Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/September 2022

Wehwalt, Hog Farm had a (discouraging) look at iridium, here. Most editors involved originally are long gone, so worrisome ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:47, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Replaced, with another older rerun.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:32, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Just saw Talk:Main_Page#1_September_TFA, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:55, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

(Maybe someone will email me a cluestick; who was the sock and what was the disruption-- that is, did it affect other FAs? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:57, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

That I can't help with. I have the vaguest memories of it, just know keeping it off the main page because of them was supported by the original FA nominator. There were also objections to the plaintiff's model being underage. If it's running as an article, we should probably run the GO in turn, I suppose, but It does feel we shouldn't run it without considering the objections. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8% of all FPs} 15:02, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

If people decide they don't like the image, that doesn't necessarily mean we have to pull the article from TFA, because there are a couple of free images of the artist we could use at WT:Featured article candidates/September Morn/archive1. I have a slight preference myself to go with an image of the artist ... I think it would be safer, but I totally understand if someone thinks I'm being too cautious. - Dank (push to talk) 15:23, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Chris, I see you were the FAC nom, and you're still peeking in from time to time ... any thoughts on this? - Dank (push to talk) 15:26, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

I think it was Coat of Many Colours. Regards, Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:52, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! They seem to have been at Featured pictures, rather than Featured articles, so that's a relief. There's this. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:04, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong, I'm fine with it running, I just was very surprised as that is one of the sternest warnings on WP:POTD/Unused Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8% of all FPs} 18:54, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of that page. I don't think we regularly check it in scheduling.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:39, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Aye, just.. one I have to be aware of as POTD coordinator, y'know? Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8% of all FPs} 23:45, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

I think I'll replace it with another article. I don't need the aggravation, which would surely follow on 1 September.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:23, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I really didn't mean to make a huge thing out of this. I just figured something I knew was more controversial than it might look should be mentioned. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8% of all FPs} 01:17, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

The month has now been scheduled.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm trying to get a picture of Elizabeth in the Auxilliary service during WWII as POTD for that day. If I'm able to (we're going a bit Ignore All Rules to pull it off, basically, as long as it's pretty certain it's going to pass, we'll run it), perhaps we could lose the sentence in the TFA about it, as it will be covered elsewhere on the main page, and it'll give you another sentence to talk about other things? Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.1% of all FPs} 17:34, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

I have no objection. Keep us posted.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:39, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Will do. It's looking likely (3 supports already) Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.1% of all FPs} 17:44, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

I am treating this as an IAR situation, excepting that this does count as the article's second TFA appearance.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:54, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

@Wehwalt: Template:POTD/2022-09-19 is go, so rewrite as you see fit. It uses text from Women in World War II#United Kingdom, as well as a brief discussion of then-Princess Elizabeth's role during it.

That said, I'd love to include some summary of this paragraph, either in TFA or the space-unrestricted POTD:

Also, if you'll forgive me backseat editing TFA a little more, I'd probably cut File:Elizabeth II greets NASA GSFC employees, May 8, 2007 edit.jpg from the photo rotation. It's not used in her article and is, in my opinion, the worst of the options. I recognise it from eyeing it as a potential POTD for the 19th. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.1% of all FPs} 22:45, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

I"m not sure if we can go from big picture to that incident, but suggestions are welcome. I'm wrapping up for the day and will look at the image situation tomorrow.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:57, 14 September 2022 (UTC)