Wikipedia talk:Featured lists

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

List of Johnson solids

[edit]

Before List of Johnson solids has been FL, there were some kind of compliments from the reader that they would like to have the table back, which I have refactored and wiped out the table completely (see Talk:Johnson solid#Can we like, go back to the old format with the tables?). After becoming successful, Many of the users supported the idea, and one of them proposed merging the list to Johnson solid. If it is possible, would the 14th March TFL be suspended to feature in the main article? I would rather execute what they wanted: demote "List of Johnson solids" from FL and merge to "Johnson solid". Dedhert.Jr (talk) 05:16, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dedhert.Jr: FLC does not litigate content disputes, but I personally feel that as written the result of merging the list and article would be a list- the article only has like a couple paragraphs that aren't in the list, and the table is more than 10 times longer than the text of the article. You'd basically be adding a couple paragraphs to the list, and then renaming it to just be "Johnson solid", and I'd call the result still a list and still and FL. --PresN 17:36, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list § Way Too Many Today's Featured List Submissions. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:38, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant prose and criterion 3c

[edit]

Looking at the eight current Michelin-starred restaurant FLs, the same paragraph, beginning "Multiple anonymous Michelin inspectors visit the restaurants several times," is duplicated almost verbatim across all of them. While I understand why the same content would be applicable to all these lists, as they are part of the same larger topic, I question a bit whether such duplication is within the spirit of Featured Lists, specifically criterion 3c: In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists and includes at minimum eight items; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article. (Emphasis added.) If there is consensus that such duplication is exempt from the criteria, then it should probably clarified somehow, at least as a footnote. --Paul_012 (talk) 10:47, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates#Trend of very similar Michelin-starred restaurants lists for a discussion of these specific lists a month ago. In addition, the purpose of that sentence fragment is to require that a list not just be a slight variation on a subject but be a distinct topic. We are, of course, open to wording change proposals. --PresN 11:43, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I forgot to check the Candidates talk page. I don't regularly work with FLs, so I don't think I have anything to add there. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:34, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § RFC: Adding featured and good content status to the tagline

[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § RFC: Adding featured and good content status to the tagline. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 19:57, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Increasing number of TFLs per week

[edit]

I was wondering... if we have ~3,397 lists as featured lists that have not appeared on the main page, in other words, as TFLs, does this not mean we can actually increase the number of times we have FLs appear on the main page per week to 3 or 4 as opposed to the status-quo 2? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:26, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the last year has seen an average monthly increase of about 20 FLs (so ~4-5 a week), running 3-4 lists a week would be sustainable (i.e., we wouldn't be burning through TFLs faster than we're adding them). However, this would have to be discussed in a broader forum. I think 3 days a week is an easier pitch because it's easy to add Wednesday to the Monday/Friday schedule. RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:02, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RunningTiger123 Yeah, your perspective is exactly mine. Which venue would that be? Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:50, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Probably Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals), though there's not much point unless you get the agreement of Giants2008, who actually does the scheduling work. --PresN 11:31, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@PresN I was going to further mention that one of the current FLC delegates could be designated (by Giants2008?) to assist him with the scheduling. Say, you or Josh, anyone who is able to. Does that make sense? I didn't bother pinging Giants2008 because I thought your message above must have pinged him.Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:15, 23 September 2025 (UTC)Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:10, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 15, 2026 25th anniversary of WP

[edit]

I've been seeing if people are planning any special observances for the 25th anniversary of WP. I started here and then discussion moved to here. I imagine WP:DYK, WP:TFA, WP:TFP (and maybe WP:TFL) might want to try to plan something. There are 3 months to figure things out. Feel free to comment there or have your own discussion.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:09, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]