Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/September 29, 2019

I appreciate that it is lifted from the article, but this Romantic style is thoroughly un-encyclopaedic. Centre of his world, in this room he did one thing; around this table he did another; his refuge; a devastating stroke. Suited to a tourist guide or a particularly cotton-woolly hagiography, but by no means encyclopaedic treatment of a building. Kevin McE (talk) 17:54, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
 * This is a very recent FA, and the blurb is a reasonable summary of the lede. Have you considered posting to the article talk page?--Wehwalt (talk) 18:05, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I am amazed that it was passed for FA with such a blatant disregard for WP:TONE, and have said so on the article's talk page. If I could find the process for challenging elevation to FA status I would do that.  Kevin McE (talk) 18:15, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

"a English country house" should be "an". (This is way down my list of concerns with this article, some of which are manifested in the extract here) Kevin McE (talk) 12:58, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd like to make changes to the blurb all at once rather than piecemeal. Can you consult with the article editors and come up with an agreed list of what needs changing in the blurb as a result of your recent discussions? The clock is ticking.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:03, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't bother me to lose "... "the most beautiful and charming" Churchill had ever seen" from the blurb; the rest seems fine. But I can't be sure; I'm not really comfortable with the subject matter. - Dank (push to talk) 14:03, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I just created the "Day-after-tomorrow's FA" subsection at ERRORS ... that might be a good place to discuss this, in about 25 hours. - Dank (push to talk) 23:14, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Just noting that I'm aware of the article talk page conversation, so I changed one word to "debilitating", and in anticipation of further changes, I deleted "..."the most beautiful and charming" Churchill had ever seen". I'll check in once or twice per day. - Dank (push to talk) 20:23, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

,, - I'll respond in a little more detail at the FAR but I appreciate the difficulty in which the coordinators are placed when an FA due to feature on the front page in three days time is made the subject of an FAR. Arguments about the page on the day it appears as TFA will do nothing for Wikipedia's reputation, so I will understand completely if the decision is made to pull it. Whether an individual editor should be allowed to subvert community consensus in this way is another matter. KJP1 (talk) 20:31, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that, I very much appreciate it. Right now I am just waiting and seeing. I think I have a couple of Churchill bios about the place, I'll start looking for them.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:44, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * FWIW, given the current state of the article, the discussions, the blurb, and the WP:FAR, the current blurb looks fine to me. But as always, people may have other opinions at WP:ERRORS, and we'll have to weigh those appropriately. - Dank (push to talk) 21:03, 26 September 2019 (UTC)