Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-04-08/Featured content

Hi, everyone. Would it be ok to use the recently featured File:1804 Silver Dollar (Class III).jpg instead of the infobox image to illustrate the article? Godot13 asked that it be withheld from the previous Signpost issue so that it could appear in this one, along with the article.-RHM22 (talk) 03:17, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Was the FP of the 1804 dollar going to be mentioned in the Featured pictures section?--Godot13 (talk) 06:20, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - I added a small blurb for the 1804 dollar photo.-RHM22 (talk) 21:36, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We have reached a milestone of 5000 Featured pictures. Shouldn't that be included somewhere? -The Herald ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 18:42, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@The Herald: I'll put it in next week's edition. SP reports are always +/- a day or two. ResMar 03:31, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for including the GA list also. I suggest that if in the future a particularly high importance article is listed as GA have a short para similar to FAs. Nergaal (talk) 04:10, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- That's... really not practical. Who determines what's particularly high importance? In addition, it'd break all formatting. Might try to give a high-importance GA the illustration, but, on the other hand, one rule I have is that the images used in the Signpost FC section must be worth highlighting, so it'd need at least one good-quality image that's more than just a thumbnail. That said, whether this continues will depend on response. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 04:20, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I like the inclusion of the GAs. They're featured, I guess, in the sense that you're featuring them :) - Dank (push to talk) 04:30, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Like them too. I am reading now this edition without being involved and I have to point out that the sentence Charles Gravier, comte de Vergennes, and Annette Duvivier, Comtesse de Vergennes (created by Antoine de Favray, nominated (1 2) by Hafspajen) is a factual error. Charles Gravier, comte de Vergennes, was nominated by User:P. S. Burton - check - Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Antoine de Favray - Portrait of Charles Gravier . Hafspajen (talk) 07:52, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, on Osias Beert Beert's paintings are called in Dutch ontbijtjes, or "little breakfasts" - is wrong. His paintings are called still-life. His depictions on breakfasts are called in Dutch ontbijtjes. Hafspajen (talk) 07:52, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've added "food" to Beert. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:00, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

and changed the nom, though the red links remain (can't see a way to fix it). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:06, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Xanty. I know it was not you. Hafspajen (talk) 08:59, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There were endashes in the links, when the image names used hyphens. Now switched over and all working fine. - SchroCat (talk) 09:03, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. PLEASE do not search-replace hyphens and en-dashes. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 00:27, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I like the idea of the GAs listed in there. I agree with Adam that it's not practical to have additional paras for the GAs, or to try and decide which article is "more important" than any other, which would be too much POV really. The only possible change I could suggest would be to add the name of the GA nominator, but whether that would lead to too much additional work is another matter. - SchroCat (talk) 09:03, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, it's not possible: The name of the nominator isn't even listed anywhere obvious once it leaves the GAN page. It's not in the GA log I used to make this up, nor in the GA review, nor on the talk page of the article. I'd have to go digging very deep to find it. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 09:50, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine: it sounds like it would be too much work to do, with not too much justification for it. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:11, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by Well, so much for that Unicorn? Hafspajen (talk) 10:56, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

…the unicorn is in love with the virgin, but has lost out to the Pope. I think that's what was meant by the author. It's not a good idea to start your Tinder profile with "I've got the horn you're looking for". Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 11:40, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I know. I am the author. But it is not explained, only copied, with no context. If someone is using my phrase without even understand it, I do react, especially when he just copies my own comment and doesn't even explain it, what is all about. I don't like it. I don't like when people copy my comments and not even credit me for it. I think nobody is willing to cope with this kind of sloppy editing. We had discussions, but the problem is still there. Hafspajen (talk) 11:49, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I Am... Yours (Beyoncé show) and Texas oil boom weren't made good articles recently; they're listed as renamed in the good article log. I have the latter article on my watchlist which was why I spotted this. I've removed them from the Signpost article. Graham87 12:05, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Thought I had filtered those. Oh well, were going to be hiccups. Thank you! Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:49, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting idea. I discovered some articles that I did not know were GA. Thank you, Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 16:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]