Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Loeba (talk | contribs) at 13:33, 22 April 2012 (→"Vital articles": new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• WT:TFAR

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present.

International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia

May 17th is International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia. I think an article fitting that theme would be nice. I have found the article The Well of Loneliness, which is a lesbian themed novel that was subject to censorship and trial. I think it would have 3 points total. Can anyone think of an article that might be a better choice or have more points? --Harizotoh9 (talk) 05:21, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

That is perhaps the best choice. Other options would be biography articles on an LGBT person. David Bowie, Angelina Jolie, Russell T Davies, Nicolo Giraud and Don Dunstan (who also helped decriminalise homosexuality in South Australia) are the available LGBT biographies. Pyrrhus16 07:32, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I wanted to check to see if there was a better article that I had missed. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 11:53, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

General Relativity on April 18th

I was about to nominate General relativity as a non-specific date, but then I noticed that the anniversary of Einstein's death is coming up on April 18th. Do you think I should wait and nominate it for the 18th or does it not really matter? --Harizotoh9 (talk) 11:50, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

We had Introduction to general relativity as TFA on April 18, 2010 (the 55th anniversary of Einstein's death), so it is likely too soon to feature the General relativity article. Pyrrhus16 12:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Is there a specific rule preventing it? It has been two years, so I think that is enough of a gap between the articles. I would like some Einstein themed article to run, and the GR article makes the most sense. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 11:53, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

The 18th sounds good to me. 2 years is easily long enough of a gap! Johnbod (talk) 00:08, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Suggestions

These are just a few suggestions I've thought up.

1. The Misplaced Pages:Featured articles that haven't been on the Main Page article needs to be more prominently listed. It should be accessible from all the FA related pages. 2. The list perhaps could be re-organized as a table or series of tables. It would include extra information that might make easier to use in selecting articles. This can include:

• Age
• Broad category and specific category (eg. "Physics" and "Physics biography")
• Whether it's a vital topic, underrepresented, or a core topic
• Dates that might be of interest if relevant (death, birth, discovery, etc)
• Current total points of the article. This would have to be maintained by a bot, and would be more complex than the others and is not essential.

3. Increase the request slots. Non-date specific should be increased to three, and date specific should be increased to 7. The reason is that an article can be nominated a long time before it is set to run, and it can sit and eat up space on the request board for almost a month. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 03:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

There are only two people who make the decision on which articles to run, and I'm sure both of them are well aware of where to find Misplaced Pages:Featured articles that haven't been on the Main Page. The last thing this process needs is more request slots; the whole point is to limit the number of nominations to a manageable amount and avoid the mess that this page used to be. This is what TFAR used to look like, and nobody in their right mind wants to go back to it. In any event, I'd imagine virtually all FA writers are aware of this page—which is only two clicks away from the Main Page—and even if not, would know that Raul is the person to ask. The last thing anyone wants is to encourage more driveby nominations, which tend to generate nothing but antagonism; if an article's writers haven't nominated it for TFA there's generally an excellent reason. "Featured articles that haven't been on the Main Page" isn't a synonym for "Featured articles that ought to be on the Main Page", despite the number of people who seem to think otherwise. 188.29.159.108 (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

"Vital articles"

I have a query. The rules state that "vital articles" qualify for six points. Does this include Level 4 vital articles? --Lobo (talk) 13:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)