Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/FASA
| Main | Discussion | Records | Templates |
|
|
Idea, maybe not useful?[edit]
Would it be worthwhile, when new FARs are opened, to put the top few in authorship/edit count onto the FAR's talk page in hopeful anticipation of a save, or does FASA only plan on taking into account post-FAR numbers? Hog Farm Talk 19:54, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- I think it may be easier to put the (pre-) stats on the talk page at the point that someone indicates an interest in restoring the article. In fact, I’ll go do that now for Brabham. Of course, anyone can do them all now if they want, but it’s kind of a lot of work :). The problem is that you have to excerpt them, as there’s no way to link the stats as of a certain date. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Hog Farm, Z1720, and Buidhe: I’ve been thinking about how we can avoid missing those FARs where someone seriously engages, without having to add the extra step of always adding stats to FAR talk (even when no one engages). One suggestion I have is: when one of us noms a FAR, we keep the article watchlisted. If we see someone working on the article, then we add the article stats to the FAR talk. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:12, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
Eligibility[edit]
So say there's a situation where one editor did substantial work on the article between the notice and the FAR, but things stalled and it went to FAR, where several other editors put in good work that got it kept. None of the three are the original FAC nominator. Are all three eligible, or only the two who did work while the FAR was ongoing? Hog Farm Talk 19:05, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- I would say only improvements during the FAR ??? @Z1720: ?? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:07, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- I would say only edits after the FAR nom should count. I envisioned the award going to editors who save the article after its FAR nomination. Z1720 (talk) 19:18, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- Right, because if we give out FASAs for edits outside of FAR, we've got our hands full! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:33, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- I would say only edits after the FAR nom should count. I envisioned the award going to editors who save the article after its FAR nomination. Z1720 (talk) 19:18, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Maintenance[edit]
Hi. I read at WP:FASA that "FAC nominators are expected to continuously maintain articles they nominated" about fifteen years after the fact. I misdirected my question before and hope I understood the reply. Is there any way to inform FAC nominators up front that they've become responsible for preserving the quality of that article into the future? -SusanLesch (talk) 15:20, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank heavens I've only gone through FAC twice—a heck of a lot to be shouldered with after the fact. Can anyone here answer? -SusanLesch (talk) 15:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, Susan ... I have been absent and likely to be even more absent in the future [1] ... I have adjusted that wording, and suspect the original miswording may have been mine. And I'm unsure if anyone has kept up with nominations here in my absence. So sorry to be unavailable to you as you continue to confront socks and intransigent editors. Yes, you have shouldered a lot, and done so admirably. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:33, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Z1720 might you look this over, since we created this effort together ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:34, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- @SusanLesch: Sorry that I did not respond sooner. My understanding is that there is an unspoken expectation that the FAC nominator will maintain the quality of the article. When an article is scheduled for TFA, the FAC nominator is notified so they can ensure the article meets the FA criteria. Also, if the article is not maintained it can lose its FA status and the nominator's "star" on WP:WBFAN is hollowed out. However, we are all volunteers so it is ultimately up to the nominator to decide if they want to maintain the article. Z1720 (talk) 13:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Z1720, I think it would be helpful to place your "unspoken expectation" in writing for the rest of us. -SusanLesch (talk) 13:42, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- @SusanLesch: It is not "my" unspoken expectation. For this to be part of a policy or guideline, it would have to be proposed and approved by the community. This is not something I want to put time and effort into. If an editor does not want to maintain an FA they nominated for promotion, the consequence is that the article might be nominated at WP:FAR and demoted. Z1720 (talk) 21:27, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Godspeed, Z1720, we've got our hands full. -SusanLesch (talk) 13:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- @SusanLesch: It is not "my" unspoken expectation. For this to be part of a policy or guideline, it would have to be proposed and approved by the community. This is not something I want to put time and effort into. If an editor does not want to maintain an FA they nominated for promotion, the consequence is that the article might be nominated at WP:FAR and demoted. Z1720 (talk) 21:27, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Z1720, I think it would be helpful to place your "unspoken expectation" in writing for the rest of us. -SusanLesch (talk) 13:42, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- @SusanLesch: Sorry that I did not respond sooner. My understanding is that there is an unspoken expectation that the FAC nominator will maintain the quality of the article. When an article is scheduled for TFA, the FAC nominator is notified so they can ensure the article meets the FA criteria. Also, if the article is not maintained it can lose its FA status and the nominator's "star" on WP:WBFAN is hollowed out. However, we are all volunteers so it is ultimately up to the nominator to decide if they want to maintain the article. Z1720 (talk) 13:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)