Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates

Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding nominations viewer to your scripts page.

For a list of foreign-language reviewers see FAC foreign language reviewers.

FAC mentoring: first-time nominators

A voluntary mentoring scheme, designed to help first-time FAC nominators through the process and to improve their chances of a successful outcome, is now in action. Click here for further details. Experienced FAC editors, with five or more "stars" behind them, are invited to consider adding their names to the list of possible mentors, also found in the link. Brianboulton (talk) 10:17, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

FAC source reviews

For advice on conducting source reviews, see Wikipedia:Guidance on source reviewing at FAC.

Japanese and Farsi/Persian speakers needed

There are two FAC reviews where the source spotcheck hinges on Japanese and Farsi/Persian sources. Specifically, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurra-yi Khuttali/archive2 for Farsi/Persian and Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pulgasari/archive1 for Japanese. Anyone who knows how to read them? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Google Lens' translate function is quite good these days for translating pictures of documents. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately not all of the problem sources are in image form; some are behind paywalls and stuff. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

FAC reviewing statistics and nominator reviewing table for November 2024

Here are the FAC reviewing statistics for November 2024. The tables below include all reviews for FACS that were either archived or promoted last month, so the reviews included are spread over the last two or three months. A review posted last month is not included if the FAC was still open at the end of the month. The new facstats tool has been updated with this data, but the old facstats tool has not. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Reviewers for November 2024

# reviews Type of review Reviewer Content Source Image Accessibility Nikkimaria 3 1 17 SchroCat 14 6 Jo-Jo Eumerus 7 3 Crisco 1492 9 Generalissima 5 1 2 Matarisvan 6 1 1 Hog Farm 6 1 Aoba47 3 2 Dudley Miles 5 UndercoverClassicist 5 750h+ 4 Gog the Mild 4 Boneless Pizza! 3 Borsoka 3 Ceoil 3 Gerda Arendt 3 Graham Beards 3 Hurricanehink 3 Premeditated Chaos 1 2 TheJoebro64 3 Tim riley 3 AirshipJungleman29 2 ChrisTheDude 2 Cukie Gherkin 1 1 Draken Bowser 2 Epicgenius 2 Heartfox 2 Jens Lallensack 2 MaranoFan 2 Medxvo 1 1 PARAKANYAA 2 Phlsph7 2 Piotrus 2 Vacant0 2 Ajpolino 1 Balon Greyjoy 1 Biruitorul 1 Caeciliusinhorto 1 Choliamb 1 Czar 1 Dugan Murphy 1 Eddie891 1 Eem dik doun in toene 1 Fifelfoo 1 Gen. Quon 1 HAL333 1 Hawkeye7 1 IntentionallyDense 1 Ippantekina 1 JennyOz 1 Joeyquism 1 Johnbod 1 Jonesey95 1 Kavyansh.Singh 1 Lankyant 1 Lazman321 1 LittleLazyLass 1 Mike Christie 1 Mrfoogles 1 Mujinga 1 NegativeMP1 1 Nick-D 1 Paleface Jack 1 Panini! 1 Relativity 1 RFNirmala 1 Rjjiii 1 Sammi Brie 1 Shapeyness 1 Shushugah 1 SnowFire 1 Srnec 1 The Rambling Man 1 Thelifeofan413 1 Thuiop 1 Tintor2 1 TompaDompa 1 Volcanoguy 1 Wehwalt 1 WikiOriginal-9 1 Wtfiv 1 Zmbro 1 Zzzs 1 Totals 155 26 27

Supports and opposes for November 2024

# declarations Declaration Editor Support Oppose converted to support Struck oppose Struck support Oppose None Total Nikkimaria 3 18 21 SchroCat 8 4 8 20 Jo-Jo Eumerus 10 10 Crisco 1492 9 9 Generalissima 3 2 3 8 Matarisvan 5 3 8 Hog Farm 5 1 1 7 Aoba47 2 3 5 UndercoverClassicist 4 1 5 Dudley Miles 3 2 5 750h+ 4 4 Gog the Mild 2 1 1 4 Tim riley 3 3 Premeditated Chaos 1 2 3 Gerda Arendt 2 1 3 Hurricanehink 3 3 Borsoka 3 3 Graham Beards 3 3 Boneless Pizza! 2 1 3 TheJoebro64 2 1 3 Ceoil 2 1 3 Vacant0 2 2 PARAKANYAA 2 2 Draken Bowser 1 1 2 Piotrus 1 1 2 ChrisTheDude 2 2 Heartfox 1 1 2 MaranoFan 1 1 2 AirshipJungleman29 1 1 2 Phlsph7 2 2 Epicgenius 2 2 Jens Lallensack 2 2 Cukie Gherkin 2 2 Medxvo 1 1 2 Lankyant 1 1 IntentionallyDense 1 1 Balon Greyjoy 1 1 Caeciliusinhorto 1 1 Ajpolino 1 1 The Rambling Man 1 1 Shapeyness 1 1 Nick-D 1 1 Paleface Jack 1 1 Gen. Quon 1 1 Joeyquism 1 1 LittleLazyLass 1 1 Jonesey95 1 1 Zzzs 1 1 Thelifeofan413 1 1 JennyOz 1 1 Srnec 1 1 SnowFire 1 1 Choliamb 1 1 Lazman321 1 1 WikiOriginal-9 1 1 Mike Christie 1 1 Hawkeye7 1 1 Wtfiv 1 1 Eem dik doun in toene 1 1 Thuiop 1 1 Fifelfoo 1 1 NegativeMP1 1 1 Dugan Murphy 1 1 Wehwalt 1 1 Mrfoogles 1 1 Czar 1 1 Rjjiii 1 1 Volcanoguy 1 1 RFNirmala 1 1 Kavyansh.Singh 1 1 TompaDompa 1 1 Johnbod 1 1 Panini! 1 1 Sammi Brie 1 1 Zmbro 1 1 Relativity 1 1 Tintor2 1 1 Biruitorul 1 1 Eddie891 1 1 Shushugah 1 1 Mujinga 1 1 HAL333 1 1 Ippantekina 1 1 Totals 105 1 1 16 85 208

The following table shows the 12-month review-to-nominations ratio for everyone who nominated an article that was promoted or archived in the last three months who has nominated more than one article in the last 12 months. The average promoted FAC receives between 6 and 7 reviews. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Nominators for September 2024 to November 2024 with more than one nomination in the last 12 months

Nominations (12 mos) Reviews (12 mos) Ratio (12 mos) 750h+ 6.0 51.0 8.5 AirshipJungleman29 7.0 39.0 5.6 Amir Ghandi 2.0 None 0.0 Boneless Pizza! 2.5 8.0 3.2 ChrisTheDude 9.0 66.0 7.3 Darkwarriorblake 6.0 3.0 0.5 Dudley Miles 6.0 33.0 5.5 Dugan Murphy 3.0 14.0 4.7 Dxneo 2.0 None 0.0 Eem dik doun in toene 3.0 10.0 3.3 Epicgenius 8.5 17.0 2.0 FunkMonk 2.8 27.0 9.5 Generalissima 9.0 61.0 6.8 Hawkeye7 5.0 7.0 1.4 Hog Farm 7.0 49.0 7.0 Hurricanehink 2.5 19.0 7.6 Ippantekina 5.0 6.0 1.2 Jens Lallensack 3.3 28.0 8.4 Jo-Jo Eumerus 6.0 218.0 36.3 Joeyquism 3.0 17.0 5.7 Kurzon 3.0 None 0.0 Kyle Peake 4.0 None 0.0 Llewee 2.0 7.0 3.5 M4V3R1CK32 2.0 None 0.0 MaranoFan 5.0 14.0 2.8 Mike Christie 6.0 54.0 9.0 NegativeMP1 3.0 11.0 3.7 Nick-D 2.0 15.0 7.5 Noorullah21 4.0 None 0.0 Paleface Jack 3.0 3.0 1.0 Peacemaker67 6.0 2.0 0.3 Phlsph7 5.0 16.0 3.2 Pollosito 2.0 None 0.0 Premeditated Chaos 8.3 35.0 4.2 Relayed 2.0 1.0 0.5 Sammi Brie 3.0 12.0 4.0 SchroCat 15.0 155.0 10.3 Serial Number 54129 3.0 39.0 13.0 The ed17 2.0 1.0 0.5 The Green Star Collector 3.0 None 0.0 Thebiguglyalien 5.0 3.0 0.6 Tim riley 5.0 52.0 10.4 TrademarkedTWOrantula 3.0 2.0 0.7 Turini2 2.0 None 0.0 UndercoverClassicist 6.0 89.0 14.8 Volcanoguy 4.0 7.0 1.8 Wehwalt 7.5 29.0 3.9

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC) >>>

Input from FA-experienced editors requested regarding quality of an existing featured article

I would appreciate input at Talk:Landis's Missouri Battery#Revamping. This is one of my earliest FACs, and I would appreciate some additional thoughts to make sure I'm not being too harsh on myself; this one isn't really up to my current standard. Hog Farm _Talk 04:04, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

On source reviews for foreign language sources

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurra-yi Khuttali/archive2 came down to three sources that were offline and in Farsi. I know that there are ways to get at offline sources, but I wonder if anyone's sitting on a way to handle spotchecks or sourcechecks when the source to be checked is in a foreign language. Folks vouched for DeepL on Hungarian sources and I think Polish sources too, but is Google Translate reliable for translating Farsi? I don't feel comfortable with skipping certain sources just because it's too hard to verify them, so these need to be checked as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:20, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

This 2021 paper found that GT was 67.5% reliable for translating medical phrases into Farsi. If the sources are linguistically complicated, I would expect the reliability to be around the same; if they are linguistically simple, the reliability will go up. GT has also improved since 2021. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:52, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

I would assume good faith if other sources' spot-check did not indicate unverified statements or close paraphrasing. In this case, the nominator could also be requested to provide a translation. Borsoka (talk) 05:51, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Archive problem

There seems to have been a problem with the bot archiving Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Corleck Head/archive1. The bot has not added Template:Fa top or Template:Fa bottom to the page or updated Talk:Corleck Head. Steelkamp (talk) 04:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Tks, I think I've located the issue so the bot will complete the archiving process next time it runs -- FYI Hawkeye7. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes. It has run now. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Tools to scan article for a quality check?

I seem to recall there were some tools an editor could run on an article that would scan it and identify some errors, particularly with citations. The tools that I'm thinking of were more-or-less part of the FA process, I seem to recall. I'm looking for these tools (in Help:Citation tools) but cannot find them. Am I dreaming, or are there such tools? Noleander (talk) 19:13, 12 January 2025 (UTC)