barrow
Main editors: Astynax
Promoted: August 18, 2010
Reasons for nomination:
Support as nominator. Triggerhippie4 (talk) 17:26, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, but only because of the timing. This ran at TFA in 2010, and we've been doing very few reruns lately. The few reruns that we do tend to get brought up in various debates over the future of TFA, such as this ongoing debate. I'd prefer not to add fuel to the fire ... let those discussions resolve themselves first. - Dank (push to talk) 18:18, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: I am not entirely opposed to a rerun, but there does not appear to be a strong enough reason to rerun this particular article. There is still a sizable, though quickly shrinking list of featured articles that haven't been on the Main Page that could be chosen before this one. Aoba47 (talk) 23:32, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per Aoba47, despite this being otherwise a worthy nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:45, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note Rather than reject this nomination (I'm not scheduling it in March), I'm going to leave it open for the next coordinator to decide. Possibly the issues cited by the opposers will have died down by then.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, I had a look at Dweller’s list of articles that haven’t run, and plenty of them are in good enough shape. We are not at such a place that we have to frequently run the recently run. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:17, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We recommend to ourselves and you that we wait later for a successful request, otherwise no one's ready. This isn't the best time, more work should've been done. «“I'm Aya Syameimaru!”I„文々。新聞“I„userbako”» 06:32, 15 April 2020 (UTC) (updated 06:33, 15 April 2020 (UTC))[reply]