Wikipedia talk:Featured short articles

message: Any preference one way or the other on "Short featured articles" vs. "Featured short articles"?  I don't have a preference.  Both shortcuts are available (WP:FSA and WP:SFA), I'll take them now. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 18:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it as it is now. -- how do you turn this on 22:42, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: So...having failed to elicit an answer as to why "short" in and of itself is a problem, the next question is: what benefit does this process confer? 
*Splitting off short FA candidates will prevent the "main" FAC list getting swamped with short articles? Well, not really. Firstly, the problem of swamping seems to be largely hypothetical and secondly, we aren't suddenly going to get a whole host of new reviewers which means the existing reviewers are either a)going to be swamped anyway, or b)ignore one of the streams in favour of the other. If they are splitting their time between SFAC and FAC it is of no advantage, and if they concentrate on one or the other we run the risk of one of the streams stagnating or two separate standards developing. I can envisage that short articles will get an easier run here, which would encourage more short article submissions and actually increase the workload for the reviewers.  
*It gives the FA director a quick way of seeing what articles are not suitable for TFA? No, because this is a subset of those articles. 
*Easier for the readers? True, once they know about the two streams they can pop over here to pick out a short article when they have five minutes, but there are simpler solutions to marking the length of the articles. 
*Easier to maintain? Certainly not. Aside from the duplication of work, we have to deal with addition or subtraction of content pushing the articles between FA and SFA and vice versa: does tipping over the bar of word count automatically move a short FA to FA "proper"?
*Dumping ground for the "problem"? Sure, as a sop to those working on shorter articles that don't want them excluded from the FA process altogether, that might convince.
*Downgrades the efforts of those working on shorter articles so they don't challenge those ranked high on WBFAN? Not meaning to be cynical about my favourite list of all time, but with a little change to the bot that just might work. (not serious, but I can't let an opportunity to laugh at the WBFAN list pass)
If anybody can tell me a concrete advantage for this as a solution to the problem (should it exist) I'm all ears. I really fail to see any at all, but I've missed the obvious before and am quite willing to admit that I may have done it again. Yomanganitalk 12:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solving how? (not what) 

message: I was very confused when I came across this, today. I've therefore added a "proposal" tag, to be removed if it gains consensus, or it's archived as a failed proposal. --Dweller (talk) 20:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/archive31#Wikipedia:Excellent short articles.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal tag