Wikipedia talk:Featured articles

FACs needing feedback view •
Virtual Self (EP)	Review it now
Veiqia	Review it now

Featured article removal candidates
Ancient Egypt	Review now
Lethbridge	Review now
Byzantine Empire	Review now
Tasha Yar	Review now
Boogeyman 2	Review now
Northrop YF-23	Review now

See also: Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles

Architecture and archaeology

I wonder if its time to split these - both have quite a few FAs added in last couple of years. I can do the separating, if there is agreement. Ceoil (talk) 22:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, ancient architecture tends to go with archaeology but there's a growing number of modern buildings among our FAs now... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:34, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, can see that as being subjective and tricky, and am now less sure. Waiting to see what other think, but would put ancient architecture within archaeology. Ceoil (talk) 23:40, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

I would agree with putting ancient architecture under the archaeology subheader. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Per Ian above, agree that the proposal should be "should we split Architecture and archaeology so that ancient architecture is within the separate archaeology sub-section".

• So pinging KJP1, Johnbod, Giano, Amandajm, Rodw, A. Parrot, Mr rnddude, WereSpielChequers, Usernameunique, Dudley Miles, Caeciliusinhorto. Not pinging the cords who do the work of maintaining, as presumably they already have this page w/listed. Ceoil (talk) 22:44, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
  • A split seems reasonable to me – there's no obvious reason that 7 World Trade Center and Benty Grange hanging bowl should be categorised together. Which category to put ancient architecture in is of course potentially a grey area, but e.g. Beulé Gate (currently at FAC) certainly strikes me as more of an archaeology article and I suspect it would be reasonable to categorise most articles on ancient buildings under archaeology rather than architecture. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 22:56, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
    • My bad, pinging also UndercoverClassicist. Ceoil (talk) 23:13, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
  • I agree that iron age hillforts are more a matter of archaeology than of architecture, and that Hampton Court Palace is more architecture than archaeology (except for part of the gardens). But where do you put the boundary? ϢereSpielChequers 23:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

  Maybe pre- and post-history, ie c. 100 AD on? Or depending if the civilization is lost and the buildings are in ruins, eg Aztecs or the lost cities in the Amazon. Ceoil (talk) 23:10, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

• Yes, split. Whether the building is still in use, or a date, should be the dividing line - also whether there have ever actually been excavations there. In most cases it will be obvious. Johnbod (talk) 02:07, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
• Agree with the split. The dividing line proposed by Johnbod makes sense to me. Some articles in other categories may also belong in the new "archaeology" category—discovery of the tomb of Tutankhamun is an archaeological event, but it ended up in the catch-all "history" category, presumably because it's an even and not a site. A. Parrot (talk) 02:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

For the record, the articles would like to merge into archaeology are listed here. I also agree with Johnbod's criteria. Re things like Corp Naomh and the few objects we have at FA FROM from Egyptian art, would prefer to be within "artworks". Ceoil (talk) 03:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the Corp Naomh doesn't seem to have ever been buried, & I think should be just "Art". The Icelandic Phallological Museum seems to be natural history/biology. Johnbod (talk) 03:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

• Would also support splitting. Sure, there will be edge cases that will need a bit of thought/discussion, but I agree with the views already expressed that the majority will be blindingly obvious. KJP1 (talk) 06:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

• I seem to have missed this. But I fully support splitting. It has even been on my to do list pretty much since I became a coordinator. If no one else does it I'll move it up my priority list. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:41, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
• Question, does someone have to be a coordinator to do a split? Or are there technical elements in doing so? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 20:25, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

WP:WAWARDS are back

Letting any watcher or regulars of Featured articles that the W Awards are back up and running since it's long sleep of 10 years. It'd be helpful if you'd like to become a reviewer or nominate people who you think fit the criteria in any of the awards (Bronze, Silver, Golden, Platinum) and give any suggestions on awards or changes that you think should happen in the talk page! Thanks, W Award Coordinator Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 01:42, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Fashion and clothing

We got several new fashion featured articles over the past year, so could we make a new sub-section named something along the lines of "Fashion and clothing" (or "Clothing and fashion, idk) below the "Culture and society" main section? The Culture and society section now looks a bit disjointed with several fashion articles between the murders and riots, and we have enough articles for a decent-sized sub-section. Plus, I think the separation would be very clear-cut (no pun intended). RetiredDuke (talk) 13:32, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

This has been requested a few times now, and I simply can't see why we don't. I may just boldly do it myself if no one shows up to complain. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:32, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

I've boldly done the split. Section title was arbitrary, anyone should feel free to revise it. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 15:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Formatting

Shouldn't we have formatting as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_lists? 162.230.170.178 (talk) 04:14, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

It is totally unclear what you could be referring to by "formatting". Remsense ‥ 论 04:16, 9 February 2025 (UTC)