| Revision as of 13:31, 31 October 2024 editGog the Mild (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Rollbackers96,578 editsm Copy edit (minor)← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:52, 24 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,517 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Misplaced Pages talk:Today's featured article/Archive 16) (bot | ||
| (39 intermediate revisions by 24 users not shown) | |||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| __TOC__ | __TOC__ | ||
| == |
==January TFAs== | ||
| ⚫ | The January 2025 schedule can now be found ]. Nominations are still welcome; changes can still be made if necessary. - ] (]) 09:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC) | ||
| == moratorium on Alexander McQueen collections == | |||
| I've got a lot going on, and I'll be taking a ] from scheduling for now ... ] did October and will be doing January. Play nice, y'all. As always, feel free to ping me on (or go ahead and edit) any blurbs I do in the meantime. - Dank (]) 03:47, 3 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| (OK, trying a different venue; is this the right one?) | |||
| == TFA == | |||
| Can we please stop sending up articles on individual Alexander McQueen collections as TFA? At least for a while? It seems like a super-niche area and we've seen a bunch of them recently; not sure how to efficiently collect stats, but I feel like today's is at least the third in a year or so. --] (]) 04:42, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{@TFA}} some random user with 300 edits scheduled the ]. I'd recommend removing all of these. ]] 10:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :TFA selection is tricky enough as it is without binding our hands any further. We struggle to show sufficient variety as it is and nance gluts if unused FAs in some areas (milhist and modern music) and a dearth in multiple areas (See ]). Sure, we can ignore new, fresh FAs from an under-represented topic and run more milhist or music, or we can rerun even more older FAs (which carries with it a whole set of other risks and problems), but that’s going to lead to many more complaints. It would also be unfair on the editors involved in getting these to FA if we deliberately ignore them without a good rationale. (BTW, I’ve already scheduled another McQueen article for late January). - ] (]) 05:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :Also will ping {{ping|SchroCat}} as above ]] 10:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Well, but clearly McQueen is a massively overrepresented topic in FA, don't you think? I would like to see more from math and science; those are underrepresented (partly because it's incredibly difficult to write a technical article to FA standards, so fair enough if there just aren't enough articles, but when they do come up I think they should take precedence over McQueen). --] (]) 05:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks ]. We'd spotted that, and next month's scheduler will be dealing with it all shortly. Cheers - ] (]) 10:50, 4 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::Society and culture is already an under-represented area at FAC, so reducing our output in that area isn’t a great option unless we increase the over-represented areas further, at which point we’ll have even more complaints to deal with. Please feel free to make life easier by adding FAs from different areas that can be used instead! - ] (]) 05:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == December nominations may now be made == | |||
| :::: I sort of get that "society and culture" generally might also be a little underrepresented (though not as much as math and science) but I struggle to understand how this constant repetition of McQueen is improving "variety" in articles. --] (]) 05:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::As I explained, we have a very limited pot of FAs we can put the MP. If we stop something where we do have ‘stock’, it has to be replaced by one of the areas which are already overrepresented (milhist or modern music), which reduces variety and raises complaints. As I’ve said, please write FAs from the ]! - ] (]) 06:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Trovatore, I’m sure everyone has heard your point. It’s time to move on. ''']]''' 06:53, 13 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Date formats == | ||
| Greetings of the season from New Zealand, or as we tend to say here. | |||
| It's too late to do much about it now, but I think ] has issues which mean it shouldn't have been made TFA; I've raised some of these in a ]. It doesn't look like took place here, and although @] and @] mentioned issues and @] resolved to fix them, nobody seems to have checked that this had been completed before the article was approved. | |||
| You may recall the report at Errors a couple of days ago about date formats of the ] article. Here's a copy of it: | |||
| The intent of this isn't to blame any editors in particular, and in fact I think a lot of work did go into the article in the run-up to today. It just seems worth flagging up this as an example of an article that wasn't quite up to scratch slipping through the cracks. ] (]) 22:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{Cquote|We should use DMY date format rather than MDY, to match the format of the article featured. ]] 08:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::But that article uses mdy format!? ''']]''' 09:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::It doesn't anymore - MDY is not the Italian format, I have changed to DMY. All the related articles are already DMY. ]] 09:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Whilst I really don't like messing with FAs, the date format change in the target article hasn't been challenged, hence I've implemented the change here as well. ''']]''' 23:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
| Today, we have the same situation, with the ] being in mdy format when it should be dmy. I've posted about it on ] as a justification for changing it to dmy. As yet, I haven't touched what is on the main page. Two queries: | |||
| == December == | |||
| *In this specific case, is it ok to tweak the date format in the TFA? | |||
| *More importantly, should the schedulers as part of the normal process check whether the date format is possibly in need of updating? | |||
| As always, your good work is much appreciated. ''']]''' 01:28, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | The |
||
| :No and no. ] (]) 02:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Per Nikkimaria. ] (]) 09:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :I think people interested in the date format of FAs should speak up at FAC and leave TFA alone. And I agree that this is not work that the TFA schedulers should be doing. —] (]) 10:31, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| : {{tq|It doesn't anymore - MDY is not the Italian format, I have changed to DMY.}} reminds me of ] and ], where that argument was rejected (and the MOS was updated to clarify "English-speaking country" in both places). Sad to see GiantSnowman is still pushing it anyway. ]] 14:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:52, 24 December 2024
Shortcut
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
 | To notify all the TFA coordinators on any talk page, use {{@TFA}} in your message, and sign it. |
January TFAs
The January 2025 schedule can now be found here. Nominations are still welcome; changes can still be made if necessary. - SchroCat (talk) 09:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
moratorium on Alexander McQueen collections
(OK, trying a different venue; is this the right one?)
Can we please stop sending up articles on individual Alexander McQueen collections as TFA? At least for a while? It seems like a super-niche area and we've seen a bunch of them recently; not sure how to efficiently collect stats, but I feel like today's is at least the third in a year or so. --Trovatore (talk) 04:42, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- TFA selection is tricky enough as it is without binding our hands any further. We struggle to show sufficient variety as it is and nance gluts if unused FAs in some areas (milhist and modern music) and a dearth in multiple areas (See here for the large areas of shortfall). Sure, we can ignore new, fresh FAs from an under-represented topic and run more milhist or music, or we can rerun even more older FAs (which carries with it a whole set of other risks and problems), but that’s going to lead to many more complaints. It would also be unfair on the editors involved in getting these to FA if we deliberately ignore them without a good rationale. (BTW, I’ve already scheduled another McQueen article for late January). - SchroCat (talk) 05:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, but clearly McQueen is a massively overrepresented topic in FA, don't you think? I would like to see more from math and science; those are underrepresented (partly because it's incredibly difficult to write a technical article to FA standards, so fair enough if there just aren't enough articles, but when they do come up I think they should take precedence over McQueen). --Trovatore (talk) 05:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Society and culture is already an under-represented area at FAC, so reducing our output in that area isn’t a great option unless we increase the over-represented areas further, at which point we’ll have even more complaints to deal with. Please feel free to make life easier by adding FAs from different areas that can be used instead! - SchroCat (talk) 05:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- I sort of get that "society and culture" generally might also be a little underrepresented (though not as much as math and science) but I struggle to understand how this constant repetition of McQueen is improving "variety" in articles. --Trovatore (talk) 05:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- As I explained, we have a very limited pot of FAs we can put the MP. If we stop something where we do have ‘stock’, it has to be replaced by one of the areas which are already overrepresented (milhist or modern music), which reduces variety and raises complaints. As I’ve said, please write FAs from the large areas where there is a shortfall! - SchroCat (talk) 06:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Trovatore, I’m sure everyone has heard your point. It’s time to move on. Schwede66 06:53, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- I sort of get that "society and culture" generally might also be a little underrepresented (though not as much as math and science) but I struggle to understand how this constant repetition of McQueen is improving "variety" in articles. --Trovatore (talk) 05:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Society and culture is already an under-represented area at FAC, so reducing our output in that area isn’t a great option unless we increase the over-represented areas further, at which point we’ll have even more complaints to deal with. Please feel free to make life easier by adding FAs from different areas that can be used instead! - SchroCat (talk) 05:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, but clearly McQueen is a massively overrepresented topic in FA, don't you think? I would like to see more from math and science; those are underrepresented (partly because it's incredibly difficult to write a technical article to FA standards, so fair enough if there just aren't enough articles, but when they do come up I think they should take precedence over McQueen). --Trovatore (talk) 05:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Date formats
Greetings of the season from New Zealand, or Meri Kirihimete as we tend to say here.
You may recall the report at Errors a couple of days ago about date formats of the Tomb of Antipope John XXIII article. Here's a copy of it:
| “ | We should use DMY date format rather than MDY, to match the format of the article featured. GiantSnowman 08:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
|
” |
Today, we have the same situation, with the 1964 Brinks Hotel bombing being in mdy format when it should be dmy. I've posted about it on the article's talk page as a justification for changing it to dmy. As yet, I haven't touched what is on the main page. Two queries:
- In this specific case, is it ok to tweak the date format in the TFA?
- More importantly, should the schedulers as part of the normal process check whether the date format is possibly in need of updating?
As always, your good work is much appreciated. Schwede66 01:28, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- No and no. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Per Nikkimaria. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think people interested in the date format of FAs should speak up at FAC and leave TFA alone. And I agree that this is not work that the TFA schedulers should be doing. —Kusma (talk) 10:31, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
It doesn't anymore - MDY is not the Italian format, I have changed to DMY.
reminds me of Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)/Archive 193#MOS on date format by country and Misplaced Pages talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers/Archive 162#DATETIES vs. DATEVAR/DATERET, where that argument was rejected (and the MOS was updated to clarify "English-speaking country" in both places). Sad to see GiantSnowman is still pushing it anyway. Anomie⚔ 14:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)