![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I must say I'm quite surprised to see Istanbul selected as TFA on January 12. I thought it was standard that the FA nominator was at least notified of an article's pending selection. And, I'm surprised this was selected so soon, given it has been less than three months since the TFA. There are certainly far more notable dates in relationship to Istanbul, such as May 29 (when the city was conquered in 1453) or related to Istanbul's potential selection as host of the 2020 Olympics. -- tariqabjotu 15:32, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
|maindate=
to the talk page as I have the page open anyway. There is no rule that articles have to wait for x months or years before being selected as TFA - in fact, there are advantages in selecting articles that have relatively recently passed FAC because they are less likely to have deteriorated since promotion and are more likely to have active editors keeping an eye on them). Nor is every TFA date-related – some are, but many are not. I simply selected Istanbul because it was a recent FA on an interesting topic that would help give a better range of topics at TFA in January; if you would rather I scheduled something else with a view to an appearance at a later date, that's fine by me. But there are no guarantees that it would appear on 29th May, or that it would be possible to select it around the time of the 2020 decision. Regards,
Bencherlite
Talk
15:52, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Nice idea if we can't come up with anything better, but how many points would (the equal to both sexes!) Romances get if its FA nominator supported the idea? -- Dweller ( talk) 13:02, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
On my talk. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:42, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Best wishes for the New Year! | |
Here's wishing you and yours a joyous, healthful, and productive 2013! Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my retirement as FAC delegate this year, and apologies for the false alarm of my first—and hopefully last—retirement; the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the FA pages this year. Maintaining standards in featured content requires vigilance, dedication and knowledge of people like you, who are needed; reviews are always welcome at
FAC,
FAR and
TFA requests.
Somehow, somehow we never ever seem to do nothin' completely nice and easy, but here's hoping that 2013 will see a peaceful road ahead and a return to the quality and comaraderie that defines the
FA process, thanks to many dedicated Wikipedians! |
You may or may not have noticed, but an editor alleged that I cannot schedule or decline that editor's submissions at TFA. I think this needs to be resolved before the situation reappears. I have some views, but I would like to hear yours first. Gimmetoo ( talk) 13:15, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Other issues: I think we should coordinate scheduling holidays and other significant days. It would probably make sense to do that at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/Delegates. The one coming up that directly concerns me is Feb 14, for which I object to scheduling the Museum article. I'm not opposed to some other day, but not that day. So if we disagree on that, we should work it out now. Gimmetoo ( talk) 19:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Nice essay. BTW, it was only meta-proven... check out the rook. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 11:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I respectfully disagree that Johnbod's edits were not deliberate vandalism. He initially advised me to use a separate paragraph for the Manuscript entitled The Three Marys Manuscriipt. I complied. He reverted because "he did not like it" - a frequent occurence for him, and reduced it to a sentence using the French term which is not advised on English wikipedia as you know. He also deliberately edited in a manner as to make it difficult for me to change back to the separate paragraph (which he advised in the first place!). He also then followed my contributions (as his contribs clearly show) to Jean de Venette and did the same. He also had the pic of the manuscript showing where he indicated a fresco. That was clearly inaccurate. I simply moved the pic back to where the Manuscript paragraph was. I usually do not use the rollback feature on my own articles but my understanding is that am allowed if vandalism is clearly utilized for the editor's own purpose which is to frustrate and obstruct. Mugginsx ( talk) 10:31, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
For your closing rationale at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Norwich City F.C. players. Well played sir! ★ Bald Zebra ★ talk 15:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC) |
No worries buddy. I am very happy that you went ahead and proposed for SL to appear on Valentine's Day. It is an excellent choice. Thanks. Jivesh1205 ( Talk) 17:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, i go the message you sent me before about the COI issue and i understand why you have deleted most of the article so i have reviewed the text and tried to lectore it to the best of my abilities so from other universities wikipages i have seen. The problem was writing in 3th person and not promoting so i have striped it down from that and i don't see a problem why have you deleted again please contact me for more help about this, in my defence i am linking the wikipage about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornell_University wich has realy good page bout the style of writing is the same. Thanks for fixing the article title thou.
Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goran.petroski ( talk • contribs) 14:28, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi We currently have a page for nominating TFAs that's very focussed on things from the article perspective. We then in a fairly ad-hoc way discuss in a number of different venues (including user talk pages) what might suit certain forthcoming calendar dates, like April 1, Halloween, etc.
This makes me think that we ought to have a page where notable calendar dates (annual, less frequent and one-offs) are listed and editors suggest articles for them.
Thoughts? -- Dweller ( talk) 19:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
here - this isn't something I like having some strange person swoop in and decide for me. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Alan, this kind of behaviour is what lands you in trouble. Don't edit war, discuss. And fwiw, Ealdgyth has an outstanding record of creating the highest quality peer-assessed content on Wikipedia. -- Dweller ( talk) 21:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry to creat onother BIG msg banner and another edit conflict Bencherlite but if we take this party elsewhere everyone will be able to join it the fun. Maybe move to WT:MOS? -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 22:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Bencher, does Mrs need the entire speech? It's in this book in translation, but I can't find it online. If I had a better idea of what she needs, I might be able to help more. -- Dweller ( talk) 22:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bencherlite, I'd prefer that this not go on the main page on January 27 as scheduled. To do a final check I would need to order some books via inter-library loan, and they can take several weeks to arrive. I hope that's okay. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
I have removed the maint tags from the Waitangi Day article and removed some contentious material. The sections that were tagged could do with references but it is factual and therefore not really in need of them. Can you reconsider its use for On This Day? I doubt that we will get Waitangi Day to FA status by the 6th of Feb. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 20:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC) (reply here)
Hi Bencherlite. Thanks a lot, and thanks also for your citing of the MOS:LAYOUT. You'll be glad to see I've put it back in the right place! Also, I have a reputable source for the family members (one of those already cited), so I've now reintroduced the section and entered the source name at the end of it.
Also, I wonder if you could possibly help me with the coding for the repetition of a source, if you have time? I've also provided a reputable source (another, also already cited), for the subject's place of residence. That has been entered immediately after the place of residence in both of the places it appears in the article (that is, in the Infobox and the 'Family' section), in case a reader only part-reads the article. Many thanks again. Regards Zhu Haifeng ( talk) 01:58, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, wanna help me write an article on the NY SAFE Act? IronKnuckle ( talk) 08:27, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of the article
Dean Ireland's Professor of the Exegesis of Holy Scripture know that it will be appearing as
the main page featured list on February 11, 2013. You can view the TFL blurb at
Wikipedia:Today's featured list/February 11, 2013. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors
The Rambling Man (
talk ·
contribs),
Dabomb87 (
talk ·
contribs) or
Giants2008 (
talk ·
contribs), or at
Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of
the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the
Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad.
Thanks!
Tbhotch.
™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!
See terms and conditions.
18:52, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
The position of Dean Ireland's Professor of the Exegesis of Holy Scripture was established at the University of Oxford in 1847. This professorship in the critical interpretation or explanation of biblical texts, a field known as exegesis, was instituted by John Ireland, who was Dean of Westminster from 1816 until his death in 1842. In his will, he left £10,000 to the university, with the interest arising to be applied to the professorship. Edward Hawkins, the first professor, was elected on the strength of his reputation gained opposing the Oxford Movement. In contrast, the third professor, Henry Liddon, was a prominent member of the Oxford Movement. Since 1932, the holder of the chair has been appointed to a fellowship at The Queen's College. Before taking up the position, two of the most recent Dean Ireland's Professors taught in Canada: G. B. Caird (pictured) at McGill University and E. P. Sanders at McMaster University. Christopher Rowland became the twelfth Dean Ireland's Professor in 1991.
The article
Prelude and Fugue on a theme of Vittoria you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 5 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See
Talk:Prelude and Fugue on a theme of Vittoria for things which need to be addressed.
Tomcat (
7)
12:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Glad to see someone using it! I've updated it with the newly-promoted articles (that haven't been delisted or appeared on the main page) since I stopped looking at the requests page in 2011. The more up-to-date version should be a little more useful, at least. GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 16:42, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
The development for TAFI has progressed significantly over the last few weeks, and we are prepared to launch the new feature on the main page for Feb 9th at 0:00 UTC. Concensus was established that the TAFI content should be placed below the DYK content. An example page has been created to show what it would look like. I would like to invite you and several other admins who have recently edited the Main Page to swing by this discussion to help us hammer out the final logistics of integrating the content onto the main page. -- Nick Penguin( contribs) 17:59, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Interwiki Coordination Barnstar | |
Thank you for your support for expanding the articles, styles and management of Wikipedia and a variety of support to other global webpages for the safety and expansion of Wikimedia. Please accept this award of appreciation and goodwill, for your ways of improving mutiple pages, solving sources and incidents to secure the sights of Wikimedia; you deserve it. Keep up the affable work. -- GoShow (............................) 21:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC) |
The article
Prelude and Fugue on a Theme of Vittoria you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Prelude and Fugue on a Theme of Vittoria for comments about the article. Well done!
Tomcat (
7)
18:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about any unintentional formatting errors at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Society, thanks again for your participation! — Cirt ( talk) 13:40, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Way too many manual closing steps at WP:FPORTC and at Wikipedia:Featured portal review, any ideas on how to make this process for closing these simpler? — Cirt ( talk) 15:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
If you're still looking for an April Fools article, Pig-faced women has intentionally been pulled from the queue in the past to be kept as a reserve April Fool TFA; it's arguably the strangest article on Wikipedia, and almost certainly the strangest current FA. I'm not wildly keen on it ever being on the main page, let alone April 1st—I was always very vocally opposed to the "liturgical calendar" approach to the main page and if I had my way article selection would be truly random; it would need to be heavily protected and constantly monitored as it would have a constant stream of people adding their teachers/friends/celebrities to it; it's an inflammatory topic which covers hot-button issues of sexism, disability and animal cruelty and could be seen as running all three for laughs, provoking legitimate complaints and tying up a lot of volunteer time explaining that an article about sexism and animal cruelty doesn't mean Wikipedia endorsing sexism and animal cruelty; it's been a Mattisse target in the past and would probably stir her into a fresh spree of attacks; it covers (in part) the same Georgian English territory as Cock Lane Ghost and Wife selling (PFWs were a broader phenomenon, appearing in Amsterdam, Dublin and Paris as well as London). However, if Wikipedia is going to insist on maintaining the "Weird crap on the main page" tradition, it's probably as good as any, and if one of the more striking illustrations were used it would have a fighting chance of breaking the Wikipedia:Today's featured article/Most viewed record. (The "over my dead body" on the talkpage dates from the period when TFAs were unprotected; provided it were semiprotected and heavily watchlisted I wouldn't have an issue with this appearing.) – iridescent 16:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
CA 78's probably not a good article to put on the Main Page, if that's what you were thinking... there's a whole bunch of sources that need to be added that I didn't have access to when I wrote the article. (If that's not what you were thinking, then never mind - I just saw your copyedit and was quite alarmed
) --
Rs
chen
7754
23:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi! Did you got it! I already sent it by email... -- Doc Taxon ( talk) 17:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I admire your scheduling again, four eagles in a row! - A question for the future: Wagner 22 May, Rite of Spring 29 May, it's close, but both should appear on their special anniversaries, right? Actually even if they were on consecutive days, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
You blocked User:Swagle, and quite rightly - he was repeatedly messing around with test edits on articles. Judging by the talk page discussion, it looks like he now understands that he should not do that and that if he wants to test anything he should use his sandbox. Also, regarding the article he created which was speedy deleted by CSD:A7, I have offered to help him on his talk page and he has agreed - my intention would be to ask him to provide the sources he thinks show notability, and we can take it from there. So, would you consider unblocking him under those conditions? -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 05:47, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
For persistent vigilance against vandals, in defense of the article Lady Saigō on the day it was the Featured Article on Wikipedia's Main Page, User:Bencherlite is awarded the Anti-Vandalism Barnstar. Your efforts are appreciated! Boneyard90 ( talk) 05:28, 5 February 2013 (UTC) |
Thanks for the heads up, I've started scheduling 'em. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 09:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
|
The Userpage Shield | |
Thank you for your help! It is good to know that fellow Wikipedians have our backs so that we can contribute to Wickipedia without fear of retaliation! I am One of Many ( talk) 20:15, 4 February 2013 (UTC) |
Many thanks again for your continued help!-- I am One of Many ( talk) 19:44, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks again and I'm hoping this will work! I think this is in connection with the SYSWOX spam page I nominated for speedy deletion and which was deleted. The IP stalker was obsessed about an article I nominated from his comments. If he is from SYSWOX, he has nearly unlimited access to different IPs. The company website is not working at this time, but I found this information [1]-- I am One of Many ( talk) 18:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi mate, since you're active right now, have admin tools, and are clearly in the mood for cleaning up (!), would you mind deleting this out-of-process nom page for me? Tks/cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 00:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
I've added some alternative images to the TFA blurb mockups at User:Prioryman/Heavy Crossbow FA blurb. Which do you prefer? Prioryman ( talk) 08:00, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the copy-edit to the list. Regards, Zia Khan 17:44, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Re Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It) — The Pop Culture wins again. Sca ( talk) 16:05, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bencherlite, I wonder if you could answer a couple of questions for me?
1. What is the current status of my Icelandic Phallological Museum nomination? It has been up (if you'll excuse the unintentional double entendre) for over a month now and has unanimous support, though not for April 1st. How much longer do you think the nomination needs to be listed?
2. You probably didn't see my earlier request on this particular subject when your talk page was spammed by a vandal, but you suggested that I should look for different images for my German V-weapons sites triple TFA. I've done a few mockups at User:Prioryman/Heavy Crossbow FA blurb. Which do you prefer? Prioryman ( talk) 23:53, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I must say I'm quite surprised to see Istanbul selected as TFA on January 12. I thought it was standard that the FA nominator was at least notified of an article's pending selection. And, I'm surprised this was selected so soon, given it has been less than three months since the TFA. There are certainly far more notable dates in relationship to Istanbul, such as May 29 (when the city was conquered in 1453) or related to Istanbul's potential selection as host of the 2020 Olympics. -- tariqabjotu 15:32, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
|maindate=
to the talk page as I have the page open anyway. There is no rule that articles have to wait for x months or years before being selected as TFA - in fact, there are advantages in selecting articles that have relatively recently passed FAC because they are less likely to have deteriorated since promotion and are more likely to have active editors keeping an eye on them). Nor is every TFA date-related – some are, but many are not. I simply selected Istanbul because it was a recent FA on an interesting topic that would help give a better range of topics at TFA in January; if you would rather I scheduled something else with a view to an appearance at a later date, that's fine by me. But there are no guarantees that it would appear on 29th May, or that it would be possible to select it around the time of the 2020 decision. Regards,
Bencherlite
Talk
15:52, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Nice idea if we can't come up with anything better, but how many points would (the equal to both sexes!) Romances get if its FA nominator supported the idea? -- Dweller ( talk) 13:02, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
On my talk. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:42, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Best wishes for the New Year! | |
Here's wishing you and yours a joyous, healthful, and productive 2013! Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my retirement as FAC delegate this year, and apologies for the false alarm of my first—and hopefully last—retirement; the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the FA pages this year. Maintaining standards in featured content requires vigilance, dedication and knowledge of people like you, who are needed; reviews are always welcome at
FAC,
FAR and
TFA requests.
Somehow, somehow we never ever seem to do nothin' completely nice and easy, but here's hoping that 2013 will see a peaceful road ahead and a return to the quality and comaraderie that defines the
FA process, thanks to many dedicated Wikipedians! |
You may or may not have noticed, but an editor alleged that I cannot schedule or decline that editor's submissions at TFA. I think this needs to be resolved before the situation reappears. I have some views, but I would like to hear yours first. Gimmetoo ( talk) 13:15, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Other issues: I think we should coordinate scheduling holidays and other significant days. It would probably make sense to do that at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/Delegates. The one coming up that directly concerns me is Feb 14, for which I object to scheduling the Museum article. I'm not opposed to some other day, but not that day. So if we disagree on that, we should work it out now. Gimmetoo ( talk) 19:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Nice essay. BTW, it was only meta-proven... check out the rook. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 11:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I respectfully disagree that Johnbod's edits were not deliberate vandalism. He initially advised me to use a separate paragraph for the Manuscript entitled The Three Marys Manuscriipt. I complied. He reverted because "he did not like it" - a frequent occurence for him, and reduced it to a sentence using the French term which is not advised on English wikipedia as you know. He also deliberately edited in a manner as to make it difficult for me to change back to the separate paragraph (which he advised in the first place!). He also then followed my contributions (as his contribs clearly show) to Jean de Venette and did the same. He also had the pic of the manuscript showing where he indicated a fresco. That was clearly inaccurate. I simply moved the pic back to where the Manuscript paragraph was. I usually do not use the rollback feature on my own articles but my understanding is that am allowed if vandalism is clearly utilized for the editor's own purpose which is to frustrate and obstruct. Mugginsx ( talk) 10:31, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
For your closing rationale at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Norwich City F.C. players. Well played sir! ★ Bald Zebra ★ talk 15:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC) |
No worries buddy. I am very happy that you went ahead and proposed for SL to appear on Valentine's Day. It is an excellent choice. Thanks. Jivesh1205 ( Talk) 17:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, i go the message you sent me before about the COI issue and i understand why you have deleted most of the article so i have reviewed the text and tried to lectore it to the best of my abilities so from other universities wikipages i have seen. The problem was writing in 3th person and not promoting so i have striped it down from that and i don't see a problem why have you deleted again please contact me for more help about this, in my defence i am linking the wikipage about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornell_University wich has realy good page bout the style of writing is the same. Thanks for fixing the article title thou.
Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goran.petroski ( talk • contribs) 14:28, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi We currently have a page for nominating TFAs that's very focussed on things from the article perspective. We then in a fairly ad-hoc way discuss in a number of different venues (including user talk pages) what might suit certain forthcoming calendar dates, like April 1, Halloween, etc.
This makes me think that we ought to have a page where notable calendar dates (annual, less frequent and one-offs) are listed and editors suggest articles for them.
Thoughts? -- Dweller ( talk) 19:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
here - this isn't something I like having some strange person swoop in and decide for me. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Alan, this kind of behaviour is what lands you in trouble. Don't edit war, discuss. And fwiw, Ealdgyth has an outstanding record of creating the highest quality peer-assessed content on Wikipedia. -- Dweller ( talk) 21:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry to creat onother BIG msg banner and another edit conflict Bencherlite but if we take this party elsewhere everyone will be able to join it the fun. Maybe move to WT:MOS? -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 22:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Bencher, does Mrs need the entire speech? It's in this book in translation, but I can't find it online. If I had a better idea of what she needs, I might be able to help more. -- Dweller ( talk) 22:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bencherlite, I'd prefer that this not go on the main page on January 27 as scheduled. To do a final check I would need to order some books via inter-library loan, and they can take several weeks to arrive. I hope that's okay. SlimVirgin (talk) 16:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
I have removed the maint tags from the Waitangi Day article and removed some contentious material. The sections that were tagged could do with references but it is factual and therefore not really in need of them. Can you reconsider its use for On This Day? I doubt that we will get Waitangi Day to FA status by the 6th of Feb. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 20:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC) (reply here)
Hi Bencherlite. Thanks a lot, and thanks also for your citing of the MOS:LAYOUT. You'll be glad to see I've put it back in the right place! Also, I have a reputable source for the family members (one of those already cited), so I've now reintroduced the section and entered the source name at the end of it.
Also, I wonder if you could possibly help me with the coding for the repetition of a source, if you have time? I've also provided a reputable source (another, also already cited), for the subject's place of residence. That has been entered immediately after the place of residence in both of the places it appears in the article (that is, in the Infobox and the 'Family' section), in case a reader only part-reads the article. Many thanks again. Regards Zhu Haifeng ( talk) 01:58, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, wanna help me write an article on the NY SAFE Act? IronKnuckle ( talk) 08:27, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of the article
Dean Ireland's Professor of the Exegesis of Holy Scripture know that it will be appearing as
the main page featured list on February 11, 2013. You can view the TFL blurb at
Wikipedia:Today's featured list/February 11, 2013. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors
The Rambling Man (
talk ·
contribs),
Dabomb87 (
talk ·
contribs) or
Giants2008 (
talk ·
contribs), or at
Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of
the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the
Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad.
Thanks!
Tbhotch.
™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!
See terms and conditions.
18:52, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
The position of Dean Ireland's Professor of the Exegesis of Holy Scripture was established at the University of Oxford in 1847. This professorship in the critical interpretation or explanation of biblical texts, a field known as exegesis, was instituted by John Ireland, who was Dean of Westminster from 1816 until his death in 1842. In his will, he left £10,000 to the university, with the interest arising to be applied to the professorship. Edward Hawkins, the first professor, was elected on the strength of his reputation gained opposing the Oxford Movement. In contrast, the third professor, Henry Liddon, was a prominent member of the Oxford Movement. Since 1932, the holder of the chair has been appointed to a fellowship at The Queen's College. Before taking up the position, two of the most recent Dean Ireland's Professors taught in Canada: G. B. Caird (pictured) at McGill University and E. P. Sanders at McMaster University. Christopher Rowland became the twelfth Dean Ireland's Professor in 1991.
The article
Prelude and Fugue on a theme of Vittoria you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 5 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See
Talk:Prelude and Fugue on a theme of Vittoria for things which need to be addressed.
Tomcat (
7)
12:24, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Glad to see someone using it! I've updated it with the newly-promoted articles (that haven't been delisted or appeared on the main page) since I stopped looking at the requests page in 2011. The more up-to-date version should be a little more useful, at least. GeeJo (t)⁄ (c) • 16:42, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
The development for TAFI has progressed significantly over the last few weeks, and we are prepared to launch the new feature on the main page for Feb 9th at 0:00 UTC. Concensus was established that the TAFI content should be placed below the DYK content. An example page has been created to show what it would look like. I would like to invite you and several other admins who have recently edited the Main Page to swing by this discussion to help us hammer out the final logistics of integrating the content onto the main page. -- Nick Penguin( contribs) 17:59, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Interwiki Coordination Barnstar | |
Thank you for your support for expanding the articles, styles and management of Wikipedia and a variety of support to other global webpages for the safety and expansion of Wikimedia. Please accept this award of appreciation and goodwill, for your ways of improving mutiple pages, solving sources and incidents to secure the sights of Wikimedia; you deserve it. Keep up the affable work. -- GoShow (............................) 21:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC) |
The article
Prelude and Fugue on a Theme of Vittoria you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Prelude and Fugue on a Theme of Vittoria for comments about the article. Well done!
Tomcat (
7)
18:03, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about any unintentional formatting errors at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Society, thanks again for your participation! — Cirt ( talk) 13:40, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Way too many manual closing steps at WP:FPORTC and at Wikipedia:Featured portal review, any ideas on how to make this process for closing these simpler? — Cirt ( talk) 15:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
If you're still looking for an April Fools article, Pig-faced women has intentionally been pulled from the queue in the past to be kept as a reserve April Fool TFA; it's arguably the strangest article on Wikipedia, and almost certainly the strangest current FA. I'm not wildly keen on it ever being on the main page, let alone April 1st—I was always very vocally opposed to the "liturgical calendar" approach to the main page and if I had my way article selection would be truly random; it would need to be heavily protected and constantly monitored as it would have a constant stream of people adding their teachers/friends/celebrities to it; it's an inflammatory topic which covers hot-button issues of sexism, disability and animal cruelty and could be seen as running all three for laughs, provoking legitimate complaints and tying up a lot of volunteer time explaining that an article about sexism and animal cruelty doesn't mean Wikipedia endorsing sexism and animal cruelty; it's been a Mattisse target in the past and would probably stir her into a fresh spree of attacks; it covers (in part) the same Georgian English territory as Cock Lane Ghost and Wife selling (PFWs were a broader phenomenon, appearing in Amsterdam, Dublin and Paris as well as London). However, if Wikipedia is going to insist on maintaining the "Weird crap on the main page" tradition, it's probably as good as any, and if one of the more striking illustrations were used it would have a fighting chance of breaking the Wikipedia:Today's featured article/Most viewed record. (The "over my dead body" on the talkpage dates from the period when TFAs were unprotected; provided it were semiprotected and heavily watchlisted I wouldn't have an issue with this appearing.) – iridescent 16:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
CA 78's probably not a good article to put on the Main Page, if that's what you were thinking... there's a whole bunch of sources that need to be added that I didn't have access to when I wrote the article. (If that's not what you were thinking, then never mind - I just saw your copyedit and was quite alarmed
) --
Rs
chen
7754
23:30, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi! Did you got it! I already sent it by email... -- Doc Taxon ( talk) 17:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I admire your scheduling again, four eagles in a row! - A question for the future: Wagner 22 May, Rite of Spring 29 May, it's close, but both should appear on their special anniversaries, right? Actually even if they were on consecutive days, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
You blocked User:Swagle, and quite rightly - he was repeatedly messing around with test edits on articles. Judging by the talk page discussion, it looks like he now understands that he should not do that and that if he wants to test anything he should use his sandbox. Also, regarding the article he created which was speedy deleted by CSD:A7, I have offered to help him on his talk page and he has agreed - my intention would be to ask him to provide the sources he thinks show notability, and we can take it from there. So, would you consider unblocking him under those conditions? -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 05:47, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
For persistent vigilance against vandals, in defense of the article Lady Saigō on the day it was the Featured Article on Wikipedia's Main Page, User:Bencherlite is awarded the Anti-Vandalism Barnstar. Your efforts are appreciated! Boneyard90 ( talk) 05:28, 5 February 2013 (UTC) |
Thanks for the heads up, I've started scheduling 'em. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 09:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
|
The Userpage Shield | |
Thank you for your help! It is good to know that fellow Wikipedians have our backs so that we can contribute to Wickipedia without fear of retaliation! I am One of Many ( talk) 20:15, 4 February 2013 (UTC) |
Many thanks again for your continued help!-- I am One of Many ( talk) 19:44, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks again and I'm hoping this will work! I think this is in connection with the SYSWOX spam page I nominated for speedy deletion and which was deleted. The IP stalker was obsessed about an article I nominated from his comments. If he is from SYSWOX, he has nearly unlimited access to different IPs. The company website is not working at this time, but I found this information [1]-- I am One of Many ( talk) 18:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi mate, since you're active right now, have admin tools, and are clearly in the mood for cleaning up (!), would you mind deleting this out-of-process nom page for me? Tks/cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 00:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
I've added some alternative images to the TFA blurb mockups at User:Prioryman/Heavy Crossbow FA blurb. Which do you prefer? Prioryman ( talk) 08:00, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the copy-edit to the list. Regards, Zia Khan 17:44, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Re Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It) — The Pop Culture wins again. Sca ( talk) 16:05, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bencherlite, I wonder if you could answer a couple of questions for me?
1. What is the current status of my Icelandic Phallological Museum nomination? It has been up (if you'll excuse the unintentional double entendre) for over a month now and has unanimous support, though not for April 1st. How much longer do you think the nomination needs to be listed?
2. You probably didn't see my earlier request on this particular subject when your talk page was spammed by a vandal, but you suggested that I should look for different images for my German V-weapons sites triple TFA. I've done a few mockups at User:Prioryman/Heavy Crossbow FA blurb. Which do you prefer? Prioryman ( talk) 23:53, 17 February 2013 (UTC)