339:
possibly one for the subject category. Then you could just sort by column and say, "Hmm, here are all the articles that have been pending for more than 2 years... let's add one of those to the queue... now let's sort by TFA date; here are all the ones that have a request date coming up, so let's add one of those to the queue... let's sort by number of articles pending by the submitter... here are a bunch whose submitter has more than 5 articles pending, let's pick one of those..." I was thinking that as we get to the point where there are thousands and thousands, that kind of sorting might be the best way to keep track of everything and balance the different criteria without letting anything get too behind... that's how I would do it anyway... Should we reorganize this into a table, then, for ease of import/export into spreadsheets?
168:
with what we have. No, I wasn't suggesting a committee-based system, just a more request-driven one. I thought you were the one saying it would be cumbersome for him to deal with the requests? Ah, I think I see what you're saying now. It's not that he doesn't have the time, you're just saying that it would be difficult to sort through/factor in all those inputs going into the TFA decision, if I understand correctly.
131:
pending on this page that I was the primary contributor to; this article became featured on _____; the 150th anniversary of this guy's birthday is on this date") which might be helpful for the decision. If Raul doesn't want to use this page, he doesn't have to... consensus hasn't crystallized as to whether we as an encyclopedia want to go this route...
54:. Given that there is a queue of 737 FAs waiting for TFA, an average of half a year is not a long time to wait. Obviously not everyone is going to get their way if there are competing requests but I think this is a good way of organizing and expressing preferences as to which date to put FAs on the main page.
338:
I'm trying to think of the most logical way to organize this page. It seems like if we could format this like an Excel spreadsheet, it would be really easy. Just have one column for the TFA request date; one for the article promotion date; one for the number of articles pending by that submitter; and
251:
Maybe what we can do is, at first just have the link and rationale, and then as time passes and the article enters the 60-day window before the requested TFA date, put the full TFA box. That will provide helpful info for deciding between competing requests as it gets close to time to add stuff to the
107:
Well, then I'll try to explain from the (hopefully) point of view of the person who has to read through all of this while scheduling the main page, and I'll pick your example. You put up a date for UNPA almost a year away. From your point of view, that makes sense, and it's a worthy request. Now,
167:
Yeah, ultimately the policy decisions are up to the community; if this page takes off and people make a demand for change, then I suppose it will have to go in that direction; on the other hand, if the page stagnates then that will pretty much be evidence that we need to try something else or stick
86:
I don't see what's wrong with 200 requests, if they're spread out across the year. Divided by 12 months, that's only 17 per month. Raul and/or his assistants can weed out the less valid requests and/or prioritize to pare it down to some reasonable number that allows for balancing date requests with
130:
Perhaps it's time to delegate some of those roles? TFA is still only one article per day, so it shouldn't be too overwhelming for someone to look at the requests and decide what to put in the queue. This page might even provide useful info for making the decision (e.g. "I have three other articles
245:
Good question - I suppose if we had hundreds, the page would get kinda crowded. Moreover, if the request is for several months out, the lead might become outdated by then. How about a link along with an explanation of the request? (On the other hand, if the subject is obscure, people might not
354:
I'm very much against granting special mainpage priviliges to articles just because they were written by the same user(s) and I disagree that time spent waiting on a request list should be anything but a marginal factor. Articles should be judged on their own merits in conjunction with their
145:
Well, Raul has already clearly said many times he isn't likely to use a page like this. Raul does a fine job of scheduling the main page, committee decisions would just stall the decisions and create another top-heavy process, and I don't see current reason to be concerned about Raul's time
182:
Right ... I'm pointing out that this page is not substantially different than the previous page, that required Raul to sort through hundreds of requests. It doesn't look that way yet, because it's not full, but if it fills up, it's right back to where we were months ago.
146:
commitments. I also don't think it would be useful to delegate a one-person task to a committee, particularly not when those same people could be using their time to do more necessary tasks on Wiki, like reviewing articles at FAC so we can actually
272:
While I think this is a good idea, I would further subdivide it into sections for each day of each month as I believe this will make it easier to look at and use, especially if it attracts noms from most of the FAs that have not yet appeared as
47:. I propose that as we create FAs, we start adding them to this list and if a lot of people do so, then it will be indicative of a forming consensus that this is a good system for requesting TFAs to supplement the existing system.
112:
want UNPA scheduled sooner. So, Raul would still has to sort through hundreds of requests each time he schedules the mainpage. And that's on top of all the other considerations that go into the job he does.
317:
and add it if you so desire. If we do holidays with movable dates, I think it should be accompanied by an explanation of how that date is figured, and/or the specific upcoming dates for the next few years.
108:
look at Raul's job. When this page gets to 200+ requests, this means whenever he's scheduling the mainpage, he would have to look at this page and sort through several hundred requests to realize that you
277:. I suggested something similar a while ago on the TFA requests talk page and I also wonder if it would be useful for a thirteenth category, namely dates that are movable. This could apply to things like
43:– instead of trying to get an article TFA'ed sooner, we're saying, Hold off on TFA'ing this article until this relevant anniversary comes up. This is in accordance with the spirit of the comment left at
361:
69:
This will quickly get right back to the 200 requests Raul has repeatedly said he doesn't want. How about a mechanism to limit this, by finding a way to remove less valid requests?
195:
177:
162:
140:
125:
96:
81:
261:
39:. This is essentially grassroots activism for changing the TFA process, as opposed to waiting for a change to be imposed from above. Basically, what we are doing is the reverse of
327:
150:
more featured content. But that's just my bias :-) On the other hand, Raul has said he does take nominator desires into consideration, so maybe he can use this page somehow.
51:
32:
63:
44:
348:
308:
239:
40:
17:
232:
36:
26:
344:
323:
257:
191:
173:
158:
136:
121:
92:
77:
59:
246:
immediately realize what it's about without a TFA box; they would have to click on the link.)
226:
333:
355:
appropriateness for a certain date. The spreadsheet format seems like a good idea, though.
8:
298:
267:
358:
340:
319:
253:
216:
Should a TFA box that has a lead and a picture be added or just a link and reason? –
184:
169:
151:
132:
114:
88:
70:
55:
218:
314:
294:
211:
274:
290:
35:, I think we should go ahead and create a long range TFA request page. See
33:
Wikipedia_talk:Today's_featured_article/requests#Suggestions_for_TFA
282:
286:
87:
other waiting articles that don't have obvious date linkages.
52:
Knowledge:Featured_articles_that_haven't_been_on_the_Main_Page
45:
Wikipedia_talk:Today's_featured_article/requests#The_Raven.3F
278:
293:, and anything that does not have a fixed date.
18:Knowledge talk:Today's featured article
41:Knowledge:Today's featured article/requests
14:
23:
31:In reference to the discussion at
24:
373:
37:Knowledge:Long range TFA requests
13:
1:
349:00:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
328:18:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
309:17:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
262:03:41, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
240:03:34, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
196:16:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
178:16:25, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
163:16:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
141:16:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
126:14:55, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
97:04:38, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
82:04:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
64:03:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
362:07:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
7:
10:
378:
27:TFA request reform
305:
238:
369:
303:
235:
229:
224:
221:
188:
155:
118:
74:
377:
376:
372:
371:
370:
368:
367:
366:
336:
302:
270:
233:
227:
219:
214:
186:
153:
116:
72:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
375:
365:
364:
356:
335:
332:
331:
330:
299:
269:
266:
265:
264:
248:
247:
213:
210:
209:
208:
207:
206:
205:
204:
203:
202:
201:
200:
199:
198:
102:
101:
100:
99:
28:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
374:
363:
360:
357:
353:
352:
351:
350:
346:
342:
329:
325:
321:
316:
313:
312:
311:
310:
307:
306:
296:
292:
288:
284:
280:
276:
263:
259:
255:
250:
249:
244:
243:
242:
241:
237:
236:
230:
223:
222:
197:
193:
189:
181:
180:
179:
175:
171:
166:
165:
164:
160:
156:
149:
144:
143:
142:
138:
134:
129:
128:
127:
123:
119:
111:
106:
105:
104:
103:
98:
94:
90:
85:
84:
83:
79:
75:
68:
67:
66:
65:
61:
57:
53:
48:
46:
42:
38:
34:
19:
341:Sarsaparilla
337:
334:Organization
320:Sarsaparilla
297:
291:Thanksgiving
271:
254:Sarsaparilla
225:
217:
215:
170:Sarsaparilla
147:
133:Sarsaparilla
109:
89:Sarsaparilla
56:Sarsaparilla
49:
30:
268:Suggestions
220:thedemonhog
301:<: -->
295:Ruhrfisch
50:See also
283:Passover
148:generate
315:Be bold
252:queue.
187:Georgia
154:Georgia
117:Georgia
73:Georgia
287:Easter
212:How-to
359:Peter
300:: -->
234:edits
185:Sandy
152:Sandy
115:Sandy
110:don't
71:Sandy
16:<
345:talk
324:talk
258:talk
228:talk
192:Talk
174:talk
159:Talk
137:talk
122:Talk
93:talk
78:Talk
60:talk
279:Eid
275:TFA
347:)
326:)
289:,
285:,
281:,
260:)
231:•
194:)
176:)
161:)
139:)
124:)
95:)
80:)
62:)
343:(
322:(
304:°
256:(
190:(
172:(
157:(
135:(
120:(
91:(
76:(
58:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.