HRWiki:Featured Article Selection

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 20:29, 21 May 2007 by Heimstern Läufer (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Current revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Jump to: navigation, search

Shortcuts:
HRW:FAS
FAS

Checklist for new Featured Article:

Make sure the article is proof-read up to a high standard.
At 0000 UTC Monday, purge the main page cache.
Protect and add {{mprotected}} to the new image; Unprotect and remove {{mprotected}} from old image.
Semi-protect the live FA write-up; Unprotect the old FA write-up.
Add {{featuredarticle}} to FA's talk page.
Update HRWiki:Featured article nominations with descriptive edit summary — see history.
Update HRWiki:Featured articles with descriptive edit summary — see history.

Discussion Archives

2006, Weeks 11-20 | 2006, Weeks 21-30 | 2006, Weeks 31-40 | 2006, Weeks 41-52 |

2007, Weeks 1-10 | 2007, Weeks 11-20

Weeklies

HRWiki:Featured article for 2007, week 21 (May 21-27)

~~montage.~~ (see below) This one will require a bit of timing, and thus could be moved up or back depending on TBC's schedule, but we should feature this email when the release of email #173 is imminent. — It's dot com 01:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Ooooh... montage on #email 173... I like it, but I believe the featured article changes on Sundays, and email #173 should be out most likely on either a Monday or Tuesday... So, I'd like to see it happen, but it may be too hard to do. If so, a rough estimate should suffice. I'm taking a wild random guess that estimate is somewhere around here. Bluebry 01:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, it looks like #173 isn't going to happen by this week, but just a note about releasing montage alongside it: after #172 is out and we anticipate that #173 might be released, we could always wait 24 hours or so to begin that week's Featured Article. That is, have montage and another one ready, and begin the FA as soon as it's evident what the new update is going to be.

Trey56 13:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

'Tis genius, I say! However, if there are three emails released in a row, I see this: Monday April 30, #171, Monday May 7, #172, and then Monday May 14, #173. Now, I estimate that it will be this week, or in the two weeks after, so to be honest, next week is a fairly good spot. But we'll adapt and plan around it.

But, if 173 doesn't come out this week, or for a back-up article, I think we should do the ever so medium-length Strong Sad's iPod. Or if we want longer, I don't see Thnikkaman bolded on the nomination page. Here comes the Featured Article... Bluebry 01:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

"Thnikkarticle". Ow! My bad pun reflex! Anyway, I think Thnikkaman is a good choice. — User:ACupOfCoffee @ 10:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Something that's not a character; we've featured two characters in a row. Heimstern Läufer

17:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

How about DNA Evidence. The mystery would make a great featured article!

Sam the Man

Too short, I think. Heimstern Läufer

06:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

How about Couch Mumbling? We just had another occurrence of it in underlings, so it's relevant. Also, it's a good length, and it's a major running gag.

Trey56 06:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

By the way, there isn't even an email 172 yet. And If we're gonna feature montage it doesn't have to be the week of email 173. At this time, many people are looking forward to 173 and will understand why montage is featured. And if we feature a different article and see sbemail 173 is gonna come out early on a Monday, we could quickly change it to montage. Homestar-Winner (talk) 09:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

DELETED seems like a good choice. Anybody agree?

Sam the Man

23:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I really like DELETED, the only problem is how little prose there is in the intro, as this is what would appear on the main page. If there's some way to expand this intro or incorporate other parts of the page in the writeup, I'd be all for this one. If not, Couch Mumbling seems good to me. Heimstern Läufer

00:00, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

How about we start about the history of DELETED and say a little bit about what E-mails Strong Bad deletes and the rest will tell itself.

Sam the Man

00:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I rewrote and expanded the lead section for DELETED, but it may need some more work.

Trey56 07:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)