Wikipedia talk:Featured articles

Latest comment: 1 month ago by Cowboygilbert in topic WP:WAWARDS are back
FACs needing feedback
viewedit
La Isla Bonita Review it now
Northern Bank robbery Review it now


Featured article removal candidates
Trembling Before G-d Review now
Northrop YF-23 Review now
The Hardy Boys Review now
Tom Swift Review now
Arthur (Or the Decline and Fall of the British Empire) Review now
Bart Simpson Review now
Emmy Noether Review now
Mariah Carey Review now
Concerto delle donne Review now

Architecture and archaeology

edit

I wonder if its time to split these - both have quite a few FAs added in last couple of years. I can do the separating, if there is agreement. Ceoil (talk) 22:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, ancient architecture tends to go with archaeology but there's a growing number of modern buildings among our FAs now... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:34, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Ok, can see that as being subjective and tricky, and am now less sure. Waiting to see what other think, but would put ancient architecture within archaeology. Ceoil (talk) 23:40, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
I would agree with putting ancient architecture under the archaeology subheader. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Per Ian above, agree that the proposal should be "should we split Architecture and archaeology so that ancient architecture is within the separate archaeology sub-section".

For the record, the articles would like to merge into archaeology are listed here. I also agree with Johnbod's criteria. Re things like Corp Naomh and the few objects we have at FA FROM from Egyptian art, would prefer to be within "artworks". Ceoil (talk) 03:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the Corp Naomh doesn't seem to have ever been buried, & I think should be just "Art". The Icelandic Phallological Museum seems to be natural history/biology. Johnbod (talk) 03:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Maintenance template

edit

Is it inappropriate to place maintenance templates on FAs? Every attempt to tag Taylor Swift (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) was reverted with different summaries that do not invalidate (or even address) the issues the tag raises (it was even called "ugly" as if that's relevant).[1][2] The discussion on the talk page and its extensiveness make clear that while there are opposing views on the fixes, the issues are clear and present. It's astounding to see several users that reverted the tagging not take part in the discussion after emphasizing its importance over the tag itself. KyleJoantalk 03:29, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

There is no rule against doing so, and 'ugly' is not a good reason not to. (No comment on whether there is a good reason in this case). Nikkimaria (talk) 03:41, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the response, Nikkimaria. In that case, I'll treat the tag like we would any other material and generate a consensus on the appropriateness of its placement. Do you have any suggestions on where it'd be appropriate for me to open that discussion? KyleJoantalk 04:02, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
That would typically be the article talk page, though for a NPOV tag you could also try WP:NPOVN. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:23, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Featured lists § FLs for television seasons

edit

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Featured lists § FLs for television seasons. The discussion regards whether season articles should go through the GA/FAC or FLC process. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:08, 13 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

WP:WAWARDS are back

edit

Letting any watcher or regulars of Featured articles that the W Awards are back up and running since it's long sleep of 10 years. It'd be helpful if you'd like to become a reviewer or nominate people who you think fit the criteria in any of the awards (Bronze, Silver, Golden, Platinum) and give any suggestions on awards or changes that you think should happen in the talk page! Thanks,   W Award Coordinator Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:42, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply