Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitextInline

Revision as of 10:26, 21 October 2024 editSchroCat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers113,319 edits OneClickArchived "Quick coord question" to Misplaced Pages talk:Featured article candidates/archive94← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 21:35, 6 January 2025 edit undoSchroCat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers113,319 edits →Second nom?
(136 intermediate revisions by 37 users not shown)
Line 50:		Line 50:
	{{Archive basics		{{Archive basics
	|archive = Misplaced Pages talk:Featured article candidates/archive%(counter)d		|archive = Misplaced Pages talk:Featured article candidates/archive%(counter)d
	|counter = 94		|counter = 95
	|maxsize= 250000		|maxsize= 150000
	}}		}}
	{{dablink|Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding ] to ].}}		{{dablink|Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding ] to ].}}
Line 65:		Line 65:
	For advice on conducting source reviews, see ].		For advice on conducting source reviews, see ].
			== FAC reviewing statistics and nominator reviewing table for October 2024 ==
	== Question ==
			Here are the FAC reviewing statistics for October 2024. The tables below include all reviews for FACS that were either archived or promoted last month, so the reviews included are spread over the last two or three months. A review posted last month is not included if the FAC was still open at the end of the month. The has been updated with this data, but the has not. ] (] - ] - ]) 14:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
	{{@FAC}} Is it possible for me to nominate ] as a FAC? ''']]''' 08:55, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
			{{collapse top|Reviewers for October 2024}}
	:Since you haven't made that many edits to the article, I recommend that you consult the main contributors of the article before nominating it, as per the instructions: "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it." ] (]) 09:14, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
	::Ill try to contact them tho
	::Also how many edits would I need so that I can promote it without contacting anyone? ''']]''' 09:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
	:{{ec}} ], just for future reference, you don't need the permission of the coords to nominate any article for FAC, you can just launch it (as long as you are the one who has worked on it and have all the relevant sources to hand). I would note, however, that the article would (in my eyes) be a quick fail. There are MOS breaches (starting with a seven-para lead, when the MOS has a limit of four), unsupported paragraphs, numbered lists when text paragraphs are preferred and some clunky text in need of a copy edit. Can I suggest you work on the article a little longer and than take it through ] for a further polish? - ] (]) 09:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
	::yeah Ill try to get it peer reviewed first ''']]''' 09:23, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
	::<small>For the record, the four-paragraph limit was from ] following discussion at ].</small> ] (]) 09:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
	:::Which was something of a mistake. Certainly this article shouldn't need seven paragraphs, and four would be much better than the mess that is currently there. - ] (]) 09:33, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
	:::{{reply|TompaDompa}} (but not ''@you'' personally), indeed someone ]. The project was never informed the discussion was taking place, even though it would be directly—and editorially—affected, and (again, above) it was noted that this was 'passed' by a quorum of a handful of editors. Personally, I suggest far too few to be making a decision that theoretically affects every article yet to be written and also puts many FAs at odds with a now-codified guideline which it is, mind you, meant to obey to the letter. Highly Kafkaesque all around. ]'']'' 15:12, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
	::::About what I thought when I stumbled across it last week. (Looking for the no longer existing paragraph guidance caused a "Duck's off!" moment.) Time to send the lads round do you think? ] (]) 16:38, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
	:::::<small>Ahh, well, if you don't like duck, you're rather stuck. ]'']'' 17:18, 23 September 2024 (UTC)</small>
	== ] ==
	Following on from re-writing ] (which became an FL), I have now done a re-write of ]. Can I put this forward for FA (is it near standard?), or, do I instead need to put it through GA first? thanks. ] (]) 13:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
	:I think that it is, in principle, allowed to nominate an article without taking it through GAN. But make sure that the article is broad in its coverage. I am not an expert on the topic, but at first sight, I noticed the following possible omissions: 1) Health effects (a quick search on Google Scholar returned many hits regarding dust in halls; common injuries; risk in climbing; therapeutical effects; etc.). 2) Climbing organizations and where climbing stands in different parts of the world, legal issues, etc. 3) The history does not start with the different subdisciplines, but much earlier; there are certainly examples of rock climbing in antiquity? 4) A definition section explaining where rock climbing stands in relation to other types of climbing. Not sure if this is strictly needed but placing the topic in its broader context is usually a good idea. Furthermore, the article seems to have a strong bias towards Europe and North America. Does rock climbing not exist in China, for example? All persons listed under "history" seem to be European or US-Americans. Hope this helps for a start. --] (]) 15:17, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
	::Thanks Jens Lallensack. In relation to your comments:
	::1. "Climbing injuries" are around tendon strains and more recently eating disorders, however, it is not a major feature in the sport.
	::2. The only organizations are in ] that I have mentioned; outside of that they are mainly mountaineering organisations (of which there are a lot), but are not specific to rock climbing.
	::3. There is a lot of mountaineering pre 19th-century, but really very little rock climbing outside of sporadic incidents in history that nobody really attributes to the "birth" of the sport of rock climbing (which is c. 1880s per the article).
	::4. Rock climbing intersects with ] in ], ] (which I have mentioned in the article).
	::5. (Europe/US point). The article mentions climbing venues in Europe, North America, Australia (Mount Arapiles), Chile/Argentina (via Patagonia) and South Africa (Rocklands). They are definitely the main locations. There are more, although of lesser global notability.
	::Great comments, and I guess I am trying to keep the article from getting too big, and wanting to keep it focused on the main/most notable global material that would concern a casual reader - but let me think about it. thanks so much! ] (]) 16:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
	:::{{re|Aszx5000}} If you are looking for comments about the feasibility of nominating at FAC, I suggest posting the article at ] and asking editors to comment there. This will give editors more space to leave detailed comments. ] (]) 16:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
	::Following on from your comments, I have added sections on 'Health' and on 'Governance and organization' which I think are merited. I am up to 160k bytes, so am wary of adding too much more but I do think that I am covering everything that is 'notable' worldwide in rock climbing? If you feel it needs a longer-look, then we can move to ], or if this will not work out (maybe the topic is too broad for on FA article), then maybe I can try the ] route as a first pass? thanks for your help! ] (]) 14:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
	:::I would try ]; there you can hopefully get opinions from several different people. Taking it to ] before nominating at FAC is preferred, but at the moment it can take a while until someone picks the review up, unfortunately. --] (]) 01:00, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
	::::Okay, I'll do that Jens and see how it goes. Thanks again for your input. ] (]) 09:16, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
	== Regularly scheduled new nom question ==
	{{@FAC}} Alright to put up a new FAC? <small> ] (]) (it/she) </small> 14:26, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
	:Yes. ] (]) 14:49, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
	== FAC reviewing statistics and nominator reviewing table for September 2024 ==
	Here are the FAC reviewing statistics for September 2024. The tables below include all reviews for FACS that were either archived or promoted last month, so the reviews included are spread over the last two or three months. A review posted last month is not included if the FAC was still open at the end of the month. The has been updated with this data, but the has not. ] (] - ] - ]) 12:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
	{{collapse top|Reviewers for September 2024}}
	{| class="wikitable sortable"		{| class="wikitable sortable"
	!'''# reviews'''		!'''# reviews'''
Line 117:		Line 80:
	|-		|-
	|Nikkimaria		|Nikkimaria
			|
	|1		|1
	|1		|23
	|20
	|		|
	|-		|-
	|Jo-Jo Eumerus		|Jo-Jo Eumerus
			|1
			|15
			|6
	|		|
			|-
			|SchroCat
	|11		|11
	|5		|4
			|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Mike Christie
	|SchroCat
	|15		|12
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Generalissima
			|7
	|1		|1
			|3
			|
			|-
			|Hog Farm
			|8
			|2
	|		|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|ChrisTheDude
	|UndercoverClassicist
	|9		|9
	|		|
Line 140:		Line 121:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Matarisvan
	|Gog the Mild
			|4
			|4
			|
			|
			|-
			|UndercoverClassicist
	|8		|8
	|		|
Line 147:		Line 134:
	|-		|-
	|750h+		|750h+
	|6		|5
	|
	|		|
			|1
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|FunkMonk
	|Mike Christie
	|6		|6
	|		|
Line 158:		Line 145:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|AirshipJungleman29
	|Alavense
	|5		|5
	|		|
Line 164:		Line 151:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Edwininlondon
	|Hog Farm
	|5		|5
	|		|
Line 176:		Line 163:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Crisco 1492
	|AirshipJungleman29
	|4		|4
	|		|
Line 182:		Line 169:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Dugan Murphy
	|Ceoil
			|3
			|1
			|
			|
			|-
			|Jens Lallensack
	|4		|4
	|		|
Line 188:		Line 181:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Llewee
	|ChrisTheDude
	|4		|4
	|		|
Line 194:		Line 187:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Phlsph7
	|Matarisvan
	|2		|1
	|2
	|		|
			|3
	|		|
	|-		|-
Line 206:		Line 199:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Aoba47
	|Edwininlondon
	|2		|3
	|1
	|		|
	|
	|-
	|Generalissima
	|1
	|2
	|		|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Dudley Miles
	|John
	|3		|3
	|		|
Line 224:		Line 211:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Gog the Mild
	|Shushugah
	|3		|3
	|		|
Line 230:		Line 217:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Mujinga
	|Steelkamp
	|3		|2
	|		|1
	|		|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|RoySmith
	|Vacant0
	|3		|3
	|		|
Line 242:		Line 229:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Serial Number 54129
	|BennyOnTheLoose
			|3
			|
	|		|
	|1
	|1
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|TechnoSquirrel69
	|Choliamb
	|2		|2
	|		|1
	|		|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Vacant0
	|Crisco 1492
	|2		|2
	|		|1
	|		|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Buidhe
	|Draken Bowser
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 266:		Line 253:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Chipmunkdavis
	|Dudley Miles
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 272:		Line 259:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Draken Bowser
	|Eem dik doun in toene
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 278:		Line 265:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Gerda Arendt
	|FunkMonk
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 284:		Line 271:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Graham Beards
	|MaranoFan
	|1
	|1
	|
	|
	|-
	|MSincccc
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 296:		Line 277:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Hurricanehink
	|Nineteen Ninety-Four guy
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 302:		Line 283:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Nick-D
	|Penitentes
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 308:		Line 289:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Sammi Brie
	|Phlsph7
			|2
	|		|
	|		|
	|2
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Sawyer777
	|RoySmith
	|1		|1
	|1		|1
Line 320:		Line 301:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Shushugah
	|Sawyer777
	|
	|2		|2
			|
	|		|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Steelkamp
	|Serial Number 54129
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 338:		Line 319:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|2601AC47
	|AryKun
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 344:		Line 325:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Alavense
	|Aza24
			|1
	|		|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Arconning
	|1		|1
			|
	|		|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Aza24
	|Boneless Pizza!
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 356:		Line 343:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Bneu2013
	|BorgQueen
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 362:		Line 349:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Boneless Pizza!
	|Borsoka
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 368:		Line 355:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|BorgQueen
	|Casliber
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 374:		Line 361:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Ceranthor
	|CosXZ
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 380:		Line 367:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|D.Lazard
	|DanCherek
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 386:		Line 373:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|David Eppstein
	|Drmies
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 392:		Line 379:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Dumelow
	|Dylan620
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 398:		Line 385:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Eewilson
	|Epicgenius
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 410:		Line 397:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Frietjes
	|Graeme Bartlett
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 416:		Line 403:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|GA-RT-22
	|Graham Beards
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 422:		Line 409:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|GamerPro64
	|Guerillero
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 428:		Line 415:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Ganesha811
	|HAL333
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 434:		Line 421:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|GeoWriter
	|Hawkeye7
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 440:		Line 427:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|HAL333
	|HJ Mitchell
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 446:		Line 433:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Hawkeye7
	|Hurricanehink
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 452:		Line 439:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Heartfox
	|Ian Rose
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 458:		Line 445:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|IceWelder
	|Ippantekina
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 464:		Line 451:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|IJReid
	|Jens Lallensack
	|1		|1
	|		|
			|
			|
			|-
			|IntentionallyDense
			|
			|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 476:		Line 469:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Joshua Jonathan
	|Jonesey95
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 482:		Line 475:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Kavyansh.Singh
	|Joy
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 488:		Line 481:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Kung Fu Man
	|KJP1
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 494:		Line 487:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|MaranoFan
	|Llewee
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 500:		Line 493:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Mathwriter2718
	|LunaEclipse
	|
	|1		|1
			|
	|		|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|MSincccc
	|Moisejp
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 512:		Line 505:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|MyCatIsAChonk
	|NegativeMP1
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 518:		Line 511:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|NegativeMP1
	|Neutralhomer
			|
	|1		|1
	|
	|		|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Paleface Jack
	|Nick-D
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 530:		Line 523:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|PanagiotisZois
	|NordNordWest
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 536:		Line 529:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Panini!
	|Noswall59
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 542:		Line 535:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Pbritti
	|Paleface Jack
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 548:		Line 541:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|PrimalMustelid
	|Pendright
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 554:		Line 547:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Queen of Hearts
	|QRep2020
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 560:		Line 553:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Remsense
	|Reidgreg
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 566:		Line 559:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Reppop
	|Rjjiii
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Rjjiii (ii)
	|Skyshifter
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 578:		Line 571:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|SandyGeorgia
	|SnowFire
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 584:		Line 577:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Shooterwalker
	|Sohom Datta
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 590:		Line 583:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|SilverTiger12
	|Ssilvers
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 596:		Line 589:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Sky Harbor
	|TechnoSquirrel69
	|
	|1		|1
			|
	|		|
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|SNUGGUMS
	|ThaesOfereode
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 608:		Line 601:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Spy-cicle
	|The ed17
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 614:		Line 607:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Ss112
	|Tomobe03
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|ThaesOfereode
	|TompaDompa
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 626:		Line 619:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|The Rambling Man
	|Unlimitedlead
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 632:		Line 625:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Tintor2
	|Vigilantcosmicpenguin
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 638:		Line 631:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|TrademarkedTWOrantula
	|Voorts
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 644:		Line 637:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|WhatamIdoing
	|Wolverine XI
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 650:		Line 643:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|XOR'easter
	|Wtfiv
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 656:		Line 649:
	|		|
	|-		|-
			|Zawed
	|Wuju Daisuki
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 663:		Line 656:
	|-		|-
	|'''Totals'''		|'''Totals'''
	|'''167'''		|'''201'''
	|'''27'''		|'''35'''
	|'''28'''		|'''38'''
	|		|
	|-		|-
	|}		|}
	{{collapse bottom}}		{{collapse bottom}}
	{{collapse top|Supports and opposes for September 2024}}		{{collapse top|Supports and opposes for October 2024}}
	{| class="wikitable sortable"		{| class="wikitable sortable"
	!'''# declarations'''		!'''# declarations'''
Line 687:		Line 680:
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|		|
			|
			|
			|24
			|24
			|-
			|Jo-Jo Eumerus
	|1		|1
	|20		|
			|
			|
			|
			|21
	|22		|22
	|-		|-
	|SchroCat		|SchroCat
	|13		|7
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|1		|3
	|2		|5
	|16		|15
	|-		|-
			|Mike Christie
	|Jo-Jo Eumerus
			|12
	|		|
	|		|
Line 708:		Line 711:
	|		|
	|		|
	|16		|12
	|16
	|-		|-
			|Generalissima
	|UndercoverClassicist
	|5		|5
	|		|
Line 717:		Line 719:
	|		|
	|		|
	|4		|6
			|11
			|-
			|Hog Farm
			|6
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|2
			|10
			|-
			|ChrisTheDude
			|9
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
	|9		|9
	|-		|-
			|UndercoverClassicist
	|Gog the Mild
	|7		|6
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|1		|1
			|1
			|8
			|-
			|Matarisvan
			|4
	|		|
			|
			|
			|
			|4
	|8		|8
	|-		|-
			|FunkMonk
	|Mike Christie
	|5		|4
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|1		|2
	|6		|6
	|-		|-
	|750h+		|750h+
	|4		|5
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|2
	|		|
			|1
	|6		|6
	|-		|-
			|Tim riley
	|Alavense
	|5		|5
	|		|
Line 756:		Line 785:
	|5		|5
	|-		|-
			|Edwininlondon
	|Hog Farm
	|5		|5
	|		|
Line 765:		Line 794:
	|5		|5
	|-		|-
			|AirshipJungleman29
	|Tim riley
	|5		|3
	|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
			|2
	|		|
	|5		|5
	|-		|-
			|Llewee
	|Matarisvan
	|2		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|2		|4
	|4		|4
	|-		|-
			|Jens Lallensack
	|AirshipJungleman29
	|2		|1
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|1		|1
	|1		|2
	|4		|4
	|-		|-
			|Phlsph7
	|ChrisTheDude
	|3		|
			|
			|
	|		|
			|
			|4
			|4
			|-
			|Crisco 1492
			|3
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|1		|1
			|
	|4		|4
	|-		|-
			|Dugan Murphy
	|Ceoil
	|3		|3
	|		|
Line 819:		Line 857:
	|4		|4
	|-		|-
			|Mujinga
	|Vacant0
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 828:		Line 866:
	|3		|3
	|-		|-
			|Serial Number 54129
	|Edwininlondon
	|1		|1
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|1
	|2		|1
	|3		|3
	|-		|-
			|Vacant0
	|Steelkamp
	|3		|1
	|
	|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
			|1
	|3		|3
	|-		|-
			|Gog the Mild
	|John
	|2
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
			|2
	|1		|1
	|3		|3
	|-		|-
			|Dudley Miles
	|Generalissima
	|1		|3
			|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|2
	|3		|3
	|-		|-
			|TechnoSquirrel69
	|Shushugah
	|3
	|		|
	|		|
Line 871:		Line 908:
	|		|
	|		|
			|3
	|3		|3
	|-		|-
			|RoySmith
	|Draken Bowser
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 879:		Line 917:
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|2		|2
			|3
	|-		|-
			|Aoba47
	|Nineteen Ninety-Four guy
	|
	|
	|
	|
	|1
	|1
	|2		|2
	|-
	|Serial Number 54129
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 898:		Line 927:
	|		|
	|1		|1
	|2		|3
	|-		|-
			|Sammi Brie
	|MaranoFan
	|
	|
	|
	|
	|
	|2		|2
	|2
	|-
	|BennyOnTheLoose
	|		|
	|		|
Line 915:		Line 936:
	|		|
	|		|
	|2
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Hurricanehink
	|Dudley Miles
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 927:		Line 947:
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Chipmunkdavis
	|Wehwalt
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 936:		Line 956:
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Graham Beards
	|RoySmith
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 945:		Line 965:
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Shushugah
	|Phlsph7
	|		|
	|		|
Line 954:		Line 974:
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Buidhe
	|Penitentes
	|2
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
			|2
	|		|
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Steelkamp
	|FunkMonk
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 972:		Line 992:
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Nick-D
	|MSincccc
	|2		|1
	|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Sawyer777
	|Choliamb
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 990:		Line 1,010:
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Gerda Arendt
	|Sawyer777
			|2
	|		|
	|		|
Line 996:		Line 1,017:
	|		|
	|		|
	|2
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Draken Bowser
	|Eem dik doun in toene
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 1,008:		Line 1,028:
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Wehwalt
	|Crisco 1492
	|2		|2
	|		|
Line 1,017:		Line 1,037:
	|2		|2
	|-		|-
			|Dumelow
	|Dylan620
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,024:		Line 1,043:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Joshua Jonathan
	|Drmies
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|		|
	|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Tintor2
	|ThaesOfereode
			|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,042:		Line 1,063:
	|		|
	|1		|1
			|-
			|MSincccc
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|HAL333
	|NordNordWest
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,053:		Line 1,082:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Panini!
	|Ian Rose
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,062:		Line 1,091:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|IntentionallyDense
	|Jens Lallensack
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,069:		Line 1,097:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Paleface Jack
	|Graham Beards
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,080:		Line 1,109:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Rjjiii (ii)
	|QRep2020
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,089:		Line 1,118:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Heartfox
	|Borsoka
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,096:		Line 1,124:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Eewilson
	|Llewee
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,107:		Line 1,136:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|IceWelder
	|HAL333
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,114:		Line 1,142:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|XOR'easter
	|Tomobe03
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,123:		Line 1,151:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Spy-cicle
	|Graeme Bartlett
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,134:		Line 1,163:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|TrademarkedTWOrantula
	|The ed17
			|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,140:		Line 1,170:
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|PrimalMustelid
	|Pendright
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|		|
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Pbritti
	|Boneless Pizza!
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,161:		Line 1,190:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|WhatamIdoing
	|Vigilantcosmicpenguin
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,170:		Line 1,199:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Frietjes
	|Hawkeye7
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
	|1		|1
			|1
			|-
			|Reppop
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,177:		Line 1,214:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|The Rambling Man
	|Nick-D
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,188:		Line 1,226:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|MaranoFan
	|Paleface Jack
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,197:		Line 1,235:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Shooterwalker
	|Casliber
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,206:		Line 1,244:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Aza24
	|LunaEclipse
	|
	|1		|1
			|
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,215:		Line 1,253:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|ThaesOfereode
	|Unlimitedlead
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,224:		Line 1,262:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|BorgQueen
	|NegativeMP1
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|IJReid
	|SnowFire
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,240:		Line 1,277:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|GeoWriter
	|Ssilvers
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,251:		Line 1,289:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Boneless Pizza!
	|KJP1
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,260:		Line 1,298:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|D.Lazard
	|Epicgenius
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,268:		Line 1,305:
	|		|
	|1		|1
	|-
	|Neutralhomer
	|1		|1
			|-
			|2601AC47
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,276:		Line 1,313:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Sky Harbor
	|Reidgreg
			|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,284:		Line 1,323:
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Alavense
	|Wolverine XI
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,296:		Line 1,334:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|MyCatIsAChonk
	|Hurricanehink
			|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,302:		Line 1,341:
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Remsense
	|Wtfiv
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|		|
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|NegativeMP1
	|DanCherek
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,323:		Line 1,361:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Zawed
	|Noswall59
			|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,329:		Line 1,368:
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|SNUGGUMS
	|Rjjiii
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|		|
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Kung Fu Man
	|Moisejp
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,350:		Line 1,388:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Arconning
	|Wuju Daisuki
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,359:		Line 1,397:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Kavyansh.Singh
	|AryKun
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,366:		Line 1,403:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Femke
	|Guerillero
			|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,374:		Line 1,413:
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Queen of Hearts
	|Skyshifter
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,384:		Line 1,421:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
Line 1,395:		Line 1,433:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Bneu2013
	|CosXZ
			|1
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|		|
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|SandyGeorgia
	|Aza24
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|		|
	|1		|1
			|-
			|PanagiotisZois
	|1		|1
	|-
	|Femke
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|		|
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Ceranthor
	|Voorts
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,431:		Line 1,469:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|SilverTiger12
	|Joy
			|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,437:		Line 1,476:
	|		|
	|		|
	|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|David Eppstein
	|BorgQueen
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,449:		Line 1,487:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|GamerPro64
	|Jonesey95
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,458:		Line 1,496:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Hawkeye7
	|TompaDompa
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,467:		Line 1,505:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Mathwriter2718
	|Sohom Datta
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,476:		Line 1,514:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Ss112
	|TechnoSquirrel69
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,485:		Line 1,523:
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|GA-RT-22
	|HJ Mitchell
	|1
	|		|
	|		|
Line 1,492:		Line 1,529:
	|		|
	|		|
			|1
	|1		|1
	|-		|-
			|Ganesha811
	|Ippantekina
	|1		|1
	|		|
Line 1,504:		Line 1,542:
	|-		|-
	|'''Totals'''		|'''Totals'''
	|'''122'''		|'''135'''
	|'''1'''
	|'''1'''
	|		|
			|
	|'''10'''
	|'''88'''		|
			|'''21'''
	|'''222'''		|'''118'''
			|'''274'''
	|}		|}
	{{collapse bottom}}		{{collapse bottom}}
	The following table shows the 12-month review-to-nominations ratio for everyone who nominated an article that was promoted or archived in the last three months who has nominated more than one article in the last 12 months. The average promoted FAC receives between 6 and 7 reviews. ] (] - ] - ]) 12:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)		The following table shows the 12-month review-to-nominations ratio for everyone who nominated an article that was promoted or archived in the last three months who has nominated more than one article in the last 12 months. The average promoted FAC receives between 6 and 7 reviews. ] (] - ] - ]) 14:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
	{{cot|Nominators for July 2024 to September 2024 with more than one nomination in the last 12 months}}		{{cot|Nominators for August 2024 to October 2024 with more than one nomination in the last 12 months}}
	{| class="wikitable sortable"		{| class="wikitable sortable"
	!		!
Line 1,523:		Line 1,561:
	|750h+		|750h+
	|5.0		|5.0
	|41.0		|47.0
	|8.2		|9.4
	|-		|-
	|AirshipJungleman29		|AirshipJungleman29
	|6.0		|8.0
	|40.0		|43.0
	|6.7		|5.4
	|-		|-
			|Amir Ghandi
	|Aoba47
	|4.0		|2.0
			|None
	|45.0
	|11.2		|0.0
	|-		|-
	|BennyOnTheLoose		|BennyOnTheLoose
	|4.5		|3.5
	|10.0		|10.0
	|2.2		|2.9
	|-		|-
			|Boneless Pizza!
	|Borsoka
	|3.0		|1.5
	|10.0		|5.0
	|3.3		|3.3
	|-		|-
	|ChrisTheDude		|ChrisTheDude
	|11.0		|9.0
	|73.0		|73.0
	|6.6		|8.1
	|-		|-
	|Darkwarriorblake		|Darkwarriorblake
	|5.0		|6.0
	|4.0		|4.0
	|0.8		|0.7
	|-		|-
	|Dudley Miles		|Dudley Miles
			|6.0
			|30.0
	|5.0		|5.0
	|31.0
	|6.2
	|-		|-
	|Dugan Murphy		|Dugan Murphy
	|3.0		|3.0
	|10.0		|14.0
	|3.3		|4.7
	|-		|-
	|Eem dik doun in toene		|Eem dik doun in toene
	|2.0		|3.0
	|9.0		|9.0
	|4.5		|3.0
	|-		|-
	|Epicgenius		|Epicgenius
	|7.5		|7.5
	|18.0		|17.0
	|2.4		|2.3
	|-		|-
	|FunkMonk		|FunkMonk
	|3.8		|2.8
	|27.0		|28.0
	|7.0		|9.9
	|-		|-
			|Generalissima
	|Ganesha811
	|2.0		|9.0
			|54.0
	|None
	|0.0		|6.0
	|-		|-
			|Hawkeye7
	|Generalissima
			|5.0
	|8.0		|8.0
	|43.0		|1.6
	|5.4
	|-		|-
			|Heartfox
	|HAL333
	|2.0
	|10.0
	|5.0		|5.0
			|26.0
			|5.2
	|-		|-
			|Hog Farm
	|Hawkeye7
	|6.0		|6.0
	|14.0		|42.0
	|2.3		|7.0
	|-		|-
			|Hurricanehink
	|Heartfox
	|6.0		|1.5
	|27.0		|16.0
	|4.5		|10.7
	|-		|-
			|Ippantekina
	|Hog Farm
	|5.0		|5.0
	|33.0		|5.0
	|6.6		|1.0
	|-		|-
			|Jens Lallensack
	|Hurricanehink
	|1.5		|3.3
	|14.0		|28.0
	|9.3		|8.4
	|-		|-
	|Jo-Jo Eumerus		|Jo-Jo Eumerus
	|6.0		|6.0
	|207.0		|221.0
	|34.5		|36.8
	|-		|-
	|Joeyquism		|Joeyquism
	|2.0		|3.0
	|15.0		|16.0
	|7.5		|5.3
	|-		|-
	|Kung Fu Man		|Kung Fu Man
	|2.0		|2.0
			|1.0
	|None
	|0.0		|0.5
	|-		|-
	|Kurzon		|Kurzon
Line 1,637:		Line 1,675:
	|-		|-
	|Kyle Peake		|Kyle Peake
	|3.0		|4.0
	|None		|None
	|0.0		|0.0
	|-		|-
	|Lee Vilenski		|Lee Vilenski
	|4.0		|3.0
	|2.0		|2.0
	|0.5		|0.7
	|-		|-
			|Llewee
	|LittleJerry
	|1.5
	|2.0		|2.0
	|1.3		|7.0
			|3.5
			|-
			|M4V3R1CK32
			|2.0
			|None
			|0.0
	|-		|-
	|MaranoFan		|MaranoFan
	|5.0		|5.0
	|18.0		|14.0
	|3.6		|2.8
	|-
	|Matarisvan
	|4.0
	|32.0
	|8.0
	|-		|-
	|Mattximus		|Mattximus
Line 1,668:		Line 1,706:
	|Mike Christie		|Mike Christie
	|6.0		|6.0
	|60.0		|64.0
	|10.0		|10.7
	|-		|-
	|NegativeMP1		|NegativeMP1
	|2.0		|3.0
	|10.0		|10.0
	|5.0		|3.3
	|-		|-
	|Nick-D		|Nick-D
	|3.0		|2.0
	|14.0		|14.0
	|4.7		|7.0
	|-
	|Noorullah21
	|3.0
	|None
	|0.0
	|-		|-
	|Paleface Jack		|Paleface Jack
	|3.0		|3.0
	|1.0
	|0.3
	|-
	|PCN02WPS
	|2.0		|2.0
	|19.0		|0.7
	|9.5
	|-		|-
	|Peacemaker67		|Peacemaker67
	|7.0		|6.0
	|3.0		|2.0
	|0.4		|0.3
	|-		|-
	|Phlsph7		|Phlsph7
	|6.0		|7.0
	|13.0		|15.0
	|2.2		|2.1
	|-		|-
	|Pickersgill-Cunliffe		|Pickersgill-Cunliffe
Line 1,710:		Line 1,738:
	|5.0		|5.0
	|2.5		|2.5
			|-
			|Pollosito
			|2.0
			|None
			|0.0
	|-		|-
	|Premeditated Chaos		|Premeditated Chaos
	|9.3		|9.3
	|33.0		|36.0
	|3.5		|3.9
	|-		|-
	|PSA		|PSA
Line 1,720:		Line 1,753:
	|4.0		|4.0
	|2.0		|2.0
	|-
	|RoySmith
	|4.0
	|45.0
	|11.2
	|-
	|SafariScribe
	|2.0
	|3.0
	|1.5
	|-		|-
	|Sammi Brie		|Sammi Brie
	|2.5		|3.5
	|15.0		|13.0
	|6.0		|3.7
	|-		|-
	|SchroCat		|SchroCat
	|15.0		|15.0
	|139.0		|143.0
	|9.3		|9.5
	|-		|-
	|Serial Number 54129		|Serial Number 54129
	|3.0		|3.0
	|46.0		|45.0
	|15.3		|15.0
	|-		|-
	|Skyshifter		|Skyshifter
Line 1,752:		Line 1,775:
	|-		|-
	|SounderBruce		|SounderBruce
	|4.0
	|3.0		|3.0
	|0.8		|1.0
			|0.3
	|-		|-
	|The ed17		|The ed17
Line 1,767:		Line 1,790:
	|-		|-
	|Thebiguglyalien		|Thebiguglyalien
			|5.0
	|4.0		|4.0
	|9.0		|0.8
	|2.2
	|-
	|Therapyisgood
	|2.3
	|6.0
	|2.6
	|-		|-
	|Tim riley		|Tim riley
	|5.0		|5.0
	|50.0		|49.0
	|10.0		|9.8
	|-		|-
	|TrademarkedTWOrantula		|TrademarkedTWOrantula
	|3.0		|3.0
	|1.0		|2.0
	|0.3		|0.7
	|-		|-
	|Turini2		|Turini2
Line 1,792:		Line 1,810:
	|-		|-
	|UndercoverClassicist		|UndercoverClassicist
	|6.0		|5.0
	|95.0		|93.0
	|15.8		|18.6
	|-
	|V.B.Speranza
	|2.0
	|None
	|0.0
	|-		|-
	|Volcanoguy		|Volcanoguy
	|3.0		|4.0
	|7.0		|7.0
	|2.3		|1.8
	|-		|-
	|Voorts		|Voorts
	|6.5		|5.5
	|19.0		|15.0
	|2.9		|2.7
	|-		|-
	|WeatherWriter		|WeatherWriter
Line 1,818:		Line 1,831:
	|Wehwalt		|Wehwalt
	|8.5		|8.5
	|33.0		|31.0
	|3.9		|3.6
	|-		|-
	|Wolverine XI		|Wolverine XI
Line 1,827:		Line 1,840:
	|-		|-
	|ZKang123		|ZKang123
			|4.0
			|13.0
			|3.2
			|}
			{{cob}}
			-- ] (] - ] - ]) 14:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
			== Science articles are underrepresented ==
			For a long time there has hardly been any science articles at FAC. Perhaps someone could remind me of the last successful candidate? But we have ] now which is not garnering much attention, which is a shame. I'm not canvassing for support, despite having given mine, but is there any chance of a few reviews? ] (]) 14:59, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
			: I'll try to take a look within the next couple days, although I've got quite a bit going on IRL. ] <sub> '']''</sub> 16:18, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
			::Ditto. I'll have time to review this weekend. I can take on the source review as well if no one beats me to it (please feel free to beat me to it). ] (]) 15:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
			:Not sure if it was the most recent, but off the top of my head there was ] not that long ago (if biography articles on scientists count). ] (]) 16:29, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
			::Right now we have ] being reviewed. Plus of course ], at which additional thoughts would be most welcome. I assume that science is being used in a way which excludes biology and geology? ] (]) 16:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
			::I believe ] counts as a science article, no? It has seven participants but only one review and is at risk of being archived. Adding onto that, it is a former featured article, which should be getting more views, especially because of its notable impacts in the ] and the United States. <span style="font-family:Times New Roman;font-size:100%;color:#00008B;background-color:transparent;;CSS">]]</span> 16:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
			Using a broad definition of science, and not counting biographies, I think there have been five promoted this year (dates in brackets).
			*Heptamegacanthus (26 Aug)
			*Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (25 Aug)
			*Dracunculiasis (22 May)
			*Prostate cancer (22 Apr)
			*Tropical Storm Hernan (2020) (7 Jan)
			My apologies for any I missed. We need more. ] (]) 17:02, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
			:You missed ]. Its ] was successfull on 27 September. I'm still surprised that a less notable, damaging, and deadly storm was promoted, but ], the opposite, is at a significant risk of being archived. <span style="font-family:Times New Roman;font-size:100%;color:#00008B;background-color:transparent;;CSS">]]</span> 17:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
			:There is also ]. That said, the reason why I am no longer writing many articles is because they need to be updated and ]. I think that's the general problem with science FAs, science isn't static in time so they become outdated. ] (]) 10:58, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
			::That's the case with many articles, not just science ones. If FAs are maintained, this should not be a problem. Also, many science articles are remarkably static. See ], which is not a FA, but a good example of a stable science article. ] (]) 11:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
			:::Aye, I know about ] and relatives which also don't get much new research. I guess I just used up my space of "how many articles can I maintain" ] (]) 11:35, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
			::::That's what happens when you become a stellar contributor. :-) ] (]) 11:38, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
			:Tiger was promoted July 25. ] (]) 14:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
			::There have been a few animals, both extant and extinct, they should count, no? ] (]) 14:17, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
			:::They do. <span style="font-family:Times New Roman;font-size:100%;color:#00008B;background-color:transparent;;CSS">]]</span> 14:19, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
			:I think ] (Aug 8) counts as a science article. <small> ] (]) (it/she) </small> 16:17, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
			I would not call a typical hurricane article a science article. For sure, meteorology is a science, and there's plenty you can write about hurricanes in general which is about the science. But most of these are just cookie-cutter recitations of the specific facts about events that happen dozens of times a year. What was the track, where it made landfall, pressure readings, wind strengths, rainfall, damage caused. That's not science, that's just a data dump wrapped up in prose form with carefully formatted references. ] ] 19:11, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
			:Yes I agree, was thinking the same. Just because a hurricane comes about due to scientific phenomena does not make discussion of individual hurricanes scientific per se. We might as well argue ] is science because she's made up of atoms, molecules, cells, mitochondria and all the rest of it 😏 &nbsp;&mdash;&nbsp;] (]) 00:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
			::Just addressing the elephant (hurricane writer) in the room, I kind of agree, that hurricane articles aren't really "science". In fact, as a hurricane writer, I make attempts to make it hurricane articles not appear too scientific, so it is accessible to the average reader. This isn't about a ] or a ] where you talk about years of research and tons of research papers. No, instead we rely on "pressure readings, wind strengths, rainfall", all different tools to describe what actually happened, and why a single storm affected so many different people. Sometimes storms can even cause wars and disrupt national economies, but they're such short-lived events, that it's not like they're an ongoing thing worthy of significant research, not when a lot of storms are honestly pretty similar. They all do very similar things, with some slight variations. That's why I find them fascinating, and why I write about them, and I'm not going to stop writing about them since I think the vast majority of tropical cyclone articles are useful and interesting. But they aren't exactly "science", like some kind of hypothesis or idea, and admittedly there should probably be more articles on the study of meteorology. I'm gonna have to do something about that... ♫ ] (<small>]</small>) 22:16, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
			:Removing my comments for now. Will post again when I've had more time to think about the content. Apologies. ]] 00:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
			== Seattle Kraken nom ==
			Hello there. A couple months back, I nominated the article ] for FA, but after five weeks, it didn't get the needed amount of reviews, and the nomination was subsequently closed. I nominated it again 11 days ago and it still hasn't received any reviews. Any reasons why? Thanks. ] (]) 02:28, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
			:To be honest, the usual cause is that lots of people are reluctant to post 'oppose' reviews. ] (]) 07:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
			:I think in this particular case it might be the topic. Popular culture doesn't fare brilliantly for FAC reviewers, and sports are even more niche (in that just liking 'sport' isn't enough, rather the sport itself). The article itself isn't in bad nick as it goes; no major MOS violations jump out, everything's cited, sources all seem OK, if news heavy (but that's probably inevitable for a relatively young team like this). ]'']'' 12:23, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
			::<small>Also, i forgot to mention that you're allowed—encouraged—to ] reviewers ] ] part in the early FAC... ]'']'' 13:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
			:Another reason might be that you haven't reviewed any articles at FAC, according to the . Reviewing articles helps editors learn the ], shows that you understand the criteria, and builds goodwill among editors. If looking for reviews, I always recommend reviewing articles yourself. ] (]) 12:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
			::Echoing this, particularly the "goodwill among editors" bit. Reviewing takes time, and I'm more willing to take that time to help someone who has invested in the FAC process. Note that when {{U|Graham Beards}} asked for volunteers a couple sections above, ]. If you're wondering why, feast your eyes on and imagine the kind of goodwill the guy has stockpiled. ] (]) 20:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
			::One caveat here is that we don't want "I'll support/oppose your article if you support/oppose mine"-type situations. Each article needs to be reviewed dispassionately. ] (]) 13:18, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
			== RfC at WT:BLP ==
			Drawing the attention of project editors to an RfC concerning a proposed change to ], which could affect relevant FACs. Interested parties should join ]. ]'']'' 18:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
			== Japanese and Farsi/Persian speakers needed ==
			There are two FAC reviews where the source spotcheck hinges on Japanese and Farsi/Persian sources. Specifically, ] for Farsi/Persian and ] for Japanese. Anyone who knows how to read them? ] (]) 13:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
			:Google Lens' translate function is quite good these days for translating pictures of documents. ] (]) 13:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
			::Unfortunately not all of the problem sources are in image form; some are behind paywalls and stuff. ] (]) 10:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
			==Images in BLPs==
			There is a thread at ] about adding images of BLPs, and possibly not passing FAC if no non-free one can be found. All comments are welcome. - ] (]) 19:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
			== Strikethrough error ==
			There appears to be some sort of error in one of the FACs as several of the listings in the "Older nominations" section have all their comments displayed with a strike-through. I was wondering if there was any way to have that fixed? I am guessing that it is an issue with one of the FAC that is bleeding out into the other FACs on the list. ] (]) 03:00, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
			:]. ] (]) 04:05, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
			==RfC at ]==
			There is an RfC at ], an FA. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the ''']'''. - ] (]) 05:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
			== FAC reviewing statistics and nominator reviewing table for November 2024 ==
			Here are the FAC reviewing statistics for November 2024. The tables below include all reviews for FACS that were either archived or promoted last month, so the reviews included are spread over the last two or three months. A review posted last month is not included if the FAC was still open at the end of the month. The has been updated with this data, but the has not. ] (] - ] - ]) 15:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
			{{collapse top|Reviewers for November 2024}}
			{| class="wikitable sortable"
			!'''# reviews'''
			! colspan="4" |Type of review
			|-
			!Reviewer
			! data-sort-type="number" |Content
			! data-sort-type="number" |Source
			! data-sort-type="number" |Image
			! data-sort-type="number" |Accessibility
			|-
			|Nikkimaria
			|3
			|1
			|17
			|
			|-
			|SchroCat
			|14
			|6
			|
			|
			|-
			|Jo-Jo Eumerus
			|
			|7
			|3
			|
			|-
			|Crisco 1492
			|9
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Generalissima
			|5
			|1
			|2
			|
			|-
			|Matarisvan
			|6
			|1
			|1
			|
			|-
			|Hog Farm
			|6
			|
			|1
			|
			|-
			|Aoba47
			|3
			|2
			|
			|
			|-
			|Dudley Miles
			|5
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|UndercoverClassicist
			|5
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|750h+
			|4
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Gog the Mild
			|4
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Boneless Pizza!
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Borsoka
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Ceoil
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Gerda Arendt
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Graham Beards
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Hurricanehink
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Premeditated Chaos
			|1
			|2
			|
			|
			|-
			|TheJoebro64
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Tim riley
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|AirshipJungleman29
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|ChrisTheDude
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Cukie Gherkin
			|
			|1
			|1
			|
			|-
			|Draken Bowser
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Epicgenius
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Heartfox
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Jens Lallensack
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|MaranoFan
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Medxvo
			|1
			|1
			|
			|
			|-
			|PARAKANYAA
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Phlsph7
			|
			|
			|2
			|
			|-
			|Piotrus
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Vacant0
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Ajpolino
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Balon Greyjoy
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Biruitorul
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Caeciliusinhorto
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Choliamb
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Czar
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Dugan Murphy
			|
			|1
			|
			|
			|-
			|Eddie891
			|
			|1
			|
			|
			|-
			|Eem dik doun in toene
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Fifelfoo
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Gen. Quon
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|HAL333
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Hawkeye7
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|IntentionallyDense
			|
			|1
			|
			|
			|-
			|Ippantekina
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|JennyOz
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Joeyquism
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Johnbod
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Jonesey95
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Kavyansh.Singh
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Lankyant
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Lazman321
			|
			|1
			|
			|
			|-
			|LittleLazyLass
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Mike Christie
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Mrfoogles
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Mujinga
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|NegativeMP1
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Nick-D
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Paleface Jack
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Panini!
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Relativity
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|RFNirmala
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Rjjiii
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Sammi Brie
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Shapeyness
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Shushugah
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|SnowFire
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Srnec
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|The Rambling Man
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Thelifeofan413
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Thuiop
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Tintor2
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|TompaDompa
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Volcanoguy
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Wehwalt
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|WikiOriginal-9
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Wtfiv
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Zmbro
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|Zzzs
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|-
			|'''Totals'''
			|'''155'''
			|'''26'''
			|'''27'''
			|
			|-
			|}
			{{collapse bottom}}
			{{collapse top|Supports and opposes for November 2024}}
			{| class="wikitable sortable"
			!'''# declarations'''
			! colspan="7" |'''Declaration'''
			|-
			!'''Editor'''
			! data-sort-type="number" |'''Support'''
			! data-sort-type="number" |'''Oppose converted to support'''
			! data-sort-type="number" |'''Struck oppose'''
			! data-sort-type="number" |'''Struck support'''
			! data-sort-type="number" |'''Oppose'''
			! data-sort-type="number" |'''None'''
			! data-sort-type="number" |'''Total'''
			|-
			|Nikkimaria
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|3
			|18
			|21
			|-
			|SchroCat
			|8
			|
			|
			|
			|4
			|8
			|20
			|-
			|Jo-Jo Eumerus
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|10
			|10
			|-
			|Crisco 1492
			|9
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|9
			|-
			|Generalissima
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|3
			|8
			|-
			|Matarisvan
			|5
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|3
			|8
			|-
			|Hog Farm
			|5
			|
			|1
			|
			|
			|1
			|7
			|-
			|Aoba47
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|3
			|5
			|-
			|UndercoverClassicist
			|4
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|
			|5
			|-
			|Dudley Miles
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|5
			|-
			|750h+
			|4
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|4
			|-
			|Gog the Mild
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|4
			|-
			|Tim riley
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|3
			|-
			|Premeditated Chaos
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|3
			|-
			|Gerda Arendt
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|3
			|-
			|Hurricanehink
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|3
			|-
			|Borsoka
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|3
			|-
			|Graham Beards
			|3
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|3
			|-
			|Boneless Pizza!
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|
			|3
			|-
			|TheJoebro64
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|
			|3
			|-
			|Ceoil
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|3
			|-
			|Vacant0
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|-
			|PARAKANYAA
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|2
			|-
			|Draken Bowser
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|2
			|-
			|Piotrus
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|2
			|-
			|ChrisTheDude
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|-
			|Heartfox
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|
			|2
			|-
			|MaranoFan
			|1
			|
			|
			|1
			|
			|
			|2
			|-
			|AirshipJungleman29
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|
			|2
			|-
			|Phlsph7
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|2
			|-
			|Epicgenius
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|-
			|Jens Lallensack
			|2
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|-
			|Cukie Gherkin
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|2
			|2
			|-
			|Medxvo
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|2
			|-
			|Lankyant
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|IntentionallyDense
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Balon Greyjoy
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Caeciliusinhorto
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Ajpolino
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|The Rambling Man
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Shapeyness
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Nick-D
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Paleface Jack
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Gen. Quon
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Joeyquism
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|LittleLazyLass
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Jonesey95
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Zzzs
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Thelifeofan413
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|JennyOz
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Srnec
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|SnowFire
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Choliamb
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Lazman321
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|WikiOriginal-9
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Mike Christie
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Hawkeye7
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Wtfiv
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Eem dik doun in toene
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Thuiop
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Fifelfoo
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|
			|1
			|-
			|NegativeMP1
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Dugan Murphy
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Wehwalt
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Mrfoogles
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Czar
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Rjjiii
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Volcanoguy
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|RFNirmala
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Kavyansh.Singh
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|TompaDompa
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Johnbod
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Panini!
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Sammi Brie
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Zmbro
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Relativity
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Tintor2
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Biruitorul
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Eddie891
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|Shushugah
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Mujinga
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|1
			|-
			|HAL333
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|Ippantekina
			|1
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|
			|1
			|-
			|'''Totals'''
			|'''105'''
			|
			|'''1'''
			|'''1'''
			|'''16'''
			|'''85'''
			|'''208'''
			|}
			{{collapse bottom}}
			The following table shows the 12-month review-to-nominations ratio for everyone who nominated an article that was promoted or archived in the last three months who has nominated more than one article in the last 12 months. The average promoted FAC receives between 6 and 7 reviews. ] (] - ] - ]) 15:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
			{{cot|Nominators for September 2024 to November 2024 with more than one nomination in the last 12 months}}
			{| class="wikitable sortable"
			!
			!Nominations (12 mos)
			!Reviews (12 mos)
			!Ratio (12 mos)
			|-
			|750h+
			|6.0
			|51.0
			|8.5
			|-
			|AirshipJungleman29
			|7.0
			|39.0
			|5.6
			|-
			|Amir Ghandi
			|2.0
			|None
			|0.0
			|-
			|Boneless Pizza!
			|2.5
			|8.0
			|3.2
			|-
			|ChrisTheDude
			|9.0
			|66.0
			|7.3
			|-
			|Darkwarriorblake
			|6.0
			|3.0
			|0.5
			|-
			|Dudley Miles
			|6.0
			|33.0
			|5.5
			|-
			|Dugan Murphy
			|3.0
			|14.0
			|4.7
			|-
			|Dxneo
			|2.0
			|None
			|0.0
			|-
			|Eem dik doun in toene
			|3.0
			|10.0
			|3.3
			|-
			|Epicgenius
			|8.5
			|17.0
			|2.0
			|-
			|FunkMonk
			|2.8
			|27.0
			|9.5
			|-
			|Generalissima
			|9.0
			|61.0
			|6.8
			|-
			|Hawkeye7
	|5.0		|5.0
			|7.0
			|1.4
			|-
			|Hog Farm
			|7.0
			|49.0
			|7.0
			|-
			|Hurricanehink
			|2.5
			|19.0
			|7.6
			|-
			|Ippantekina
			|5.0
			|6.0
			|1.2
			|-
			|Jens Lallensack
			|3.3
			|28.0
			|8.4
			|-
			|Jo-Jo Eumerus
			|6.0
			|218.0
			|36.3
			|-
			|Joeyquism
			|3.0
			|17.0
			|5.7
			|-
			|Kurzon
			|3.0
			|None
			|0.0
			|-
			|Kyle Peake
			|4.0
			|None
			|0.0
			|-
			|Llewee
			|2.0
			|7.0
			|3.5
			|-
			|M4V3R1CK32
			|2.0
			|None
			|0.0
			|-
			|MaranoFan
			|5.0
			|14.0
			|2.8
			|-
			|Mike Christie
			|6.0
			|54.0
			|9.0
			|-
			|NegativeMP1
			|3.0
			|11.0
			|3.7
			|-
			|Nick-D
			|2.0
	|15.0		|15.0
			|7.5
			|-
			|Noorullah21
			|4.0
			|None
			|0.0
			|-
			|Paleface Jack
	|3.0		|3.0
			|3.0
			|1.0
	|-		|-
			|Peacemaker67
	|Zmbro
			|6.0
			|2.0
			|0.3
			|-
			|Phlsph7
			|5.0
			|16.0
			|3.2
			|-
			|Pollosito
			|2.0
			|None
			|0.0
			|-
			|Premeditated Chaos
			|8.3
			|35.0
			|4.2
			|-
			|Relayed
	|2.0		|2.0
	|1.0		|1.0
	|0.5		|0.5
			|-
			|Sammi Brie
			|3.0
			|12.0
			|4.0
			|-
			|SchroCat
			|15.0
			|155.0
			|10.3
			|-
			|Serial Number 54129
			|3.0
			|39.0
			|13.0
			|-
			|The ed17
			|2.0
			|1.0
			|0.5
			|-
			|The Green Star Collector
			|3.0
			|None
			|0.0
			|-
			|Thebiguglyalien
			|5.0
			|3.0
			|0.6
			|-
			|Tim riley
			|5.0
			|52.0
			|10.4
			|-
			|TrademarkedTWOrantula
			|3.0
			|2.0
			|0.7
			|-
			|Turini2
			|2.0
			|None
			|0.0
			|-
			|UndercoverClassicist
			|6.0
			|89.0
			|14.8
			|-
			|Volcanoguy
			|4.0
			|7.0
			|1.8
			|-
			|Wehwalt
			|7.5
			|29.0
			|3.9
	|}		|}
	{{cob}}		{{cob}}
	-- ] (] - ] - ]) 12:26, 7 October 2024 (UTC)		-- ] (] - ] - ]) 15:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
			>>>
	== Article that heavily uses one source ==		== Status of Virgo interferometer ==
			{{@FAC}} What is the status of ]? Gog the Mild promoted it, FrB.TG ] for a spotcheck. , and I am not sure if what Hurricanehink mentioned is a spotcheck. ] (]) 16:19, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
	I'm considering ] for FAC, and I believe I've found all of the significant sources on this person. The problem is that one of them is much longer than the others. A few article-length sources have been written about her, but there's also one comprehensive book, a biography written by a historian who was given personal access to all of her records and documents. As a result, this one source dominates the article. I've highlighted the parts sourced to it at ], which is the majority of the article. Is this an issue in terms of the FA criteria? ] (]) 20:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
	:I can't see that it necessarily would be: criterion 1c is the most obviously relevant here, and that requires {{tq|a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature}}. If this really is a representative survey of the relevant literature (and "it's the only book-length work on her and was published within the last five years" seems like a good reason to believe that this is true) then I can't see what else in ] that would violate. That said, I can't immediately think of an example of an FA which is quite so reliant on a single source – ] comes to mind as a subject with a single monograph which dominates the scholarship, but it was published in 1995 and there have been several relevant articles and book chapters since, so Henry accounts for only about half of the references. ] (]) 20:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
	:: ] is up there as well. ] <sub> '']''</sub> 20:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
	:::That's a better example – looks like the only comment about sourcing which came up at FAC was {{tq|Heavy reliance on Licence, but it looks like that's the main source that exists}}. So looks like it's not a dealbreaker (though that review had pretty light participation, so I guess mileage may vary depending on how thoroughly individual reviewers grill you about justifying it?) ] (]) 21:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
	::::I would say it should be fine as long as the major facts are supported by other sources and any opinions are attributed. It's only a problem if one source is being used at the expense of all others. It's not uncommon, especially with biographies, to have one full-length book on a subject and lots of not-so-detailed sources. Those articles should still be able to become FAs. ] &#124; ] 22:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
			== Input from FA-experienced editors requested regarding quality of an existing featured article ==
	:::::The other possibility I'd suggest checking is whether there are relevant non-English sources not currently used. Those can be difficult to track in languages you don't know. (Not specific to this article, which I recognize does include non-English sources). ] (]) 23:09, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
	:Thanks everyone! I went over all of the other sources one more time and nominated the article. ] (]) 02:24, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
			I would appreciate input at ]. This is one of my earliest FACs, and I would appreciate some additional thoughts to make sure I'm not being too harsh on myself; this one isn't really up to my current standard. ] <sub> '']''</sub> 04:04, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
	==Second nom?==
	FAC Co-ords, would it be okay if I put another article up for nomination? My current nom—]—has been going for a while and has five supports and completed source and image reviews. (Obviously there's no problem if you want me to wait a bit longer on this too). Cheers - ] (]) 05:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
			== disputing archiving ==
	:Go ahead ] (]) 17:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
	::Thanks ] - much appreciated! Cheers - ] (]) 17:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
			] was archived with 5 supports, 1 oppose (which had been mainly resolved), and 3 reviews currently in progress. I think this is very premature — the closer said that the most recent review by {{u|AirshipJungleman29}} showed that it was not ready for promotion, but this mainly consistented of minor text tweaks and recommendations that would be resolved in a matter of minutes. I feel that this should be reopened, though obviously I'm going to be biased in that respect; I wanted to see what everyone else thought. <small> ] (]) (it/she) </small> 13:56, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
	== Additional source reviewers ==
			:fwiw, although Ian didn't know this when closing, the rest of my review would not have been resolved in a matter of minutes; I was intending, among other things, to deeply question the reliance on one book so recently published I can find zero scholarly reviews of it. ] (]) 14:16, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
			::Yeah, given that Airship's review so far was only on the lead and already included a couple of non-trivial comments, plus given the nom had been open for weeks already and had another outstanding oppose, I think a closure was reasonably justifiable, though of course disappointing. ] (]) 14:20, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
			::Ah, that's fair enough I suppose. To PR! <small> ] (]) (it/she) </small> 14:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
			== On source reviews for foreign language sources ==
			] came down to three sources that were offline and in Farsi. I know that ] to get at offline sources, but I wonder if anyone's sitting on a way to handle spotchecks or sourcechecks when the source to be checked is in a foreign language. Folks vouched for DeepL on Hungarian sources and I think Polish sources too, but is Google Translate reliable for translating Farsi? I don't feel comfortable with skipping certain sources just because it's too hard to verify them, so these need to be checked as well. ] (]) 11:20, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			: found that GT was 67.5% reliable for translating medical phrases into Farsi. If the sources are linguistically complicated, I would expect the reliability to be around the same; if they are linguistically simple, the reliability will go up. GT has also improved since 2021. ] (]) 11:52, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			::I would assume good faith if other sources' spot-check did not indicate unverified statements or close paraphrasing. In this case, the nominator could also be requested to provide a translation. ] (]) 05:51, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
			== Archive problem ==
			There seems to have been a problem with the bot archiving ]. The bot has not added ] or ] to the page or updated ]. ] (]) 04:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:Tks, I think I've located so the bot will complete the archiving process next time it runs -- FYI {{u|Hawkeye7}}. Cheers, ] (]) 07:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::Yes. It has run now. ] ] 08:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			==Second nom?==
			{{@FAC}} Would I be okay to pop in a second nom? ] has been going for a couple of weeks and has five supports and has cleared image and source reviews, so most of the heavy lifting appears to be done on that. No problems if you'd rather I wait a little longer, obviously. Cheers - ] (]) 20:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
			:Yes, you would. ] (]) 21:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
	If there are any folks willing to process ] it would be very much appreciated. Especially folks familiar with videogames and popular culture topics (e.g ]) - I review these too but I am always a bit uncertain on the quality of the sources vis-a-vis the FA criterium "high-quality reliable source", as I am more familiar with academic subjects than these. ] (]) 10:01, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
			::Thanks very much ] - that's great. Cheers - ] (]) 21:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

---

Latest revision as of 21:35, 6 January 2025

Shortcut

• WT:FAC

Pages, tools and templates for
Featured articles
Peer review pre-FAC Articles seeking peer review before featured article candidacy August 29 Ivan the Terrible (1945 film) September 3 A Space for the Unbound October 4 Cisnormativity October 16 Veiqia October 21 Crohn's Disease October 22 Stingless bee October 28 Nayib Bukele October 29 William D. Hoard October 30 Mind November 5 Midnights November 15 The Legend of Dragoon November 19 "Kill Bill" (SZA song) November 20 Beachy Head (poem) November 27 Fire Shut Up in My Bones November 29 Tyla (album) December 3 Neurocysticercosis December 10 "I Feel It Coming" December 12 "Christmas Tree Farm" December 13 History of education in Wales (1701–1870) December 16 Statue of Robert Falcon Scott, Christchurch December 16 "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" December 19 "Cherry on Top" (Bini song) December 21 Black Ken December 22 Larries December 23 "Not in Love" (Crystal Castles song) December 24 Central Powers December 28 Selected Ambient Works 85–92 December 29 Leon S. Kennedy December 31 The River (Bruce Springsteen album) January 1 Steven Universe Unanswered peer reviews view edit
Featured article candidates (FAC) Image/source check requests Mentoring for FAC Source reviewing at FAC FAC statistics tool FAC coordination FACs needing feedback view • edit Tesla Model S Review it now How You Get the Girl Review it now 2007 Greensburg tornado Review it now
Featured article review (FAR) FAs on cleanup list Hot articles at FAR Misplaced Pages:Unreviewed featured articles/2020 Featured article removal candidates view edit Boogeyman 2 Review now Shoshone National Forest Review now Northrop YF-23 Review now Emmy Noether Review now Concerto delle donne Review now Featured article review Talk notices given view edit Diocletianic Persecution 2020-05-03 Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky 2020-05-22 Underwater diving 2020-09-15 Józef Piłsudski 2020-09-25, 2021-08-07 Supernatural (season 1) 2020-11-02 Supernatural (season 2) 2020-11-02 Kahaani 2020-11-18 2023-02-25 Major depressive disorder 2020-11-20 2022-08-18 2024-11-19 India 2020-11-29 and 2023-11-28 1968 Thule Air Base B-52 crash 2020-11-30 Tumbler Ridge 2020-12-26 2024-11-19 Glacier National Park (U.S.) 2020-12-30 Ivan Bagramyan 2021-02-21 Bird 2021-02-21 Hamilton, Ontario 2021-02-22 Comet Hyakutake 2021-02-22 Mary Wollstonecraft 2021-03-03 Postage stamps of Ireland 2021-03-11, 2023-03-25 The Joy of Sect 2021-04-08 The World Ends with You 2021-04-23 Defense of the Ancients 2021-06-10 Dwarf planet 2021-08-14 Robert Garran 2021-10-09 Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia 2021-11-27 Hurricane Edith (1971) 2021-12-04 Meteorological history of Hurricane Jeanne 2021-12-05 Meteorological history of Hurricane Gordon 2021-12-05 Hurricane Dean 2021-12-05 Meteorological history of Hurricane Wilma 2021-12-05 Meteorological history of Hurricane Ivan 2021-12-05 Effects of Hurricane Ivan in the Lesser Antilles and South America 2021-12-05 Tropical Storm Bonnie (2004) 2021-12-05 Tropical Storm Henri (2003) 2021-12-05 Tropical Storm Edouard (2002) 2021-12-05 Hurricane Fabian 2021-12-05 Effects of Hurricane Isabel in Maryland and Washington, D.C. 2021-12-06 Hurricane Erika (1997) 2021-12-06 Hurricane Isabel 2021-12-06 Hurricane Kenna 2021-12-06 Typhoon Pongsona 2021-12-07 Hubble Space Telescope 2022-01-08 Dürer's Rhinoceros 2022-02-04 Io (moon) 2022-02-13 Solar eclipse 2022-04-30 Manchester 2022-05-12 Transformers (film) 2022-06-05 Slate industry in Wales 2022-07-05 Working Schizophrenia 2022-08-18 Amanita muscaria 2022-08-26 Battle of Corydon 2022-10-10 White Deer Hole Creek 2022-10-22 Work ongoing December 2022 Mayan languages 2022-11-19 Sentence spacing 2022-11-19 Indigenous people of the Everglades region 2022-11-21 First-move advantage in chess 2022-11-21 King Arthur 2022-11-22 Stephen Crane 2022-11-22 Mark Kerry 2022-12-01 California Gold Rush 2022-12-02 Harry McNish Noticed 2022-12-03 History of Lithuania (1219–1295) 2022-12-03 Władysław II Jagiełło 2022-12-03 David I of Scotland 2022-12-03 Coeliac disease 2022-12-03 Metabolism 2022-12-03 Northern bald ibis 2022-12-09 Cane toad 2022-12-09 Boeing 777 2022-12-09 Second Crusade 2022-12-09 Delichon 2022-12-10 Rock martin 2022-12-10 Lion 2022-12-10 Victoria Cross for New Zealand 2023-01-01 Work ongoing January 2023 Bengali language movement 2023-01-15 USS New Jersey (BB-62) 2023-01-23 West Wycombe Park 2023-01-25 Holkham Hall 2023-01-25 Redshift 2023-01-26 Angkor Wat 2023-01-28 Jack Sheppard 2023-02-02 Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna of Russia 2023-02-12 Guy Fawkes Night 2023-02-14 Marcus Trescothick 2023-02-22 Moe Berg 2023-03-10 Falaise Pocket 2023-03-29 James Nesbitt 2023-03-29 Johnstown Inclined Plane 2023-04-23 Dengue fever 2023-04-30 Wood Badge 2023-05-15 Hurricane Claudette (2003) 2023-05-16 Cleveland 2023-05-16 Buildings and architecture of Bristol 2023-05-20 Oregon State Capitol 2023-06-02 Surrender of Japan 2023-06-30 Felice Beato 2023-08-04 Augustus 2023-08-08 Caspar David Friedrich 2023-08-13 Jocelin of Glasgow 2023-11-01 Hydrogen 2023-11-01 Ancient Egypt 2023-11-18 Acetic acid 2023-12-8 Eric Brewer (ice hockey) 2024-01-02 Adelaide Anne Procter 2024-01-30 Boston 2024-04-15 Borscht 2024-06-15 Khan Noonien Singh 2024-07-03 Taylor Swift 2024-08-02 Nahuatl 2024-08-04 Carnivàle 2024-08-09 Your Power 2024-08-16 Washington, D.C. 2024-08-27 George Washington (inventor) 2024-08-30 Alien vs. Predator (film) 2024-10-26 Mom and Dad (1945 film) 2024-10-26 A Cure for Pokeritis 2024-10-26 Zombie Nightmare 2024-10-26 Naruto Uzumaki 2024-12-31 Find more: Unreviewed featured articles
Today's featured article (TFA) Pending requests
Scripts and tools Dashes Dup link checker Dates Other Resolving HarvRef errors Reliability of sources Article alerts Featured article candidates All featured articles
Guidance Mentoring for FAC Advice pages Featured article advice Dweller Giano Jengod Nick-D Nikkimaria SandyGeorgia Yannismarou Writing How to improve your writing Redundancy exercises Essay on writing Reception sections Image and source reviewing Source reviewing essay Source reviewing dispatch Ealdgyth source reviewing Free images Non-free images
v t e

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (April Fools 2005) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 (2007) 22 23 24 25 26 (2008) 27 28 29 30 31 (Short FAs) 32 (Short FAs cont) 33 34 (Context and notability) 35 (2009) 36 (new FAC/FAR delegates) 37 38 39 (alt text) 40 41 42 (2010) 43 (RFC) 44 45 46 47 48 (Plagiarism, new FAC delegate) 49 (2011) 50 51 52 53 54 (2012) 55 (RFC) 56 57 58 59 60 (2013) 61 62 63 (proposals) (2014) 64 (2015) 65 66 (2016) 67 68 69 (2017) 70 71 72 73 74 (2018) 75 76 77 (2019) 78 79 80 81 82 83 (2020) 84 85 86 87 (2021) 88 89 (2022) 90 91 92 (2023) 93 94 (2023–24) Archives by topic: Alt text, Citation templates (load times)

Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding nominations viewer to your scripts page. For a list of foreign-language reviewers see FAC foreign language reviewers.

Image/source check requests

Current requests Requests should only be posted here for FAC nominations that have attracted several reviews and declarations of support. Premature requests can be removed by any editor.

FAC mentoring: first-time nominators

A voluntary mentoring scheme, designed to help first-time FAC nominators through the process and to improve their chances of a successful outcome, is now in action. Click here for further details. Experienced FAC editors, with five or more "stars" behind them, are invited to consider adding their names to the list of possible mentors, also found in the link. Brianboulton (talk) 10:17, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

FAC source reviews

For advice on conducting source reviews, see Misplaced Pages:Guidance on source reviewing at FAC.

FAC reviewing statistics and nominator reviewing table for October 2024

Here are the FAC reviewing statistics for October 2024. The tables below include all reviews for FACS that were either archived or promoted last month, so the reviews included are spread over the last two or three months. A review posted last month is not included if the FAC was still open at the end of the month. The new facstats tool has been updated with this data, but the old facstats tool has not. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Reviewers for October 2024

# reviews Type of review Reviewer Content Source Image Accessibility Nikkimaria 1 23 Jo-Jo Eumerus 1 15 6 SchroCat 11 4 Mike Christie 12 Generalissima 7 1 3 Hog Farm 8 2 ChrisTheDude 9 Matarisvan 4 4 UndercoverClassicist 8 750h+ 5 1 FunkMonk 6 AirshipJungleman29 5 Edwininlondon 5 Tim riley 5 Crisco 1492 4 Dugan Murphy 3 1 Jens Lallensack 4 Llewee 4 Phlsph7 1 3 Premeditated Chaos 3 1 Aoba47 3 Dudley Miles 3 Gog the Mild 3 Mujinga 2 1 RoySmith 3 Serial Number 54129 3 TechnoSquirrel69 2 1 Vacant0 2 1 Buidhe 2 Chipmunkdavis 2 Draken Bowser 2 Gerda Arendt 2 Graham Beards 2 Hurricanehink 2 Nick-D 2 Sammi Brie 2 Sawyer777 1 1 Shushugah 2 Steelkamp 2 Wehwalt 2 2601AC47 1 Alavense 1 Arconning 1 Aza24 1 Bneu2013 1 Boneless Pizza! 1 BorgQueen 1 Ceranthor 1 D.Lazard 1 David Eppstein 1 Dumelow 1 Eewilson 1 Femke 1 Frietjes 1 GA-RT-22 1 GamerPro64 1 Ganesha811 1 GeoWriter 1 HAL333 1 Hawkeye7 1 Heartfox 1 IceWelder 1 IJReid 1 IntentionallyDense 1 Joeyquism 1 Joshua Jonathan 1 Kavyansh.Singh 1 Kung Fu Man 1 MaranoFan 1 Mathwriter2718 1 MSincccc 1 MyCatIsAChonk 1 NegativeMP1 1 Paleface Jack 1 PanagiotisZois 1 Panini! 1 Pbritti 1 PrimalMustelid 1 Queen of Hearts 1 Remsense 1 Reppop 1 Rjjiii (ii) 1 SandyGeorgia 1 Shooterwalker 1 SilverTiger12 1 Sky Harbor 1 SNUGGUMS 1 Spy-cicle 1 Ss112 1 ThaesOfereode 1 The Rambling Man 1 Tintor2 1 TrademarkedTWOrantula 1 WhatamIdoing 1 XOR'easter 1 Zawed 1 Totals 201 35 38

Supports and opposes for October 2024

# declarations Declaration Editor Support Oppose converted to support Struck oppose Struck support Oppose None Total Nikkimaria 24 24 Jo-Jo Eumerus 1 21 22 SchroCat 7 3 5 15 Mike Christie 12 12 Generalissima 5 6 11 Hog Farm 6 2 2 10 ChrisTheDude 9 9 UndercoverClassicist 6 1 1 8 Matarisvan 4 4 8 FunkMonk 4 2 6 750h+ 5 1 6 Tim riley 5 5 Edwininlondon 5 5 AirshipJungleman29 3 2 5 Llewee 4 4 Jens Lallensack 1 1 2 4 Phlsph7 4 4 Crisco 1492 3 1 4 Dugan Murphy 3 1 4 Premeditated Chaos 3 1 4 Mujinga 2 1 3 Serial Number 54129 1 1 1 3 Vacant0 1 1 1 3 Gog the Mild 2 1 3 Dudley Miles 3 3 TechnoSquirrel69 3 3 RoySmith 1 2 3 Aoba47 2 1 3 Sammi Brie 2 2 Hurricanehink 2 2 Chipmunkdavis 2 2 Graham Beards 1 1 2 Shushugah 2 2 Buidhe 2 2 Steelkamp 2 2 Nick-D 1 1 2 Sawyer777 1 1 2 Gerda Arendt 2 2 Draken Bowser 2 2 Wehwalt 2 2 Dumelow 1 1 Joshua Jonathan 1 1 Tintor2 1 1 MSincccc 1 1 HAL333 1 1 Panini! 1 1 IntentionallyDense 1 1 Paleface Jack 1 1 Rjjiii (ii) 1 1 Heartfox 1 1 Eewilson 1 1 IceWelder 1 1 XOR'easter 1 1 Spy-cicle 1 1 TrademarkedTWOrantula 1 1 PrimalMustelid 1 1 Pbritti 1 1 WhatamIdoing 1 1 Frietjes 1 1 Reppop 1 1 The Rambling Man 1 1 MaranoFan 1 1 Shooterwalker 1 1 Aza24 1 1 ThaesOfereode 1 1 BorgQueen 1 1 IJReid 1 1 GeoWriter 1 1 Boneless Pizza! 1 1 D.Lazard 1 1 2601AC47 1 1 Sky Harbor 1 1 Alavense 1 1 MyCatIsAChonk 1 1 Remsense 1 1 NegativeMP1 1 1 Zawed 1 1 SNUGGUMS 1 1 Kung Fu Man 1 1 Arconning 1 1 Kavyansh.Singh 1 1 Femke 1 1 Queen of Hearts 1 1 Joeyquism 1 1 Bneu2013 1 1 SandyGeorgia 1 1 PanagiotisZois 1 1 Ceranthor 1 1 SilverTiger12 1 1 David Eppstein 1 1 GamerPro64 1 1 Hawkeye7 1 1 Mathwriter2718 1 1 Ss112 1 1 GA-RT-22 1 1 Ganesha811 1 1 Totals 135 21 118 274

The following table shows the 12-month review-to-nominations ratio for everyone who nominated an article that was promoted or archived in the last three months who has nominated more than one article in the last 12 months. The average promoted FAC receives between 6 and 7 reviews. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Nominators for August 2024 to October 2024 with more than one nomination in the last 12 months

Nominations (12 mos) Reviews (12 mos) Ratio (12 mos) 750h+ 5.0 47.0 9.4 AirshipJungleman29 8.0 43.0 5.4 Amir Ghandi 2.0 None 0.0 BennyOnTheLoose 3.5 10.0 2.9 Boneless Pizza! 1.5 5.0 3.3 ChrisTheDude 9.0 73.0 8.1 Darkwarriorblake 6.0 4.0 0.7 Dudley Miles 6.0 30.0 5.0 Dugan Murphy 3.0 14.0 4.7 Eem dik doun in toene 3.0 9.0 3.0 Epicgenius 7.5 17.0 2.3 FunkMonk 2.8 28.0 9.9 Generalissima 9.0 54.0 6.0 Hawkeye7 5.0 8.0 1.6 Heartfox 5.0 26.0 5.2 Hog Farm 6.0 42.0 7.0 Hurricanehink 1.5 16.0 10.7 Ippantekina 5.0 5.0 1.0 Jens Lallensack 3.3 28.0 8.4 Jo-Jo Eumerus 6.0 221.0 36.8 Joeyquism 3.0 16.0 5.3 Kung Fu Man 2.0 1.0 0.5 Kurzon 3.0 None 0.0 Kyle Peake 4.0 None 0.0 Lee Vilenski 3.0 2.0 0.7 Llewee 2.0 7.0 3.5 M4V3R1CK32 2.0 None 0.0 MaranoFan 5.0 14.0 2.8 Mattximus 3.0 None 0.0 Mike Christie 6.0 64.0 10.7 NegativeMP1 3.0 10.0 3.3 Nick-D 2.0 14.0 7.0 Paleface Jack 3.0 2.0 0.7 Peacemaker67 6.0 2.0 0.3 Phlsph7 7.0 15.0 2.1 Pickersgill-Cunliffe 2.0 5.0 2.5 Pollosito 2.0 None 0.0 Premeditated Chaos 9.3 36.0 3.9 PSA 2.0 4.0 2.0 Sammi Brie 3.5 13.0 3.7 SchroCat 15.0 143.0 9.5 Serial Number 54129 3.0 45.0 15.0 Skyshifter 4.0 6.0 1.5 SounderBruce 3.0 1.0 0.3 The ed17 2.0 1.0 0.5 The Green Star Collector 2.0 None 0.0 Thebiguglyalien 5.0 4.0 0.8 Tim riley 5.0 49.0 9.8 TrademarkedTWOrantula 3.0 2.0 0.7 Turini2 2.0 None 0.0 UndercoverClassicist 5.0 93.0 18.6 Volcanoguy 4.0 7.0 1.8 Voorts 5.5 15.0 2.7 WeatherWriter 2.0 None 0.0 Wehwalt 8.5 31.0 3.6 Wolverine XI 5.0 8.0 1.6 ZKang123 4.0 13.0 3.2

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:08, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Science articles are underrepresented

For a long time there has hardly been any science articles at FAC. Perhaps someone could remind me of the last successful candidate? But we have one at FAC now which is not garnering much attention, which is a shame. I'm not canvassing for support, despite having given mine, but is there any chance of a few reviews? Graham Beards (talk) 14:59, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I'll try to take a look within the next couple days, although I've got quite a bit going on IRL. Hog Farm _Talk 16:18, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Ditto. I'll have time to review this weekend. I can take on the source review as well if no one beats me to it (please feel free to beat me to it). Ajpolino (talk) 15:39, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Not sure if it was the most recent, but off the top of my head there was Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Lise Meitner/archive1 not that long ago (if biography articles on scientists count). TompaDompa (talk) 16:29, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Right now we have Otto Hahn being reviewed. Plus of course Virgo interferometer, at which additional thoughts would be most welcome. I assume that science is being used in a way which excludes biology and geology? Gog the Mild (talk) 16:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I believe Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Dennis/archive1 counts as a science article, no? It has seven participants but only one review and is at risk of being archived. Adding onto that, it is a former featured article, which should be getting more views, especially because of its notable impacts in the Greater Antilles and the United States. _ZZ'S 16:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Using a broad definition of science, and not counting biographies, I think there have been five promoted this year (dates in brackets).

• Heptamegacanthus (26 Aug)
• Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (25 Aug)
• Dracunculiasis (22 May)
• Prostate cancer (22 Apr)
• Tropical Storm Hernan (2020) (7 Jan)

My apologies for any I missed. We need more. Graham Beards (talk) 17:02, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

You missed Hurricane Cindy (2005). Its nomination was successfull on 27 September. I'm still surprised that a less notable, damaging, and deadly storm was promoted, but Hurricane Dennis, the opposite, is at a significant risk of being archived. _ZZ'S 17:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

There is also Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Socompa/archive1. That said, the reason why I am no longer writing many articles is because they need to be updated and my queue has just become too long. I think that's the general problem with science FAs, science isn't static in time so they become outdated. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:58, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

That's the case with many articles, not just science ones. If FAs are maintained, this should not be a problem. Also, many science articles are remarkably static. See Maxwell's equations, which is not a FA, but a good example of a stable science article. Graham Beards (talk) 11:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Aye, I know about Wōdejebato and relatives which also don't get much new research. I guess I just used up my space of "how many articles can I maintain" Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:35, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

That's what happens when you become a stellar contributor. :-) Graham Beards (talk) 11:38, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Tiger was promoted July 25. LittleJerry (talk) 14:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

There have been a few animals, both extant and extinct, they should count, no? FunkMonk (talk) 14:17, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

They do. _ZZ'S 14:19, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I think Bonn–Oberkassel dog (Aug 8) counts as a science article. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 16:17, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I would not call a typical hurricane article a science article. For sure, meteorology is a science, and there's plenty you can write about hurricanes in general which is about the science. But most of these are just cookie-cutter recitations of the specific facts about events that happen dozens of times a year. What was the track, where it made landfall, pressure readings, wind strengths, rainfall, damage caused. That's not science, that's just a data dump wrapped up in prose form with carefully formatted references. RoySmith (talk) 19:11, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes I agree, was thinking the same. Just because a hurricane comes about due to scientific phenomena does not make discussion of individual hurricanes scientific per se. We might as well argue Taylor Swift is science because she's made up of atoms, molecules, cells, mitochondria and all the rest of it 😏  — Amakuru (talk) 00:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Just addressing the elephant (hurricane writer) in the room, I kind of agree, that hurricane articles aren't really "science". In fact, as a hurricane writer, I make attempts to make it hurricane articles not appear too scientific, so it is accessible to the average reader. This isn't about a proton or a black hole where you talk about years of research and tons of research papers. No, instead we rely on "pressure readings, wind strengths, rainfall", all different tools to describe what actually happened, and why a single storm affected so many different people. Sometimes storms can even cause wars and disrupt national economies, but they're such short-lived events, that it's not like they're an ongoing thing worthy of significant research, not when a lot of storms are honestly pretty similar. They all do very similar things, with some slight variations. That's why I find them fascinating, and why I write about them, and I'm not going to stop writing about them since I think the vast majority of tropical cyclone articles are useful and interesting. But they aren't exactly "science", like some kind of hypothesis or idea, and admittedly there should probably be more articles on the study of meteorology. I'm gonna have to do something about that... ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:16, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Removing my comments for now. Will post again when I've had more time to think about the content. Apologies. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Seattle Kraken nom

Hello there. A couple months back, I nominated the article Seattle Kraken for FA, but after five weeks, it didn't get the needed amount of reviews, and the nomination was subsequently closed. I nominated it again 11 days ago and it still hasn't received any reviews. Any reasons why? Thanks. XR228 (talk) 02:28, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

To be honest, the usual cause is that lots of people are reluctant to post 'oppose' reviews. Nick-D (talk) 07:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I think in this particular case it might be the topic. Popular culture doesn't fare brilliantly for FAC reviewers, and sports are even more niche (in that just liking 'sport' isn't enough, rather the sport itself). The article itself isn't in bad nick as it goes; no major MOS violations jump out, everything's cited, sources all seem OK, if news heavy (but that's probably inevitable for a relatively young team like this). SerialNumber54129 12:23, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Also, i forgot to mention that you're allowed—encouraged—to page reviewers who took part in the early FAC... SerialNumber54129 13:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Another reason might be that you haven't reviewed any articles at FAC, according to the FAC statistics tool. Reviewing articles helps editors learn the FA criteria, shows that you understand the criteria, and builds goodwill among editors. If looking for reviews, I always recommend reviewing articles yourself. Z1720 (talk) 12:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Echoing this, particularly the "goodwill among editors" bit. Reviewing takes time, and I'm more willing to take that time to help someone who has invested in the FAC process. Note that when Graham Beards asked for volunteers a couple sections above, folks jumped in to review. If you're wondering why, feast your eyes on Graham's reviewing stats and imagine the kind of goodwill the guy has stockpiled. Ajpolino (talk) 20:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

One caveat here is that we don't want "I'll support/oppose your article if you support/oppose mine"-type situations. Each article needs to be reviewed dispassionately. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:18, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

RfC at WT:BLP

Drawing the attention of project editors to an RfC concerning a proposed change to WP:SUSPECT, which could affect relevant FACs. Interested parties should join this discussion. SerialNumber54129 18:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Japanese and Farsi/Persian speakers needed

There are two FAC reviews where the source spotcheck hinges on Japanese and Farsi/Persian sources. Specifically, Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Hurra-yi Khuttali/archive2 for Farsi/Persian and Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Pulgasari/archive1 for Japanese. Anyone who knows how to read them? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Google Lens' translate function is quite good these days for translating pictures of documents. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately not all of the problem sources are in image form; some are behind paywalls and stuff. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Images in BLPs

There is a thread at Talk:Len Deighton#Lack of an image about adding images of BLPs, and possibly not passing FAC if no non-free one can be found. All comments are welcome. - SchroCat (talk) 19:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Strikethrough error

There appears to be some sort of error in one of the FACs as several of the listings in the "Older nominations" section have all their comments displayed with a strike-through. I was wondering if there was any way to have that fixed? I am guessing that it is an issue with one of the FAC that is bleeding out into the other FACs on the list. Aoba47 (talk) 03:00, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I think I've fixed it. Mr rnddude (talk) 04:05, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

RfC at Talk:Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov

There is an RfC at Talk:Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov, an FA. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. - SchroCat (talk) 05:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

FAC reviewing statistics and nominator reviewing table for November 2024

Here are the FAC reviewing statistics for November 2024. The tables below include all reviews for FACS that were either archived or promoted last month, so the reviews included are spread over the last two or three months. A review posted last month is not included if the FAC was still open at the end of the month. The new facstats tool has been updated with this data, but the old facstats tool has not. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Reviewers for November 2024

# reviews Type of review Reviewer Content Source Image Accessibility Nikkimaria 3 1 17 SchroCat 14 6 Jo-Jo Eumerus 7 3 Crisco 1492 9 Generalissima 5 1 2 Matarisvan 6 1 1 Hog Farm 6 1 Aoba47 3 2 Dudley Miles 5 UndercoverClassicist 5 750h+ 4 Gog the Mild 4 Boneless Pizza! 3 Borsoka 3 Ceoil 3 Gerda Arendt 3 Graham Beards 3 Hurricanehink 3 Premeditated Chaos 1 2 TheJoebro64 3 Tim riley 3 AirshipJungleman29 2 ChrisTheDude 2 Cukie Gherkin 1 1 Draken Bowser 2 Epicgenius 2 Heartfox 2 Jens Lallensack 2 MaranoFan 2 Medxvo 1 1 PARAKANYAA 2 Phlsph7 2 Piotrus 2 Vacant0 2 Ajpolino 1 Balon Greyjoy 1 Biruitorul 1 Caeciliusinhorto 1 Choliamb 1 Czar 1 Dugan Murphy 1 Eddie891 1 Eem dik doun in toene 1 Fifelfoo 1 Gen. Quon 1 HAL333 1 Hawkeye7 1 IntentionallyDense 1 Ippantekina 1 JennyOz 1 Joeyquism 1 Johnbod 1 Jonesey95 1 Kavyansh.Singh 1 Lankyant 1 Lazman321 1 LittleLazyLass 1 Mike Christie 1 Mrfoogles 1 Mujinga 1 NegativeMP1 1 Nick-D 1 Paleface Jack 1 Panini! 1 Relativity 1 RFNirmala 1 Rjjiii 1 Sammi Brie 1 Shapeyness 1 Shushugah 1 SnowFire 1 Srnec 1 The Rambling Man 1 Thelifeofan413 1 Thuiop 1 Tintor2 1 TompaDompa 1 Volcanoguy 1 Wehwalt 1 WikiOriginal-9 1 Wtfiv 1 Zmbro 1 Zzzs 1 Totals 155 26 27

Supports and opposes for November 2024

# declarations Declaration Editor Support Oppose converted to support Struck oppose Struck support Oppose None Total Nikkimaria 3 18 21 SchroCat 8 4 8 20 Jo-Jo Eumerus 10 10 Crisco 1492 9 9 Generalissima 3 2 3 8 Matarisvan 5 3 8 Hog Farm 5 1 1 7 Aoba47 2 3 5 UndercoverClassicist 4 1 5 Dudley Miles 3 2 5 750h+ 4 4 Gog the Mild 2 1 1 4 Tim riley 3 3 Premeditated Chaos 1 2 3 Gerda Arendt 2 1 3 Hurricanehink 3 3 Borsoka 3 3 Graham Beards 3 3 Boneless Pizza! 2 1 3 TheJoebro64 2 1 3 Ceoil 2 1 3 Vacant0 2 2 PARAKANYAA 2 2 Draken Bowser 1 1 2 Piotrus 1 1 2 ChrisTheDude 2 2 Heartfox 1 1 2 MaranoFan 1 1 2 AirshipJungleman29 1 1 2 Phlsph7 2 2 Epicgenius 2 2 Jens Lallensack 2 2 Cukie Gherkin 2 2 Medxvo 1 1 2 Lankyant 1 1 IntentionallyDense 1 1 Balon Greyjoy 1 1 Caeciliusinhorto 1 1 Ajpolino 1 1 The Rambling Man 1 1 Shapeyness 1 1 Nick-D 1 1 Paleface Jack 1 1 Gen. Quon 1 1 Joeyquism 1 1 LittleLazyLass 1 1 Jonesey95 1 1 Zzzs 1 1 Thelifeofan413 1 1 JennyOz 1 1 Srnec 1 1 SnowFire 1 1 Choliamb 1 1 Lazman321 1 1 WikiOriginal-9 1 1 Mike Christie 1 1 Hawkeye7 1 1 Wtfiv 1 1 Eem dik doun in toene 1 1 Thuiop 1 1 Fifelfoo 1 1 NegativeMP1 1 1 Dugan Murphy 1 1 Wehwalt 1 1 Mrfoogles 1 1 Czar 1 1 Rjjiii 1 1 Volcanoguy 1 1 RFNirmala 1 1 Kavyansh.Singh 1 1 TompaDompa 1 1 Johnbod 1 1 Panini! 1 1 Sammi Brie 1 1 Zmbro 1 1 Relativity 1 1 Tintor2 1 1 Biruitorul 1 1 Eddie891 1 1 Shushugah 1 1 Mujinga 1 1 HAL333 1 1 Ippantekina 1 1 Totals 105 1 1 16 85 208

The following table shows the 12-month review-to-nominations ratio for everyone who nominated an article that was promoted or archived in the last three months who has nominated more than one article in the last 12 months. The average promoted FAC receives between 6 and 7 reviews. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Nominators for September 2024 to November 2024 with more than one nomination in the last 12 months

Nominations (12 mos) Reviews (12 mos) Ratio (12 mos) 750h+ 6.0 51.0 8.5 AirshipJungleman29 7.0 39.0 5.6 Amir Ghandi 2.0 None 0.0 Boneless Pizza! 2.5 8.0 3.2 ChrisTheDude 9.0 66.0 7.3 Darkwarriorblake 6.0 3.0 0.5 Dudley Miles 6.0 33.0 5.5 Dugan Murphy 3.0 14.0 4.7 Dxneo 2.0 None 0.0 Eem dik doun in toene 3.0 10.0 3.3 Epicgenius 8.5 17.0 2.0 FunkMonk 2.8 27.0 9.5 Generalissima 9.0 61.0 6.8 Hawkeye7 5.0 7.0 1.4 Hog Farm 7.0 49.0 7.0 Hurricanehink 2.5 19.0 7.6 Ippantekina 5.0 6.0 1.2 Jens Lallensack 3.3 28.0 8.4 Jo-Jo Eumerus 6.0 218.0 36.3 Joeyquism 3.0 17.0 5.7 Kurzon 3.0 None 0.0 Kyle Peake 4.0 None 0.0 Llewee 2.0 7.0 3.5 M4V3R1CK32 2.0 None 0.0 MaranoFan 5.0 14.0 2.8 Mike Christie 6.0 54.0 9.0 NegativeMP1 3.0 11.0 3.7 Nick-D 2.0 15.0 7.5 Noorullah21 4.0 None 0.0 Paleface Jack 3.0 3.0 1.0 Peacemaker67 6.0 2.0 0.3 Phlsph7 5.0 16.0 3.2 Pollosito 2.0 None 0.0 Premeditated Chaos 8.3 35.0 4.2 Relayed 2.0 1.0 0.5 Sammi Brie 3.0 12.0 4.0 SchroCat 15.0 155.0 10.3 Serial Number 54129 3.0 39.0 13.0 The ed17 2.0 1.0 0.5 The Green Star Collector 3.0 None 0.0 Thebiguglyalien 5.0 3.0 0.6 Tim riley 5.0 52.0 10.4 TrademarkedTWOrantula 3.0 2.0 0.7 Turini2 2.0 None 0.0 UndercoverClassicist 6.0 89.0 14.8 Volcanoguy 4.0 7.0 1.8 Wehwalt 7.5 29.0 3.9

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC) >>>

Status of Virgo interferometer

@FAC coordinators: What is the status of Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Virgo interferometer/archive2? Gog the Mild promoted it, FrB.TG asked for a spotcheck. None was done in the short timespan between the edits, and I am not sure if what Hurricanehink mentioned is a spotcheck. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:19, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Input from FA-experienced editors requested regarding quality of an existing featured article

I would appreciate input at Talk:Landis's Missouri Battery#Revamping. This is one of my earliest FACs, and I would appreciate some additional thoughts to make sure I'm not being too harsh on myself; this one isn't really up to my current standard. Hog Farm _Talk 04:04, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

disputing archiving

Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Gusuku period/archive1 was archived with 5 supports, 1 oppose (which had been mainly resolved), and 3 reviews currently in progress. I think this is very premature — the closer said that the most recent review by AirshipJungleman29 showed that it was not ready for promotion, but this mainly consistented of minor text tweaks and recommendations that would be resolved in a matter of minutes. I feel that this should be reopened, though obviously I'm going to be biased in that respect; I wanted to see what everyone else thought. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 13:56, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

fwiw, although Ian didn't know this when closing, the rest of my review would not have been resolved in a matter of minutes; I was intending, among other things, to deeply question the reliance on one book so recently published I can find zero scholarly reviews of it. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:16, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, given that Airship's review so far was only on the lead and already included a couple of non-trivial comments, plus given the nom had been open for weeks already and had another outstanding oppose, I think a closure was reasonably justifiable, though of course disappointing. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:20, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Ah, that's fair enough I suppose. To PR! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 14:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

On source reviews for foreign language sources

Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Hurra-yi Khuttali/archive2 came down to three sources that were offline and in Farsi. I know that there are ways to get at offline sources, but I wonder if anyone's sitting on a way to handle spotchecks or sourcechecks when the source to be checked is in a foreign language. Folks vouched for DeepL on Hungarian sources and I think Polish sources too, but is Google Translate reliable for translating Farsi? I don't feel comfortable with skipping certain sources just because it's too hard to verify them, so these need to be checked as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:20, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

This 2021 paper found that GT was 67.5% reliable for translating medical phrases into Farsi. If the sources are linguistically complicated, I would expect the reliability to be around the same; if they are linguistically simple, the reliability will go up. GT has also improved since 2021. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:52, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

I would assume good faith if other sources' spot-check did not indicate unverified statements or close paraphrasing. In this case, the nominator could also be requested to provide a translation. Borsoka (talk) 05:51, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Archive problem

There seems to have been a problem with the bot archiving Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Corleck Head/archive1. The bot has not added Template:Fa top or Template:Fa bottom to the page or updated Talk:Corleck Head. Steelkamp (talk) 04:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Tks, I think I've located the issue so the bot will complete the archiving process next time it runs -- FYI Hawkeye7. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes. It has run now. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Second nom?

@FAC coordinators: Would I be okay to pop in a second nom? My current one has been going for a couple of weeks and has five supports and has cleared image and source reviews, so most of the heavy lifting appears to be done on that. No problems if you'd rather I wait a little longer, obviously. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 20:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, you would. FrB.TG (talk) 21:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks very much FrB.TG - that's great. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)