Template talk:Featured article

message: Please add id:Templat:Featured article. Thanks  —Preceding unsigned comment added by William Surya Permana (talk • contribs) 14:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki link (again) 

message: I saw strategy:Proposal:Flag Featured article diffs, and i thought it was a good idea. Basically, instead of linking to Wikipedia:Featured articles, make the icon be a perma-link to the revision that was promoted to featured status. This could be done incrementally (new parameter rev which takes the revision id of the version that was featured, and default to current behaviour if no revision defined), or with aid of bot. Thoughts? Bawolff (talk) 05:09, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh looks like someone already brought the idea up (saw it in archives). Sorry for double posting it. please ignore. Bawolff (talk) 05:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Link icon to version of article that was proposed

message: Please fix This template uses the deprecated :File:LinkFA-star.png, instead of :File:Cscr-featured.svg. Please change this. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:19, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:09, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I do note that png thumbnails from SVGs are rather unoptimized. Usually separate maually compressed and edited thumbnails at this size are a much better idea. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:25, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request 

message: Currently this template uses a hack-coded styling , but there's a readily-available  meta-template which could be used instead to simplify and standardise the code. I've dropped an update into the new sandbox demonstrating this. If there are no objections I'll sync it with the live code. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 21:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 11:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subclassing to {{tl|top icon}} 

message: This edit apparently removed the categorization code from this template. The edit needs to be fixed or reverted. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:32, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. Ucucha 00:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sweet. Thanks! --MZMcBride (talk) 00:58, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-add category code 

message: This template uses id = good-star, while  uses id = featured-star. Shouldn't these be reversed (i.e. put featured-star on this one and good-star on )? I don't know enough about this template to know whether there's anything in the CSS/JS pages in the MediaWiki: namespace that would need to be changed to match. jcgoble3 (talk) 20:59, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Swapping those would make some intuitive sense, I suppose. There are no places in the MediaWiki namespace that I can find that use these IDs, but many userscripts reference #featured-star (search). I doubt, though, that many of those CSS/JS pages are really intentionally referring to the good and not the featured icon. The only user CSS/JS page mentioning "good-star" that would be affected by the swap is User:Taylormoney94/vector.css. Ucucha (talk) 21:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Further investigation reveals that this template emitted featured-star until ; the change to good-star was presumably accidental, so I've swapped it back. Thumperward also changed the ID for the GA icon, so I swapped that one back too. Ucucha (talk) 21:45, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from jcgoble3, 8 September 2011 

message: Please replace this template with the sandbox version to allow the date and an offset (for use if multiple awards have been won like GA & FA or  (multiple) TFA)  Results can be seen on the testcases page Technical 13 (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. This shouldn't be necessary. An article may be GA, FA or neither - it can't be both. Nor can an article be doubly-GA or doubly-FA. Multiple TFA is rare, but not unknown: there have been two cases, both of which were exceptional - Barack Obama and Transit of Venus. But articles that have been TFA don't get a topicon in addition to the normal FA star. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:36, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  How do you figure it can't be both?  Steamtown, U.S.A. is both  and .  There are MANY articles that were GAs before they were FAs, and just because they have been featured does not mean they are no longer good.  Technical 13 (talk) 00:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, the majority of FAs were GAs before being promoted to FA (many editors see GA as a step on the road to FA): but please see WP:WIAGA#What cannot be a good article? "a good article loses its status when promoted to a featured article". --Redrose64 (talk) 08:43, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 27 September 2013 

message: Just a simple question, but do you place it on only articles presently being featured, or ones that have been previously featured? 74.248.55.19 (talk) 17:11, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The  template may be placed on any article that has passed a WP:FAC and which has not subsequently failed a WP:FARC. Whether the article is, or has ever been, WP:TFA, is immaterial. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:24, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  On only current featured, or past and present? 

message: use this other star. it is shinier
:File:Cscr-featured1.png  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tetra quark (talk • contribs) 20:17, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: The current instructions state that the template should be placed at the bottom of the article, apparently in part because of this bug, which seems to have been fixed.  The Good article template is placed at the top of articles, which to me is in line with MOS:ORDER (I'd make it item 2.5 on the list), and it certainly makes the template easier to find.  Who's with me in making this change?—DocWatson42 (talk) 06:15, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Additionally, since the template's message appears at the top of an article, it seems to me to make sense that the template should be there, too.—DocWatson42 (talk) 08:45, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fortunately, those latter two types—date format and dialect—are already supposed to be placed at the top, though  currently goes at the bottom.—DocWatson42 (talk) 23:02, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, and I was instrumental in that. They can still sometimes be found somewhere at the bottom though. I agree with you that  should likewise be on top (or in an infobox). Debresser (talk) 00:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template placement 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment#Improving how article assessments are presented to readers.  Sdkb (talk) 22:45, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at [[Wikipedia talk:Content assessment#Improving how article assessments are presented to readers]]

message: Change:

To:

This removes a random asterisk in the link and allow you to go directly to WP:Featured Articles. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 21:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The asterisk is for a statistical redirect, added by Elli last month, for tracking purposes. SWinxy (talk) 23:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. Think this data collection is still useful so suggest withdrawing (or someone else declining) this edit request. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 14 April 2024 

message: This might be dumb but why does it link to Wikipedia:Featured articles* and not Wikipedia:Featured articles? 48JCL (talk • contribs) 22:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It's so we can see how many people click the link from the template, as opposed to ending up on that page some other way. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: thats smart 48JCL (talk • contribs) 01:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  question