HRWiki:Featured Article Selection

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(→HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 18 (May 3-9))
(autoreplace: A Death-Defying Decemberween → A Death Defying Decemberween)
 
(includes 974 intermediate revisions)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
<div style="background-color: #CCFFCC; border: 1px solid #009900; margin: 0.5em; padding: 0.5em; text-align:center">
 +
'''[[HRWiki:Featured article nominations|Nominations]] for [[HRWiki:featured articles|Featured article]] selection are closed.  This is an archive. Please do not add discussion here.'''
 +
</div>
{{shortcut|FAS||[[FAS]]}}
{{shortcut|FAS||[[FAS]]}}
-
Welcome to '''[[HRWiki:Featured articles|featured article]] selection'''. Please help us choose and create write-ups for our best, most interesting, or otherwise noteworthy articles to appear on the [[main page]]. For ideas, check out the [[HRWiki:Featured Article Nominations|featured article nominations]].
+
 
 +
[[Category:HRWiki History|{{PAGENAME}}]]
 +
 
 +
Welcome to '''[[HRWiki:Featured articles|featured article]] selection'''. Please help us choose and create write-ups for our best, most interesting, or otherwise noteworthy articles to appear on the [[main page]]. For ideas, check out the [[HRWiki:Featured Article Nominations|featured article nominations]]. For drafts, see [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Drafts|this page]].  
==Checklist==
==Checklist==
-
{{talkchecklist|Checklist for new Featured Article:|noeditsection=true}}
+
{{talkchecklist|Checklist for new Featured Article:|noeditsection=true|inactive=true}}
*Make sure the article is proof-read up to a high standard.
*Make sure the article is proof-read up to a high standard.
*At 0000 [[Wikipedia:Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]] Monday, [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Main_Page&action=purge purge the main page cache].
*At 0000 [[Wikipedia:Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]] Monday, [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Main_Page&action=purge purge the main page cache].
-
*[[HRWiki:Protected page|Protect]] and add {{[[Template:mprotected|mprotected]]}} to the new image; Unprotect and remove {{[[Template:mprotected|mprotected]]}} from old image.
+
*[[HRWiki:Protected page|Protect]] and add {{[[Template:mprotected|mprotected]]}} to the new image; unprotect and remove {{[[Template:mprotected|mprotected]]}} from old image.
-
*Semi-protect the live FA write-up; Unprotect the old FA write-up.
+
*Semi-protect the live FA write-up; unprotect the old FA write-up.
*Add {{[[Template:featuredarticle|featuredarticle]]}} to FA's talk page.
*Add {{[[Template:featuredarticle|featuredarticle]]}} to FA's talk page.
*Update [[HRWiki:Featured Article Nominations]] with descriptive edit summary &mdash; see [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_Article_Nominations&action=history history].
*Update [[HRWiki:Featured Article Nominations]] with descriptive edit summary &mdash; see [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_Article_Nominations&action=history history].
*Update [[HRWiki:Featured articles]] with descriptive edit summary &mdash; see [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_articles&action=history history].
*Update [[HRWiki:Featured articles]] with descriptive edit summary &mdash; see [http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_articles&action=history history].
-
|}<br/>
+
|}<br/>  
==Discussion archives==
==Discussion archives==
-
<center>[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/General Discussion|Other Discussion]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2005 Weeks 26-29|2005, Weeks 26-29]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2005 Weeks 30-39|2005, Weeks 30-39]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2005 Weeks 40-49|2005, Weeks 40-52]]
+
<center>
 +
{| {{standardtable}}
 +
! Year !! Weeks 1-10 !! Weeks 11-20 !! Weeks 21-30 !! Weeks 31-40 !! Weeks 41-52
 +
|-
 +
| 2005
 +
|
 +
|
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2005 Weeks 26-29|2005, Weeks 26-29]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2005 Weeks 30-39|2005, Weeks 30-39]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2005 Weeks 40-49|2005, Weeks 40-52]]
 +
|-
 +
| 2006
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2006 Weeks 1-10 |2006, Weeks 1-10]] 
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2006 Weeks 11-20|2006, Weeks 11-20]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2006 Weeks 21-30|2006, Weeks 21-30]]  
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2006 Weeks 31-40|2006, Weeks 31-40]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2006 Weeks 41-52|2006, Weeks 41-52]]
 +
|-
 +
| 2007
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2007 Weeks 1-10 |2007, Weeks 1-10]] 
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2007 Weeks 11-20|2007, Weeks 11-20]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2007 Weeks 21-30|2007, Weeks 21-30]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2007 Weeks 31-40|2007, Weeks 31-40]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2007 Weeks 41-52|2007, Weeks 41-52]]  
 +
|-
 +
| 2008
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 1-10 |2008, Weeks 1-10]] 
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 11-20|2008, Weeks 11-20]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 21-30|2008, Weeks 21-30]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 31-40|2008, Weeks 31-40]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 41-52|2008, Weeks 41-52]]
 +
|-
 +
| 2009
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2009 Weeks 1-10 |2009, Weeks 1-10]] 
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2009 Weeks 11-20|2009, Weeks 11-20]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2009 Weeks 21-30|2009, Weeks 21-30]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2009 Weeks 31-40|2009, Weeks 31-40]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2009 Weeks 41-53|2009, Weeks 41-53]]
 +
|-
 +
| 2010
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2010 Weeks 1-10 |2010, Weeks 1-10]] 
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2010 Weeks 11-20|2010, Weeks 11-20]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2010 Weeks 21-30|2010, Weeks 21-30]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2010 Weeks 31-40|2010, Weeks 31-40]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2010 Weeks 41-52|2010, Weeks 41-52]]
 +
|-
 +
| 2011
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2011 Weeks 1-10 |2011, Weeks 1-10]] 
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2011 Weeks 11-20|2011, Weeks 11-20]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2011 Weeks 21-30|2011, Weeks 21-30]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2011 Weeks 31-40|2011, Weeks 31-40]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2011 Weeks 41-52|2011, Weeks 41-52]]
 +
|-
 +
| 2012
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2012 Weeks 1-10 |2012, Weeks 1-10]] 
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2012 Weeks 11-20|2012, Weeks 11-20]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2012 Weeks 21-30|2012, Weeks 21-30]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2012 Weeks 31-40|2012, Weeks 31-40]]
 +
| [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2012 Weeks 41-52|2012, Weeks 41-52]]
 +
|}
-
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2006 Weeks 1-10|2006, Weeks 1-10]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2006 Weeks 11-20|2006, Weeks 11-20]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2006 Weeks 21-30|2006, Weeks 21-30]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2006 Weeks 31-40|2006, Weeks 31-40]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2006 Weeks 41-52|2006, Weeks 41-52]]
 
-
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2007 Weeks 1-10|2007, Weeks 1-10]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2007 Weeks 11-20|2007, Weeks 11-20]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2007 Weeks 21-30|2007, Weeks 21-30]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2007 Weeks 31-40|2007, Weeks 31-40]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2007 Weeks 41-52|2007, Weeks 41-52]]
+
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/General Discussion|Other Discussion]] |
 +
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Stalled Discussions Archive 1|Stalled Discussions Archive 1]] |
 +
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Stalled Discussions Archive 2|Stalled Discussions Archive 2]]
 +
</center>
-
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 1-10|2008, Weeks 1-10]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 11-20|2008, Weeks 11-20]] |
+
==Featured Article Queue==
-
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 21-30|2008, Weeks 21-30]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 31-40|2008, Weeks 31-40]] | [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2008 Weeks 41-52|2008, Weeks 41-52]]
+
{| {{standardtable}}
 +
! Week !! Article !! Discussion
 +
{{FA queue| 3 Dec 2012 |2-Part Episode: Part 1}}
 +
{{FA queue|10 Dec 2012 |2-Part Episode: Part 2}}
 +
{{FA queue|17 Dec 2012 |Decemberween in July Dailies|alternatediscussion=yes|decision=Decemberween in July}}
 +
{{FA queue|24 Dec 2012 |The Last Featured Article|alternatediscussion=yes|decision=A Death Defying Decemberween}}
 +
|}
-
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2009 Weeks 1-10|2009, Weeks 1-10]] |
+
===Redirects===
-
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2009 Weeks 11-20|2009, Weeks 11-20]] |
+
This is a placeholder topic for 5-year redirects.  Due to overall decreased activity, FAs are now being reused more often.  The common practice has become to redirect to the FA exactly 5 years prior to the current FA.  When an article is re-used, mark it in the following manner:
-
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2009 Weeks 21-30|2009, Weeks 21-30]] |
+
<pre>
-
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2009 Weeks 31-40|2009, Weeks 31-40]] |
+
{{FA queue|<date>|Redirects|alternatediscussion=yes|decision=<article name>}}
-
[[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection/Discussion Archive 2009 Weeks 41-53|2009, Weeks 41-53]]
+
</pre>
 +
Example:
 +
<pre>
 +
{{FA queue|15 Aug 2011 |Redirects|alternatediscussion=yes|decision=1-Up}}
 +
</pre>
-
[[HRWiki:Featured_Article_Selection/Discussion_Archive_2010_Weeks_1-10|2010, Weeks 1-10]] |
+
Please keep this discussion in the FA page at all times, but do copy it to archive pages as well.
-
[[HRWiki:Featured_Article_Selection/Discussion_Archive_2010_Weeks_11-20|2010, Weeks 11-20]]
+
-
</center>
+
==Article discussions==
==Article discussions==
-
===[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 17]] (Apr 26-May 2)===
 
-
For this week, how about something "live"? I'm thinking the [[SXSW Panel - 14 Mar 2005|the SXSW Panel from March 14, 2005]]. Combine the intro with a summary of the script and it would work, I think. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 07:41, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:Certainly would be good to something real-world. Yeah, I think that would work, from what I can see in the article. Maybe might be good to prepare the writeup a bit early so we can be sure it works (note: not saying right now. Just sometime as it gets closer.) {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 07:49, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::I am not disagreeing with that article at all; in fact, I think that it would be great to do something real-life, seeing as how we haven't in a while. But, perhaps out of my silliness and stupidity, I feel that [[The Couch]] should be featured for this specific week. {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 18:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::Good idea. [[The Couch]]. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 10:44, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::What about the couch? --[[User:Essence of Ghost Water|Essence of Ghost Water]] 12:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::::Glad you asked. First off, it is a pretty decent article, but for what inspired me to nominate it would be Opti's post [[HRWiki_talk:Featured_Article_Selection#Holiday_articles|here.]] Call me stupid, but since Opti never recommended an article, and he doesn't come here often nowadays, The Couch ''is'' in his sig. {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 19:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::::I think The Couch would be great to have on the front page for a while... Not only is it a well-written artical, it also makes the Main Page more appealing and comfy! (no, but seriously it is a great article) {{User:Nova Scotia/sig}} 19:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::::::So what should be done for today? [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 15:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::::::The Couch would make an excellent FA; let's go with that. {{User:Wbwolf/sig}} 18:15, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
I am soooo glad [[the couch]] got picked for this week!  What a good choice!  I only just remembered [http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=HRWiki_talk:Featured_Article_Selection&diff=prev&oldid=572218 this edit of mine] from 2008, and I couldn't have picked a better article myself!  =]  {{User:OptimisticFool/sig}} 02:37, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 
-
===[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 18]] (May 3-9)===
+
== Discussions of Articles Needing Expansion ==
-
Since it's been a while since our last set of dailies, how about Dangeresque characters, as MHarrington has previously suggested? {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 07:43, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
+
:''Discussions in this section regard articles that, per consensus, require further expansion of the article itself before the article should be featured.''
-
:Good idea. But I have two other daily ideas:
+
-
*Stuff in [[Old Flash Stuff]] (we can start off with Old Flash Stuff, then do six of the nine items in OFS. I'm wondering which three items will have to miss out; those three will probably need to be the three most important ones so they can have their own week.)
+
==Stalled Discussions==
-
*Main Pages (we can do six main Main Pages, then one of the secret ones. Sometime in the future, we will probably do three more MP dailies in this format. However, this means that one MP will get a week to itself; as [[Main Page 22]] seems to be the most important Main Page, it will probably be the one.)
+
:''Discussions in this section regard articles that, due to lack of consensus or consensus against, are not ready to be featured at this time. ''
-
:[[User:RickTommy|RickTommy]] 11:40, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
+
==General discussion==
-
::Are you suggesting these ideas for this week or just sometime in the future? If the former, I really think the Dangeresque ones should take priority since they were suggested a while ago. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 11:45, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::If we're going to do the Dangeresque characters for a dailies set, how about this (as per what has been said repeatedly):
+
-
:::*Monday: [[Dangeresque (character)|Dangeresque]]
+
-
:::*Tuesday: [[Dangeresque Too]]
+
-
:::*Wednesday: [[Renaldo]]
+
-
:::*Thursday: [[Cutesy Buttons]]
+
-
:::*Friday: [[Perducci]]
+
-
:::*Saturday: [[Killingyouguy]]
+
-
:::*Sunday: [[Baron Darin Diamonocle]]
+
-
:::That seems a bit solid, don't you think? [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 03:08, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::Yes, but maybe with one of them replaced with [[The Stunt Double]]. [[User:RickTommy|RickTommy]] [[User talk:RickTommy|talk]] [[Image:slang.PNG|50px]] 08:22, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::No, I think it's pretty solid how it is right now. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 05:11, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::I would really like to have [[Sultry Buttons]] included. She's an easily overlooked character because she's only in SBCG4AP (though she plays a critical role in it), and I think it's good for us to emphasize these lesser-known ones. And no, I don't think she should be substituted for Cutesy, as including them both (preferably consecutively, even) emphasizes the unclear relationship between the two. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 07:35, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::What if we fleetingly mentioned Sultry in Cutesy's article? [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 05:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::I think the list we have now is fine! But we should stick with the characters in the [[stunt double|toon]][[dangeresque 3|s]] ''and'' the [[Dangeresque 3: The Criminal Projective|game]][[Dangeresque Roomisode 1: Behind the Dangerdesque|s]].So I say no Sultry Buttons {{User:Wasd98/sig}} 18:43, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::And I say otherwise. The very interest of Sultry Buttons is eliminated if she's but a footnote in Cutesy's bio. She deserves a full day on the main page. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 10:51, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::::I agree with Heinsterm Fauler. --[[User:Essence of Ghost Water|Essence of Ghost Water]] 12:36, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::::No way! I'd rather do the Stunt Double, as he's the Dangeresque series' raison d'etre. Anyway, can we move the dailies to next week, and do [[A Mother's Day Message]] instead, since it's Mother's Day? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 08:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::::::Please, RickTommy, let's be nicer in how we discuss. It's true, though; we really do have an overabundance of Dangeresque characters. If only we could have a ten-day week at some point in which to do them all.
+
-
::::::::::::If we move this ahead a week, we'd be shoving Huudge or Sterrance off the list until later. Since there's no real consensus there, that could be done, but I'm not too sure we should. I also think we've been trying a little too hard of late to have seasonally themed FAs and that we could lighten up on that a bit. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 09:02, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::::::A Mother's Day Message would be a good idea, but Mother's Day is on the 9th, and that's the last day it would even be up. I want to go with Dangeresque, but the Mothers Day toon is a good idea too... {{User:Nova Scotia/sig}} 19:29, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:First off: while celebrating Mother's day is not a bad idea, I think we're more invested in taking the Dangeresque route and since it's coming up soon, we should finalize preparations for those dailies.  We can always feature [[A Mother's Day Message]] next week (even if it's a day late) or shelve it till next year since we only have one Mother's day toon to feature and we celebrate Mother's day every year.
+
-
:Now, on to Dangeresque: I think the current proposed order is pretty good. However, given the importance of both [[Sultry Buttons]] and [[Cutesy Buttons]], why not feature them both on the same day? It's the perfect place to lampshade the ambiguity between the two characters.  Moreover, this could be moved to then end on Sunday as part of a "special [[Wikipedia:Jeopardy|daily double]] [[Wikipedia:Double feature|feature]]" :).  The lineup would then be as follows:
+
-
::*Monday: [[Dangeresque (character)|Dangeresque]]
+
-
::*Tuesday: [[Dangeresque Too]]
+
-
::*Wednesday: [[Renaldo]]
+
-
::*Thursday: [[Perducci]]
+
-
::*Friday: [[Killingyouguy]]
+
-
::*Saturday: [[Baron Darin Diamonocle]]
+
-
::*Sunday: [[Cutesy Buttons]] and [[Sultry Buttons]]
+
-
:What do you guys think? How does that look? --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 17:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::I think we should put the Buttons characters on Thursday and push the other characters down by one day. And we should focus primarily on Cutesy, though we could fleetingly mention Sultry in the description. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 20:01, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::Why do you so insist on a fleeting mention of Sultry? Are you listening to anyone else's ideas at all? Incidentally, though I hadn't thought of it until Stux mentioned it, the idea of simultaneous featured articles is not unprecedented: On the day of the 2008 US Presidential Election, Wikipedia featured both Barack Obama and John McCain (and even randomized the order so as not to give preference to one or the other). I think that'd be an interesting idea to pursue. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 23:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::That's a great idea, Heimstern. But again, what about the Stunt Double? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 02:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::The Stunt Double is indeed important to the origins of the Dangeresque franchise, but his article is a tad shorter than most. More important is the reason it's shorter: He's not really much of a character. Him showing up to get beaten up, smashed, even diamond'd is funny, but doesn't leave much character for him. That's why, unless we're able to extend this week by adding Whackday, Spleenday, Rootenskahootenday and Schnozday (which would actually be a fun idea), I would prefer to exclude the Stunt Double in favour of the others above. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 08:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::It seems like we have more than double the number of [[:Category:Dangeresque Characters|Dangeresque characters]] than we have days in the week. Would it be so crazy for completion's sake to do TWO weeks worth of these dailies, lumping together a few sets of characters to make them all fit into 14 days and shift all the suggestions for the following weeks down by one? {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 09:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::And now, I choose to recite a list:
+
-
:::::::#[[Dangeresque (character)|Dangeresque]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Dangeresque Too]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Renaldo]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Perducci]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Killingyouguy]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Cutesy Buttons]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Hot Tub]] and [[The Stunt Double]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Uzi Bazooka]] and [[Baron Darin Diamonocle]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Professor Experimento]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Sultry Buttons]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Szechuan Steve]] and [[Craig]]
+
-
:::::::#[[Dadgeresque]] and [[Kidnapping Victim]]
+
-
:::::::#[[The Informant]]
+
-
:::::::#[[The Monster]]
+
-
:::::::{{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 10:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::I think some are too short to merit an article appearance. And I think it's fine just to do a week of all the main characters. This is why I think Cutesy should be the main point of one article and Sultry could appear in Cutesy's article. Sultry only appeared in Dangeresque 3, whereas Cutesy appeared more often. This is why I've thought that Sultry should appear only fleetingly, if at all. I think we should still do the week idea I've thought of earlier. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 20:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::I really like Heimstern's idea of extending the week with several fake days. But the "two whole weeks" idea is pretty good too. {{User:Nova Scotia/sig}} 20:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::::Oh, these ARE fake days... I figure we call the second sunday "twelvesday", monday "flinglesday", tuesday... alright seriously... MHarrington, I don't appreciate being summarily shot down. How about keeping an open mind to other people's ideas? Further, part of the point of doing dailies is to cover shorter articles that work as part of a group, but wouldn't merit a whole week to themselves. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 20:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::::The Rootenskahootenday idea wasn't mine, incidentally. I got that from DorianGray, who I think told me he got it from some commercial or something. Given that it's not practical, though, I'm going to support Deffy's suggestion. I really think we have too many characters for a single week. MHarrington, I know you're convinced of giving Sultry but a fleeting mention, but I've already expressed my own disagreement, and I'm clearly not the only one who wants additional characters covered. I agree with Deffy that you should listen more to what others are interested in, as you seem single-mindedly focused on doing it how you want to. Some of the characters on the list are in fact too short, even for a daily feature, which is why we've suggested the doubleheader idea. I know, this is new, but if we never try new things, we'll never get any innovation. (Note: I may want to tweak the list a little, but I'm basically supportive of the idea.) {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 23:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::::::I'm really liking Deffy's two-week daily double-header idea.  I hadn't realized Dangeresque's character ensemble was so rich and varied.  Since we can't fit all the characters into one week, this would be the perfect way to showcase them :).  A few things: even though I haven't played the game, Sultry's article has just as much content as Cutesy's and so it seems that they are of relatively equal importance; therefore, I'd certainly would like to see them featured separately.  The feature order could be tweaked a little too: 'major' characters should be spread across the two weeks a little more.  We don't want to clump all the minor characters to the end of the 2nd week.  Other than that, I like it! It looks good! I'm geeked! :) <small>Now to bed, tomorrow's another long work day :S</small> Good night everybody! --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 03:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::::::::I agree with what Stux said. If we went with two whole weeks, we would have to work out who should go where, since we don't want to crowd all the major characters on one said and the minor on the other. Plus, we'd be doing some things we've never done before, like having more than one article in one day. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 17:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::::::::You do realize Stux said he's in support of the two weeks idea, right? {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 23:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:Outdenting to get back to talking about the list and suggest a tweak: I think both Uzi Bazooka and Diamonocle could sustain their own days, whereas I'm not so sure The Informant can. How about combining him with The Monster and giving Uzi and Diamonocle their own days? {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 23:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::Maybe we could do that. I think we should definitely show Diamonocle first, then Uzi. Actually, I just don't think we should be doing two whole weeks worth of characters, at least not all at once. It would probably get real old real fast for some people out there. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 06:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::I agree with Stux and Heim. I pretty much threw that list together real quick to give a vague idea of how it could be done. I support any tweaks to it that will make it better. Squish it, (danger)skew it, turn it all around for all I care. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 08:37, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::MHarrington, I do understand your concerns about it getting a little old, and I don't think we should do this often. But in this case, I think it's merited as a compromise between various people wanting certain characters featured and as a recognition that we've got lots to choose from, and it hardly seems fair to give some of them the shaft (and it's unlikely we'll ever feature any more Dangeresque characters after this, so for each one, it's now or never, pretty much). I do think we should probably not do this again, or if we do, not for a very long time. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 08:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::Oh man, with <s>32</s> 40 comments (not counting this one), this has turned out to be the <s>second-</s>longest discussion for a particular week in FA. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 00:13, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::I don't think that that has to do with anything in this discussion. If anything, it shows that the wiki is getting more involved in things like this. Anydangway, my two cents. I think that The Informant And The Monster should come immediately after Hot Tub and The Stunt Double, Since they're all played by Double S. {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 00:34, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:::::::We need to organize the listing of characters. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 06:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::::::::I just started the list, but not finished it. Any help would be greatly appreciated. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 19:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
+
-
:Guys:  splitting the suggestions up would be problematic.  It would be best to arrive at a single list first then go with that list.  We can use the links below to then write the articles.  One thing's for sure, [[Dangeresque (character)]] will be featured first, but I'd like to balance things out a little bit among the two weeks.  I will submit a formal list shortly. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 01:19, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
+
-
::Okay, so here is my suggested order:
+
-
:::''[[#2-week FAS order|Click here]] to see.''  I tried to balance primary characters with minor characters and I also added the missing character from the {{tl|Dangeresque}} template ([[The Chief]]).  Also, I made a subsection of the list so that we just have one list and we move things around in-place (within reason) without having a plethora of lists.  Suggestions for moves can continue on this thread.  I'd say that the list should be finalized no later than tomorrow evening.  Though the sooner, the better.  We can start making writeups on a separate section within this thread or their target week templates since we can just move the text around.  The text should only be moved when we're ready to publish though. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 02:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
+
-
====2-week FAS order====
+
-
::#[[Dangeresque (character)|Dangeresque]] - ''this one is 99% set in stone''
+
-
::#[[Renaldo]]
+
-
::#[[Killingyouguy]]
+
-
::#[[Cutesy Buttons]]
+
-
::#[[The Chief]] and [[Uzi Bazooka]]
+
-
::#[[Perducci]]
+
-
::#[[Hot Tub]] and [[The Stunt Double]]
+
-
::#[[Dangeresque Too]] (to start off "week too")
+
-
::#[[The Informant]] and  [[The Monster]]
+
-
::#[[Professor Experimento]]
+
-
::#[[Sultry Buttons]]
+
-
::#[[Szechuan Steve]] and [[Craig]]
+
-
::#[[Dadgeresque]] and [[Kidnapping Victim]]
+
-
::# [[Baron Darin Diamonocle]]
+
-
:This seems about right to me. Renaldo second as the traditional sidekick (after all, Dangeresque Too didn't appear until the second installment in the franchise), then mix up some major and minor characters. Dangeresque Too to start Week Too is a nice touch, too. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 02:25, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
::You forgot one character: [[Istanbul]].
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 18, day 1]]====
 
-
For today, [[Dangeresque (character)|Dangeresque]]. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 19:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 18, day 2]]====
 
-
For today, [[Dangeresque Too]]. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 19:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:Actually I would like to push this further down.
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 18, day 3]]====
 
-
For today, [[Renaldo]]. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 19:22, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 18, day 4]]====
 
-
[[Cutesy Buttons]], just to cover the 4 main characters (in my opinion) first. {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 19:25, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 18, day 5]]====
 
-
[[Perducci]]. A few more main characters to round out. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 19:34, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 18, day 6]]====
 
-
[[Killingyouguy]]. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 19:34, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
====[[HRwiki:Featured article for 2010, week 18, day 0]]====
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 19, day 1]]====
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 19, day 2]]====
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 19, day 3]]====
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 19, day 4]]====
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 19, day 5]]====
 
-
 
-
====[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 19, day 6]]====
 
-
 
-
====[[HRwiki:Featured article for 2010, week 19, day 0]]====
 
-
 
-
===[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 19]] (May 10-16)===
 
-
How about a Limozeen character - [[Larry Palaroncini|Larry]], perhaps? [[User:RickTommy|RickTommy]] 07:09, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:It's been, like, nine or ten weeks since the [[best thing]] email was articled, so I don't know. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 07:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::Yeah, I think waiting for a bit before featuring Larry would be for the best. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 04:13, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 
-
How about [[Da Huuuuuudge]]? {{User:Power Pie/sig}}
 
-
:How about [[Sterrance]] instead? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 11:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::Please discuss; don't just throw out ideas without discussing what others have already said. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 11:19, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::Da Huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuudge is a better choice than Sterrance. --[[User:Essence of Ghost Water|Essence of Ghost Water]] 12:22, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::Umm, Sterrance is much more important, as he (?) has appeared in more than twice as many toons as Da Huuuuuuuudge has. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 08:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::::I'm down with [[Da Huuuuuudge]], it's slightly off-beat which is cool and emphasizes TBC's weird humor. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 18:22, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::::I think we should do Sterrance first before we do Da Huuuuuuuudge. We should do both soon, though. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 20:07, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::::::Reasons why, everyone. So far, I've only seen reasons from RickTommy and Stux. This is not discussion; it's turning into the town meeting from [[unnatural]]. (And yes, I do think we should kill it.) {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 23:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::::::Sterrance, because it was the one SB claimed to have gotten right. And it appeared more often than Da Huuuuuuuudge. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 06:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:'''''Per the [[##HRWiki:Featured_article_for_2010.2C_week_18_.28May_3-9.29|above discussion]], this week's discussion has been shelved.  Please continue regular discussion for the following weeks. Thanks!'''''
 
-
::Actually, let me take this opportunity to ask: what should we do for the following weeks?  Simply skip the suggestions made for this week or push everything down 1 week? (Or maybe even push everything down until [[##HRWiki:Featured_article_for_2010.2C_week_21_.28May_24-30.29|this point]] since no solid discussion has emerged that week? --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 01:19, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
===[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 20]] (May 17-23)===
 
-
Five years since the first featured article! Maybe we should do something special to mark the occasion? [[User:RickTommy|RickTommy]] 07:09, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:Sorry, I can't really think of anything. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 05:12, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::I was thinking maybe [[Index Page]], the most imprtant page on the site (not really, but it's often the first page that one looks at on the site), or an early toon like [[Pom Pom Too]], or one of the earliest articles to be suggested as a featured article: [[Schenactady Crispies]], or, as has been mentioned a couple of times not long ago: [[homestarrunner.com]]. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 00:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::I don't know. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 18:58, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::So, the new main page did not appear until {{pl|l=http://hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=next&oldid=86323 May 23, 2005}} which was the first day of [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 21|week 21]] on 2005 (see [[Wikipedia:ISO_week_date|ISO_week_date]]). I see that this year that date falls on Week 20 (after getting this wrong {{pl|l=http://hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_Article_Selection&diff=700126&oldid=700125&rcid=660875 a couple}} {{pl|l=http://hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_Article_Selection&diff=700128&oldid=700127&rcid=660877 of times}}). If it's that important, we can just [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 21|re-feature]] [[Homestar Runner (body of work)|Homestar Runner]] as a one-time retro-feauture with a short and subtle 1-line message saying that we've been doing 5 years of FAs.  For some reason I feel it would be nice to do this on week 21 rather than week 20 (and match the week numbers).  Otherwise, I think we should really treat this like any other FA week.  Looking at the oft-ignored [[HRWiki:Featured_Article_Nominations|nominations page]] I see that we have never featured [[Parsnips A-Plenty]] and it might be due for a feature. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 18:14, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::::I suggest [[Museum]]. It just seem fitting for 5 years, I guess it's the title. {{User:Nova Scotia/sig}} 20:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::::Look before you leap. [[Museum]] ''has'' [[HRWiki:Featured_articles/Archive_3#Week_29.2C_2006.2C_Day_7|been featured]] already. {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 21:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::::::I don't think the anniversary of FAs is significant enough to merit an article celebrating it. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 23:32, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::::::Maybe not, but still, can we do any of the ideas that either I or Stux suggested? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 11:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
===[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 21]] (May 24-30)===
 
-
[[Missy Palmer]]? [[User:RickTommy|RickTommy]] [[User talk:RickTommy|talk]] [[Image:slang.PNG|50px]] 01:52, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:Missy Palmer's important to H*R, but that article's seriously lacking in content. At present, it wouldn't work for a weeklong feature. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 07:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
===[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 22]] (May 31-Jun 6)===
 
-
How about a Videlectrix game? We have available: [[Secret Collect]], [[Rhino Feeder]], [[Thy Dungeonman]], [[Population: Tire]], [[Pigs on Head]], [[Thy Dungeonman 2]], [[50K Racewalker]], [[Duck Guardian One]], and [[Thy Dungeonman 3]]. [[User:RickTommy|RickTommy]] [[User talk:RickTommy|talk]] [[Image:slang.PNG|50px]] 01:52, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:Based on the ones listed here, I would say [[Population: Tire]] is probably the best bet. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 05:10, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::I'd pick one of the Thy Dungeonman games.
 
-
:::Either Pop Tire or a Dungeonman game would probably be good choices. Can't decide which I prefer at this point. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 08:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
===[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 23]] (Jun 7-13)===
 
-
For this week, how about the [[jibblies]]? [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 05:16, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
===[[HRWiki:Featured article for 2010, week 24]] (Jun 14-20)===
 
-
For this week, how about [[Strong Bad's Computer Malfunctioning]]? We could have the intro and all the little descriptions after it, sort of like [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2009, week 26|that article on characters lacking certain body parts]]. [[User:MHarrington|MHarrington]] 18:45, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
===[[HRwiki:Featured article for 2010, week 25]] (Jun 21-27)===
 
-
How about [[The Reddest Radish]]? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 00:20, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:While this is (once again) over the limit of ten, there doesn't seem to be a clear consensus in some of the nominations above. Why not contribute your opinion there first instead of adding more weeks? {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 00:53, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
===[[HRwiki:Featured article for 2010, week 26]] (Jun 28-Jul 4)===
 
-
[[Cardboard Marzipan]]? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 10:44, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:What did the man say to you above? --[[User:Essence of Ghost Water|Essence of Ghost Water]] 12:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::At this point, we're exactly 10 weeks out, so he's OK this time. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 12:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
:::Oh. Anyhow, Cardboard Mazipan is a good choice. It's certainly better than [[Cardboard Homestar]]. --[[User:Essence of Ghost Water|Essence of Ghost Water]] 12:24, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
::::While Heim's right and he's ok within the 10-week limit, [[User:RickTommy|RickTommy]], why don't you give others a chance to make initial suggestions during the new few FA weeks for a change?  There is no need to rush the FA process and you should give others a chance to weigh in their suggestions without them feeling rushed or like they need to follow a specific topic.  Thanks. --[[User:Stux|Stux]] 18:08, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
===[[HRwiki:Featured article for 2010, week 27]] (Jul 5-11)===
 
-
[[New Paper]]? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 02:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 
-
 
-
==General discussion==
 
===Daily Featured Blocks (On Occasion)===
===Daily Featured Blocks (On Occasion)===
In order to make daily featured articles for one week, create pages like:
In order to make daily featured articles for one week, create pages like:

Current revision as of 22:13, 4 November 2022

Nominations for Featured article selection are closed. This is an archive. Please do not add discussion here.

Shortcuts:
HRW:FAS
FAS

Welcome to featured article selection. Please help us choose and create write-ups for our best, most interesting, or otherwise noteworthy articles to appear on the main page. For ideas, check out the featured article nominations. For drafts, see this page.

Contents

[edit] Checklist

Checklist for new Featured Article:(INACTIVE)

[edit] Discussion archives

Year Weeks 1-10 Weeks 11-20 Weeks 21-30 Weeks 31-40 Weeks 41-52
2005 2005, Weeks 26-29 2005, Weeks 30-39 2005, Weeks 40-52
2006 2006, Weeks 1-10 2006, Weeks 11-20 2006, Weeks 21-30 2006, Weeks 31-40 2006, Weeks 41-52
2007 2007, Weeks 1-10 2007, Weeks 11-20 2007, Weeks 21-30 2007, Weeks 31-40 2007, Weeks 41-52
2008 2008, Weeks 1-10 2008, Weeks 11-20 2008, Weeks 21-30 2008, Weeks 31-40 2008, Weeks 41-52
2009 2009, Weeks 1-10 2009, Weeks 11-20 2009, Weeks 21-30 2009, Weeks 31-40 2009, Weeks 41-53
2010 2010, Weeks 1-10 2010, Weeks 11-20 2010, Weeks 21-30 2010, Weeks 31-40 2010, Weeks 41-52
2011 2011, Weeks 1-10 2011, Weeks 11-20 2011, Weeks 21-30 2011, Weeks 31-40 2011, Weeks 41-52
2012 2012, Weeks 1-10 2012, Weeks 11-20 2012, Weeks 21-30 2012, Weeks 31-40 2012, Weeks 41-52


Other Discussion | Stalled Discussions Archive 1 | Stalled Discussions Archive 2

[edit] Featured Article Queue

Week Article Discussion
HRWiki:Featured article for 2012, week 49 (Dec 3–9) 2-Part Episode: Part 1 discussion
HRWiki:Featured article for 2012, week 50 (Dec 10–16) 2-Part Episode: Part 2 discussion
HRWiki:Featured article for 2012, week 51 (Dec 17–23) Decemberween in July Dailies - Decemberween in July discussion
HRWiki:Featured article for 2012, week 52 (Dec 24–30) The Last Featured Article - A Death Defying Decemberween discussion

[edit] Redirects

This is a placeholder topic for 5-year redirects. Due to overall decreased activity, FAs are now being reused more often. The common practice has become to redirect to the FA exactly 5 years prior to the current FA. When an article is re-used, mark it in the following manner: 

{{FA queue|<date>|Redirects|alternatediscussion=yes|decision=<article name>}}

Example: 

{{FA queue|15 Aug 2011 |Redirects|alternatediscussion=yes|decision=1-Up}}

Please keep this discussion in the FA page at all times, but do copy it to archive pages as well.

[edit] Article discussions

[edit] Discussions of Articles Needing Expansion

Discussions in this section regard articles that, per consensus, require further expansion of the article itself before the article should be featured.

[edit] Stalled Discussions

Discussions in this section regard articles that, due to lack of consensus or consensus against, are not ready to be featured at this time.

[edit] General discussion

[edit] Daily Featured Blocks (On Occasion)

In order to make daily featured articles for one week, create pages like:

  • [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 1]]
  • [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 2]]
  • [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 3]]
  • [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 4]]
  • [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 5]]
  • [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 6]]
  • [[HRWiki:Featured article for 2005, week 50, day 0]] (redirect day 7 to this)
Retrieved from "http://www.hrwiki.org/wiki/HRWiki:Featured_Article_Selection"