Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Boneyard/Blank page 016

To Do
ResMar, please ping in each nominator to have them review content. Thanks, Sandy Georgia (Talk) 20:30, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

As discussed in the Newsroom, all the articles presented here were already presented in Wikipedia Signpost/2010-08-23/Features and admins. Even if the descriptions there were somewhat shorter, I don't think it is very fortunate that our readers get told about the same featured articles twice in a row. It would be good if this dispatch would tell more about the history and state of the FA process itself, like Wikipedia Signpost/2006-06-12/Thousandth FA. Are there current versions of the graphs at WP:FAS (which were also used in the 2000th FA dispatch)?

Regards, HaeB (talk) 19:23, 29 August 2010 (UTC)


 * To my knowledge, those graphs were maintained by someone on the German Wiki, and have long gone without update. I agree that we should tell more about how the FAC process has evolved since the 2,000th promotion, and see no need to describe specific artiles anywhere (either here or on Features and admins, but YMMV).  At any rate, the 3,000th articles do deserve more mention than our weekly promotions.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:54, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added the relevant bits to F and A, and put Mario's name as co-author. This page now need not run. Tony   (talk)  03:09, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It's very dissapointing that you are in enough of a position of power as to singehandidly disregard this like that. Perhaps you should convert F&A into an "everything column", then, and mark down Dispatches as historical? Funny thing is, if I hadn't been sleeping at the time, I could very well have reverted it and nitched it in fast enough for HaeB to not notice, thus putting this article into "unrevertable" status. An interesting thought. Too bad I don't stay up all night to get a crummy newspaper going. Res Mar 17:53, 3 September 2010 (UTC)