Wikipedia talk:Featured topic candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured content dispatch workshop 
view · edit · hist

Jul 10: Infoboxes: time for a fresh look?


Nov 15: A guide to the Good Article Review Process
Oct 18: Common issues seen in Peer review
Oct 11: Editing tools, part 3
Sep 20: Editing tools, part 2
Sep 6: Editing tools, part 1
Mar 15: GA Sweeps end
Feb 8: Content reviewers and standards


Nov 2: Inner German border
Oct 12: Sounds
May 11: WP Birds
May 4: Featured lists
Apr 20: Valued pictures
Apr 13: Plagiarism
Apr 6: New FAC/FAR nominations
Mar 16: New FAC/FAR delegates
Mar 9: 100 Featured sounds
Mar 2: WP Ships FT and GT
Feb 23: 100 FS approaches
Feb 16: How busy was 2008?
Feb 8: April Fools 2009
Jan 31: In the News
Jan 24: Reviewing featured picture candidates
Jan 17: FA writers—the 2008 leaders
Jan 10: December themed page
Jan 3: Featured list writers


Nov 24: Featured article writers
Nov 10: Historic election on Main Page
Nov 8: Halloween Main Page contest
Oct 13: Latest on featured articles
Oct 6: Matthewedwards interview
Sep 22: Reviewing non-free images
Sep 15: Interview with Ruhrfisch
Sep 8: Style guide and policy changes, August
Sep 1: Featured topics
Aug 25: Interview with Mav
Aug 18: Choosing Today's Featured Article
Aug 11: Reviewing free images
Aug 9 (late): Style guide and policy changes, July
Jul 28: Find reliable sources online
Jul 21: History of the FA process
Jul 14: Rick Block interview
Jul 7: Style guide and policy changes for June
Jun 30: Sources in biology and medicine
Jun 23 (26): Reliable sources
Jun 16 (23): Assessment scale
Jun 9: Main page day
Jun 2: Styleguide and policy changes, April and May
May 26: Featured sounds
May 19: Good article milestone
May 12: Changes at Featured lists
May 9 (late): FC from schools and universities
May 2 (late): Did You Know
Apr 21: Styleguide and policy changes
Apr 14: FA milestone
Apr 7: Reviewers achieving excellence
Mar 31: Featured content overview
Mar 24: Taming talk page clutter
Mar 17: Changes at peer review
Mar 13 (late): Vintage image restoration
Mar 3: April Fools mainpage
Feb 25: Snapshot of FA categories
Feb 18: FA promotion despite adversity
Feb 11: Great saves at FAR
Feb 4: New methods to find FACs
Jan 28: Banner year for Featured articles

Hurricane Isabel[edit]

So, one of the articles in the Hurricane Isabel topic was merged. How do we go about removing one article from a topic? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:48, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

You can go ahead and edit the Wikipedia:Featured topics/Hurricane Isabel page directly, since it's not an addition of a new article or removal of an article that still exists. Since this pushes the topic to 50% featured, you then untransclude the topic from the Good Topics page and add it to the Featured Topics page, and adjust the templates on the talk pages of the articles in the topic. --PresN 04:05, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
I took care of moving the topic from GT to FT. I think it takes a while for it to update to show its now a Featured Topic though. GamerPro64 14:39, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Found the issue. The Canada article was still tagged as being part of the topic so I removed it. GamerPro64 14:51, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:14, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

So similar to Isabel, the tropical cyclone project recently agreed to merging 1978 January subtropical storm, which was part of Wikipedia:Featured topics/Off-season Atlantic hurricanes. Is there an easy way to remove that? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:15, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

  • Once again I did this and now its not part of the topic anymore. Thank you for calling attention to it. GamerPro64 21:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks, wasn't sure how easy or hard it was. The article was merged only a short time ago. I just wanted to finish everything associated with it. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:32, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Once again, we agreed to merge Hurricane Patsy (1959). I removed it from Wikipedia:Featured topics/Category 5 Pacific hurricanes, but wasn't sure how much else had to be done, since its merger qualifies it for FT status, I believe. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:03, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Seeing how much there was in the topic, as in all the crossing overs the articles had with other topics, it was hard to make sure all the numbers were correct. But overall, I updated the topic to Featured Topic status and all that. GamerPro64 15:46, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Hopefully Patsy wasn't too bad, since it was only in the one topic. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014[edit]

Hi there; this is just a quick note to let you all know that the 2014 WikiCup will begin in January. The WikiCup is an annual competition to encourage high-quality contributions to Wikipedia by adding a little friendly competition to editing. At the time of writing, 106 users have signed up to take part in the competition; interested parties, no matter their level of experience or their editing interests, are warmly invited to sign up. Questions are welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn (talk) 20:39, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Ford Island[edit]

I'm considering this as a topic area for Featured topic status. It needs some work, but this is what I have in mind:

I think I can get Ford Island, Pacific Aviation Museum, USS Arizon Memorial and USS Oklahoma to GA class. Would I also need the last 2 to be at GA status?--v/r - TP 19:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

While Seth Porter Ford does not have to be in the topic, Naval Auxiliary Landing Field Ford Island should be included. However, why is USS Bowfin (SS-287) in {{Ford Island}} but not mentioned in Ford Island? Since the Bowfin lies closer to Honolulu's mainland than Ford Island, it should probably be removed from the navbox to avoid confusion. Otherwise, it appears the rest of the topic as proposed is complete.-- 22:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Okay, so I've added arrows above, that is my goal. If I reach my goal, do you think this topic will be FTC material? I put the Bowfin in the Navbox to include all of the Pearl Harbor memorials. A separate navbox for the memorials would duplicate a lot of the Ford Island stuff.--v/r - TP 03:07, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Okay, those first 9 articles should work for a good topic nomination. However, although not applying to this topic, does Battleship Row really need its own article? It seems like you could easily merge it into Attack on Pearl Harbor.-- 04:15, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Why is the Oklahoma included here? She was salvaged and later lost at sea while being towed to the mainland. Admittedly she was sunk in Battleship Row and was the only BB other than Arizona not to be returned to service, but so what? And Battleship Row needs to be revamped; the term actually refers to the mooring positions alongside Ford Island usually used by the Pacific Fleet's battleships.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 05:49, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
The Oklahoma's mast was returned to Ford Island and currently sits in a memorial right outside the entrance to the USS Missouri. Juhachi, I felt the same way upon first impression. But my guess is that if I were to do a bit of digging, battleship row is probably notable in it's own right. I think Mr. Ford is important to a topic about Ford Island as its namesake.--v/r - TP 06:27, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
I think Battleship Row is notable only in the context of Pearl Harbor; I'm sure other places have similar type names for parts of the fleet anchorages. Don't forget that every article needs to be at least a good article for good topic status; and 50% must be FA for a featured topic.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 07:07, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

A question on procedure[edit]

I've recently finished writing the last few articles that will complete this rather large topic. Granted, two lists need to go through FLC (which means I'll see you in 6 months ;) ), but I'm not sure of the proper procedure. Because the topic is so large, I've split it into subtopics - 4 of the 5 subtopics are already Good Topics, but the last one is not. When it comes time, should I nominate the subtopic separately from the main topic or will one nomination do the job? I don't want to create more work for anyone than I already am. Parsecboy (talk) 12:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Nominate each topic separately. Nergaal (talk) 16:22, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 16:38, 8 April 2014 (UTC)


Crossposting from GamerPro's talk page, per his suggestion. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:15, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Roughly how much overlap is allowed? Say, if we had a Roekiah filmography topic, and a Kartolo filmography topic (only difference would be the main article and Berdjoang being included in Kartolo's filmography), or (a less extreme example) a Films written by Saeroen topic and a Films produced by Union Films topic (overlap of four articles), would they all have a chance for FTC? (Union Films is only two articles short; Saeroen is a little further back but still in good shape) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:53, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Te Saeroen set has less than half of the articles overlap, so I don't think you should worry about that. The other set, I am not sure. They seem to be natural topics, but I have not taken a good look at to. Is there a sensible way to merge the two? Nergaal (talk) 10:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "Filmography of Roekiah and Kartolo" is possible, but that would exclude Berdjoang. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

For those who need to visualize it, Union and Saeroen would look like this (current ratings used)

Whereas Roekiah and Kartolo's would look like this

Wikipedia:Featured topics on the Main Page[edit]

This may be of interest. BencherliteTalk 22:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)