1240:- I absolutely support having featured lists on the main page, but I don't think that this is the way to go about selecting them. Majority rule does not always produce desirable results and can be unnecessarily tedious. TonytheTiger says he wants quality lists to be featured. First, since they are featured, aren't they already supposed to be of a high quality? Second, I would worry that voting would favor those who have the time and/or inclination to constantly vote. I certainly don't have the time to conscientiously read through the lists and vote. Third, would "majority rule" favor certain topics? Undoubtedly. Fourth, the main page should be diversified as much as possible. This is hard enough to achieve. We need to find a way to make it easier, not harder. Just some thoughts. Having an occasional "featured list" instead of a "featured article" seems like one good option, although I like the idea of offering readers a variety on a daily basis, if we can really sustain that. To me "DYK" and "On this day" are too similar to really merit all the space they get.
2004:
selective process. My idea is intended to identify the 30 most main page worthy candidates and the single best candidate in a single monthly process. It allows for some slippage of deserving candidates into the second 30 who may not have been fully noted at first. That is pretty much a summary of what I am presenting. I am not much worried about the order of selections 2-30. If you have a better idea for a selective consensus based idea, I would probably support that. So far the main objections have come from those in support of the dictatorial and first in line processes as well as a few who don't like the format of lists for the main page however.--
1930:
ascertained by choosing a small percentage of the whole. So, voting could work for List of the Month or Year (if you get enough participants) should such an award be desirable. At present, there are only just enough lists to fill a year. Even if the promotion rate exceeds 1 per day, each list still has a strong chance of appearing on the Main Page if daily appearance is allowed. What would voting achieve in those circumstances? After a month or two, all the really excellent lists will be chosen. Enthusiasm for the whole thing will rapidly diminish. Even the "merely good" lists will get votes from project members who want to support their own kind.
1901:
nominating editors and an additional 10 editors concerned enough with main page content to vote. This should give us 30 good selections. We may need more votes to distinguish the second thiry, but if we have less than 60 candidates, this is not necessary. I think with 75 nominators and 20 or 25 additional interested voters we could credibly distinguish both the top 30 promotions and second 30 renominations. My only concern is about the variation in the types of lists nominated and selected. However, logic dictates that if a guy has worked on 10 hockey lists and only has 3 votes he will not nominate them all in the same month.--
347:- I completely believe this is a necessary evelopment. Though there is only a small number of these right now, the prestige, as it were, of having one's article placed on the front page bolsters the popularity of improving to features article status and lists should garner the same support as lists are equally invaluable to the encyclopedia's volume. I do understand there might be teething issues due to the low number in place presently, but believe this will promote improvement of the lists, rather than decrease the quality of the lists already present. --
2033:
I'd rather we ensure that only "the best" become FLs rather than accepting dull lists that merely meet some objective criteria. There is enough grief on WP over FA/FL/GA reviewing without introducing another area where people can become sore losers. If all FLs are "the best", then the actual mechanism for fairly displaying them on the main page becomes irrelevant and therefore should be simple and involve the least effort. If the effort involved in this proposed voting system went into reviewing at FLC, we'd have better FLs.
1162:. I've created several featured lists, and I don't think they should go on the main page. While featured lists do represent the best of Knowledge (XXG)'s lists, I don't believe that they necessarily represent the best of Knowledge (XXG)'s content (some do, certainly, but not nearly as high a percentage as featured articles, for example). Featured lists are already covered on the featured content page; I see no need to attempt to cram an example of every feature category onto the main page. --
1681:
List. And it gets to be highlighted on the Main Page. Give a space for any objections to a certain list on a certain day (as you might find on the Main Page errors board every now and again), and make them easily interchanged. I don't think people will have many objections as long as lists are not often repeated, nor similar topics being showcased over and over again. I just don't think voting on a List of the Day/Month/Year is that good of an idea. E kala mai. --
1258:- As with a number of people, I'm not opposed to the idea of having a FL on the Main Page. However this proposal is confusing, unnecessarily complicated and generally a bad idea. Voting is a surefire way to increase canvasing, systemic bias, and pointless bickering. Having a 'dictiorial' (or whatever you want to call it) director or going by time of promotion may seem unfair and has it's problems but it's far better then this voting proposal.
1854:—can even the best list truly represent our best work? The FA box introduces readers to our content, and I don't think we have even a dozen featured lists that are comparable to the average featured article. Don't get me wrong, I've created several featured lists, and some of them take a lot of work, pulling information from different sources and all. But at the end of the day, don't we want to introduce ourselves as an encyclopedia of
876:. That had hundreds of voters yet by #17 it failed to rank precisely. Add to this the fatigue after the best 30, 60, 90 lists have already been chosen. I don't believe voters will have the time and patience to seriously review the 30+ lists on offer each month. It is quite a bit less pleasurable than rating pretty photographs. Voting on WP is generally discouraged, can be divisive and can be manipulated.
880:
discourage bunching lists of one topic together. As with TFA and POTD, a list gets one shot at glory. A simple and crude method of encouraging fair play would be to disallow an editor from inserting their own list. This approach is far more in keeping with the Wiki spirit than the present LOTD proposal or the TFA method. It requires very little house keeping or administrative actions.
717:. I assumed such a process existed when a list I nominated was promoted. I searched everywhere so I could immediately submit a request for a specific day like one can do for a featured article. I was even prepared to submit the list on the FA request and just hope someone would understand what I really wanted. I now know why my search was futile, so I think it's a great idea.--
980:), my concerns from then still stand. Articles can be summarized, pictures can be resized. How does one summarize a list while still retaining the list-ness of it and not just cutting off the list and using the lead section as a summary (which IMO defeats the purpose of putting lists on the main page)? By putting it in list form, its about as summarized as it gets. Even if we use
2730:. Many persons involved were hesitant to support because of the possibility that this proposal might detract from the appearance of the main page. Several support votes have specifically expressed satisfaction with this late addition to the proposal. Even some early oppose votes based on formatting predate the creation of sample2. I had been proposing with the
2252:
1469:
being worth putting in the spotlight the way you are proposing. They just are not interesting to anyone outside of there small fanbases. I really don't care about lists of anime episodes and lists of criket teams. Even the
Simposons which I'm a huge fan of, sorry don't see why a list of every episodes would be of interest to anyone.
1388:
decides on the list, with suggestions from the community. Any voting system is going to favour certain topics (for example the large number of music, tv and sports related lists) and also certain regions (ie those with more
Wikipedians). I'd prefer we vote for a Today's Featured List Director, and then have a system analogous to TFA. -
1583:. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor
1934:
first-come-first-served). We all know voting favours the entries at the top of a list, so even the ones with multiple votes are probably those that got listed early. The end result is that no real selection is going on. It will become trivial to ensure a project votes its own lists onto the page, regardless of merit.
2721:
If you are wavering between approved and no consensus keep in mind that at one point this debate had 10 oppose and 7 support. However, as the arguments have been refined and the proposal has been tweaked 18 of the last 24 respondents have supported. Also, note that one of the major changes that has
2076:
It involves a complicated voting system with points and voting for multiple items and then a hierarchical advancement to "List of the Month," and "List of the Year." Now the bias... All of this is unheard of in the
English Knowledge (XXG) and is not really in the spirit of how things are usually run.
2655:
But how do you expect people to review thirty lists, most of which are on subjects a reviewer is likely to know next to nothing about, in hopes of selecting the three which represent the best work? To me, it looks that the most popular topics would end up getting most votes. Perhaps this is how it
1974:
have set the precedent of one featured content item per day from their spaces. I don't think it makes sense to try to do more than one a day since this is an international project and different people sleep at different times. 3 a day would mean 8 hours for each item. Suppose you sleep from 11:00
1941:
If you think some of of the
Featured Lists don't "exemplify Knowledge (XXG)'s very best work", then they don't deserve to be on the Main Page. But solving that requires either nominating them for FLRC or else changing the FL criteria. Unlike FA, I'd say it was easier for a list to pass the technical
1680:
I'd say that is a much better idea. Simply have a "Featured List director" (I think this was mentioned somewhere... maybe even you Tiger-like Tony) to line up a daily
Featured List. Or, if you want it to be more wiki-like, just open a calendar, and let people populate it with their favorite Featured
1404:
While I like the idea I don't think there is a large enough pool of articles to draw from at this point. A large portion of the list is lists of tv show episodes, list of various sporting teams/championships, list of artists discographies. Yes there are 400 featured lists but I'm not sure how many
1387:
For now. Is there an example anywhere of how the main page would look with a featured list included? Also, I believe the voting system proposed is going to be more trouble then it's worth. I'd be much happier with a system similar to that for Today's
Featured Article. With a Bureaucrat or Admin that
879:
My suggestion, should a LOTD meet community approval, is that initially we adopt the
Commons' Picture of the Day procedure (as I understand it, correct me if I'm wrong). A calendar one or two months ahead is created and editors simply insert an FL into a vacant slot. Add a few informal guidelines to
2349:
Absolutely. This proposal, however, is going no where, and fast. I kindly suggest that it be tagged as rejected and the discussion be moved to the
Village Pump, where it can be determined if community consensus does in fact exist for such an inclusion (especially among those editors who do not work
2154:
How exactly is there any attempt to achieve consensus in this proposal? All you're doing is counting votes. There is no explaination required for why you're voting the way you vote. The reality is of course it's going to be very difficult to explain why you feel item 1 is better then item 2 most of
2086:
The FA system is dictatorial. One person says what goes on the main page without room for negotiation. This proposal is a consensus based system in which all nominators have the responsibility of casting three votes. The monthly selections are based on the collective consensus, and anyone who is
1929:
We already have a selective process; it is what selected the
Featured List in the first place. These are supposed to "exemplify Knowledge (XXG)'s very best work". I accept that within the FLs there are some that are excellent and some that are merely good. But that sort of distinction could only be
1322:
As many above, FLs don't belong on the Main Page. The space they would take up and the unnecessary regular voting would not be worth the trouble, as Z-Man points out, that a list is not a list when it is summarised into an intro with a few rows of list content so that it can fit onto the Main Page.
415:, but I am reasonably convinced that it would work. I'm somewhat convinced that adding the FL box to the mainpage as it now appears on the FC page, or with some minor modifications, will also work. WP needs to do a better job of promoting its featured content, and this will help do that. As long as
150:
Comment: should we also have featured topics, featured sounds, and featured portals on the main page? The main page isn't to feature some subset of whatever category of content we invent, it's to present readers with a glimpse of what we are and provide them with useful information. I don't think
2517:
process will not expedite getting our well deserved FLs on the Main Page. This proposal, as written, is an utter waste of time. Process Is Evil. There is a simple solution, and that is just putting the lists on the Main Page chronologically - no obtrusive "voting," no one person in charge, just
2363:
I think you should split it into 2 discussions, cause right now we're discussing having FL on main page and having a voting process for the lists to be displayed per day. These are separate and should be discussed in 2 different pages. Of course, you need the first discussion to reach an agreement
2032:
Voting is only a "consensus based selective process" among reviewers, not editors/nominators, since there is no opportunity for a dialogue between nominator and reviewer, as there is at the FLC stage. This can result in either the list improving and/or the reviewer changing their mind. This is why
1896:
Personally, I am not sure that a calendar is a good way to pursue the objective of exhibiting the best of
Knowledge (XXG). A calendar works on a first come first served basis and is thus not selective. I believe that a selective process where some judgmental process is used to winnow out from an
1874:
I'm in support of the calendar idea, and whoever promotes it (which is pretty much any established, trusted user acting on good faith that isn't directly involved with the article itself) should slot the article in on the next available day; sounds much more reasonable than having a voting system,
1630:
I am with Ali'i here. I think we should have some sort of FL one the main page although if i remember rightly, it was considered at one time not able to hold the readers attention like an article can. Whilst i agree that we should have something (how you fit it in is another question), i think the
1468:
First don't compare FL, To FA. They are not the same. Second I have looked at the list, the list is very lopsided. Tons of sports lists, but then a subject like chemistry which to me seems like a perfect category for lists only has a few entries. Sorry I Just see the majority of FL at this time
366:
I am strongly supportive of there being a main page space for FLs. I am neutral on the idea of voting etc. I certainly don't object if there are those who would wish to participate in this, but I doubt I'd find the time myself. Thanks to T the T and Co for putting so much thought into the concept.
2607:
Thats a broken argument that could be applied to FPs and FAs as well. Instead of dilly dallying by trying to institute some utterly wasteful process that there will be no consensus for, fight instead for getting the FLs on the main page in the first place, and keep the selection process simple.
2289:
That there is significant support, thus far for including featured lists in some form on the main page, however, this proposal looks destined for the land of no consensus rejection if we don't decide what to do. First we should feel out how the community feels about FL inclusion on the main page,
1309:
I really dislike the idea of regular voting. As somebody who has successfully worked on many FLs, I think having a "today's featured list" really isn't necesssary. A lot of peoples rationale seems to boil down to "Articles and pictures are on the main page, so so should lists", but isn't the main
206:: I like the idea of having a space on the main page for featured lists (why wouldn't we when we have featured pictures and articles there?), however I am not sure about the voting process. I would be more in favour of the way TFA was run before all the non-specific date requests were removed. –
2301:
mentioning an opinion about lists on the main page. It appears that including featured lists on the main page somehow is definitely something many people would like, and I think the first thing we should decide is how that will look, and then we can decide how the lists selected will be chosen.
2300:
18 of the 23 who have commented above support lists on the main page. 6 of these 18 do not support this proposal. Of the remaining 5, 3 have oppose out of concern for how featured lists would look on the main page, 1 felt featured lists were not our best work, and 1 opposed this proposal without
1620:
be high-time to put featured lists on the main page, but I don't think voting on list of the year, etc. is plausible (nor workable) at this point-in-time. I might suggest limiting this proposal to getting a daily List of the Day (Today's Featured List... whatever you want to call it) on the Main
603:
I think it will be a good idea to have it on the main page like POTD, i don't think there is really any lack of space on the main page, as it just adds to the bottom. Dunno about voting yet but that is something that should be decided once it has been decided to have it on the main page anyway.
396:
On the one hand, I wish WP's other featured content got a little more attention. I myself didn't realize there were such things as featured lists, sounds, and so on, until after I started contributing actively. On the other hand, I too am worried about implementation and usefulness. I think if
2003:
I should add a comment about the voting. In summary, the debate has demonstrated those supportive of a consensus based selective process (the proposal), a dictatorial selective process (TFA) and a first in line calandar process. I am willing to compromise on any ideas about a consensus based
1113:
on a list of the day sounds even worse. Don't get me wrong, it sounds like a great idea to have featured lists appear on the main page, and people put as much effort into working on lists as working on an article with the potential to become featured in the near future. But voting for it, and
2481:
You know, looking at the Main Page today, today's featured picture has both a larger image and more text than today's featured article! Surely the picture does not need more than half a column, for the picture and a caption, and the other half of its space could be taken up by a list... --
1933:
I estimate that you need at least 3x the number of voters for the quantity of "winners" (so a top 10 needs at least 30 voters, a top 30 needs 90). Very few activities on WP attract 90 regular participants. So the bottom two thirds may achieve a solitary vote (and are effectively then chosen
1900:
Also, I think that since my proposal requires that all nominating editors cast three votes we should have sufficient revealed preferences to have a credible selective process. I don’t feel that much more than 40 or 50 votes would be necessary to have meaningful results. Suppose we have 40
897:
I am not sure I understand your opposition, but I don't think any system is perfect (not even Raul). I would be quite happy if this system got the best 16 right. I think that there are dozens of people who are concerned enough about main page content to cast three votes on a few dozen
1937:
The calendar system has the huge merit of requiring little bureaucracy - it can be supervised much like FLC by the normal non-admin regulars. If the next month's calendar fills up too quickly, then it can be slowed down by requiring a proposer and seconder, or some other lightweight
397:
someone could make a mock-up of how the main page would look with a featured list, and a mock up of how the nomination and selection process would work, and perhaps even try it out at the sandbox level, that would go a long way to convincing people to support the idea.
1150:. I'm not fundamentally opposed to the idea of somehow including featured lists on the main page. However, I agree with 17Drew that list extracts would be both unattractive and space consuming there. Also I don't think voting is the way to select high-quality content.
1748:
I agree, and the whole "vote for the list" system isn't something that I personally wouldn't feel comfortable using as the system for choosing what goes on the main page; if anything, it should be a discussion, or a featured list director should be appointed (like
1640:
If people think list of the year is too much that part of the process can be removed. However, if a LOTD is feasible, a LOTY is a lot easier to do because it would only be 12 lists we have already looked closely at. You could easily vote Support without LOTY for
1774:
I don't even think Raul is interested in FLs, but I think combining the two roles is probably unorthodox since Raul has not been involved at FLC. It makes sense for him to do TFA because he does FAC, but LOTD would be derived from efforts at FLC where he is
1108:
I'm in opposition to the proposal; the featured lists should be combined into Today's featured article, and perhaps, have one or two featured lists a week and the rest featured articles, or something similar (e.g. list, article, article, list). The idea of
1502:
yes thanks to google I bet alot of list list get tons of hits. Still don't see them as being compelling enough to go on the main page. Everyone looks at the TV listings in the newspaper but they don't put them on the front page. 02:23, 19 October 2007
936:
has been POTD twice and I know I have seen at least one three time POTD. However, if the number of candidates is very high we could rule out repeat appearances. I would hope we can generate sufficient interest to have to limit appearances to only one
2087:
interested may contribute to the decision. In addition, to providing a mechanism to fill out a monthly schedule of LOTDs, this mechanism could be used, if people agree to designate a single best "List of the Month" and possibly "List of the Year."--
1735:
This is all too complicated... why can't you just lump in Featured Lists in the current Today's Featured Article pool? There is not that much screen space available on the Main Page, so having a FL fill in a few slots in TFA should do the job...
1405:
of that 400 would be worth putting on the front page. A minority of the list would be of interest to anyone outside a small fan base. Maybe once there are more featured lists this could be a little more appealing. 05:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
321:- This seems like a great idea to me. Featured lists have gone through a rigorous process to reach their status just as FAs and FPs have, so I don't see why they should not also receive daily recognition as Featured content on the main page.
1579:. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at
1073:
I would imagine if you don't like that format there is nothing that would make you support lists being on the main page. If you feel lists should get their day in the sun on the main page, that is the best we are likely to be able to
2465:
There is clearly a substantial body of opinion that featured lists should appear on the main page in some form, although there is some opposition. This kind of proposal could develop a wider consensus, one way or the other.
2767:
I think most of the people were upset because the FLOD is chosen by voting, which takes too much time. However, most opposition agrees on having a FLOD. In short, people oppose because of how they are chosen, not the idea.
1690:
I would accept such responsibility, but think there are many others qualified and also feel a democratic process would be better. I think you would be surprised at how well it works. As I have mentioned I have done it at
2680:
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, and I can see that you're commenting in good faith, but your language is a bit abrasive. Calling this proposal "stupid" and a "waste of time" may be seen by some editors as being
2424:
Furthermore, if there are users who want to create featured lists of the day, but cannot agree on a vote method, you might want to consider how POTDs are chosen: they are selected in the order they were promoted, a rough
2290:
then we should decide how to do it. Who, participating in this discussion (regardless of all the voting above) would support the simple idea of Featured lists being included on the main page in some form to be decided?
1288:- As above. I am not at all opposed to having lists featured on the main page, however the way of selecting them is unnecessarily complicated. The way that FA's re selected works fine. Just do the same for lists.
1310:
page just supposed to be a sort of introduction to Knowledge (XXG). It would also make the page longer than necessary and if you confine the lists just to leads, some FLs only have a couple sentences of text. --
1753:) who will choose what goes where, and when. Combining lists and articles under Today's featured article (perhaps a name change, uh, Today's featured content, or something) seems like the better alternative. ~
1517:
Just nominate FL for occasional use on the main page in the FA slot or a temporary FL spot. Suggest six to for consideration, and see what happens to editing activity on them after front page appearance.
1957:: I am wondering if the lists can be updated 2-3 times per day via a bot. Like for example, a small link to the feature list be changed each time. For example, with the header (today's featured list).
2115:"Dictatorial" is a highly inflammatory word to use. I don't think that a single person needs to be elected or selected to make the decision, but this bureaucracy and voting is completely unnecessary.
2656:
should be (it ensures that the FLs that end up on the main page are of interest to more readers), but do we really need a full-scale selection process when a simple popularity contest would suffice?—
419:
can have a heading that makes it easier to understand, and as long as the administrator duties can be handled, and the formatting issues on LOTDP worked out (which there are a few), it is feasable.
696:. I think having featured lists on the main page is a great idea, but all the checks and balances involved in the proposed selection method are unnecessarily confusing. Still, that's a side issue.
165:
Sounds and topics have not reached sufficient scale where this is close to being a viable option. I think portals still has a way to go before they have a sufficient scale, but they are closer.--
1942:
criteria and yet be somewhat underwhelming. If this is a problem, we need to solve it at source rather than introducing a two-tier FL status (those good enough for the main page, and those not).
2566:
But won't people realise that whatever they do, as long as the list they've written is a FL, it'll end up on the main page at somepoint, regardless of how many votes its gets - as it should be?
1850:
Do you seriously want to replace an FA with an FL? Think of the readers! The best FLs only have several paragraphs of content, followed by pages and pages of raw information. Plus, we are an
275:- I think it's a good idea. Editors work hard to get lists up to Featured standard, and once they are that standard, they should actually be "featured" on the main page. I think the layout at
1625:
1228:- I would whole heartedly support the incorporation of featured lists to be featured on the mainpage somehow, either as part of the featured article main page system or some other system.
2391:
I started a separate discussion at the Village pump concerning featured lists on the Main Page and consensus, or lackthereof, for their inclusion on the Main Page at all. It can be seen
842:, Lists are very important because not only do they provide information but they provide a link to other articles increasing the likelihood that they will be expanded and/or improved.--
1685:
2694:
No offense was intended, but I won't back down from my feeling that this is wasting time... whoever wrote this proposal meant well, but like I said, its doing more harm than good. --
1897:
excess of desirous candidates would be better. Using a system where those who are best at gaming the system to be first in line is not the type of selectivity we should be endorsing.
53:
1048:
I would still oppose that. It just seems ... odd ... to summarize a list with 275 rows with just the first 3. It just seems like trying to summarize a novel with the first chapter.
2174:
Shouldn't this page belong in the project space? I'm going to be bold and move the page to the project space, and if anyone has any problems with it, we can revert and discuss. ~
1183:
about this proposal. This is absurdly bureaucratic, with the voting for three articles and the list of the year and everything. Do whatever the FA does, and I'm cool with that.
2155:
the time so any consensus based system is inherently flawed. Instead, all you're left with is a simple vote which is prone to increase systemic bias etc as I mentioned above
1631:
voting system is a bit convoluted for my liking. I think it just needs an administrator willing to accpet the same role that Raul currently does for TFA. Thats my two cents.
2627:
The process is fairly simple. People nominate lists, and everyone involved says which 3 they would most like to see on the main page. Then, someone tallies the responses.--
2518:
simple chronological listing. Keep it simple. Instead of wasting our time with this, we should focus our energies on getting the FLs on the Main Page in the first place. --
798:- I'd love to see FLs on the main page (assuming they'd fit). Although, I dislike the idea of the voting system, and would prefer something similar to the one used for TFA.
17:
1823:
Raul's primary role as FA director is to close FAC's; I don't think that he would be unable to select pages from the list of Featured Lists, if the community so desires.
2418:
729:
I would like a featured list of the day/week because it will encourage more people to work on lists, but I don't like all the buroacracy and voting this method has.
2409:
Why all the rush to post a featured list on the Main Page when you can start small and begin to create featured lists of the day right now ASAP? Yes it is true that
988:
and most other FLs will be extremely long to put the whole thing on. Also, I don't like the idea of voting on it, especially since it will have to be done daily.
1350:
already has a featured list section. A few hundred lists have been layed out in excerpted format. What we would probably see is a section at the bottom of the
466:
already has a featured list section. A few hundred lists have been layed out in excerpted format. What we would probably see is a section at the bottom of the
2469:
It goes almost without saying that it is going to be difficult to get wide support for a bureaucratic/"democratic" process, with daily/weekly/monthly votes. --
2723:
743:
237:
2731:
972:
at least until I can see an example of what the main page would look like after such a change is made. I remember this was proposed a few months ago on
501:
1722:
1675:
1635:
1696:
52:
on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is
872:
because voting will fail to choose the best 30 lists each month. You need a huge number of voters in order to rank 30+ items. Look at Round 1 of
822:- Why Not? - People have worked hard to have lists raised to FL status. Therefore the lists should be featured on the main page. I prefer the
2579:
That does not make sense. If there are over 400 FLs and they are producing more than 30 per month, how can they all get on the main page.--
2392:
521:
2414:
2197:
1487:
1114:
creating a whole new section for lists, especially when there are limited spaces for content on the main page, doesn't appeal to me. ~
2748:
2637:
2589:
2548:
2134:
2097:
2014:
1985:
1911:
1785:
1709:
1651:
1597:
1450:
1364:
1084:
1030:
947:
908:
757:
574:
534:
480:
175:
80:
2538:
Competition breeds innovation and a competitive selective process to get on the main page will cause people to improve the project.--
2700:
2614:
2524:
2442:
The proposer is somewhat against the idea since he/she feels there needs to be additional selection beyond being a FL. See above...
2212:
2124:
Dictatorial is a term the Featured Articles Director, himself, and his cadre use to describe him. I am just using their own term.--
252:
218:
1699:. It works out pretty well. However, I gather you prefer a non-democratic process, but think list are ready for the main page.--
2752:
2641:
2593:
2552:
2138:
2101:
2018:
1989:
1915:
1835:
A director is unnecessary. Whoever can close FLCs should be able to do a TFL. Having one particular person do it is unnecessary.
1789:
1713:
1655:
1601:
1454:
1368:
1088:
1034:
951:
912:
578:
538:
484:
179:
84:
553:
101:, I think this is a very good proposal. I'm surprised that lists aren't currently featured on the main page, so it makes sense.
2756:
2645:
2597:
2556:
2142:
2105:
2022:
1993:
1919:
1793:
1717:
1659:
1605:
1458:
1372:
1274:
1092:
1038:
955:
933:
916:
582:
542:
488:
183:
88:
1550:
and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of
279:
is fine. If a reader is interested in the list, they get a taster of it and will click on the link to read the whole thing. --
151:
that lists, topics, sounds, or portals represent Knowledge (XXG) nearly as well as what currently appears on the main page. --
23:
2705:
2619:
2529:
1421:
1195:. Voting a featured list to be displayed on main page every single day for 365 days in a year sounds too complicated to me.
1138:
Having small excerpts of lists on the Main Page would be unattractive and fill a disproportionately large amount of space.
747:, the exerts of the list are a bit cluttered. I think the voting is unnecessary, though there is nothing wrong with it. --
741:
the idea of FL of the day; the Project should show off some of its more almanac-like articles. I would rather it look like
2778:
2761:
2708:
2689:
2665:
2650:
2622:
2602:
2574:
2561:
2532:
2502:
2489:
2476:
2446:
2436:
2399:
2374:
2358:
2342:
2320:
2294:
2274:
2244:
2223:
2190:
2159:
2147:
2119:
2110:
2081:
2070:
2040:
2027:
1998:
1965:
1949:
1924:
1891:
1867:
1839:
1830:
1818:
1798:
1769:
1743:
1664:
1610:
1558:. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting
1522:
1497:
1473:
1463:
1396:
1377:
1338:
1314:
1301:
1280:
1250:
1232:
1220:
1205:
1187:
1171:
1154:
1142:
1130:
1097:
1068:
1043:
1008:
960:
921:
887:
857:
834:
814:
802:
790:
762:
733:
721:
709:
688:
676:
660:
648:
615:
587:
559:
547:
515:
493:
454:
435:
423:
401:
388:
376:
358:
339:
313:
290:
263:
229:
188:
160:
145:
105:
93:
2316:
2266:
1810:
1479:
1290:
305:
117:
on the main page, the fact that they currently aren't makes the work and effort of these editors pretty much redundant. -
2413:
started in 2004, but they did not appear on the main page until July 2005. In that month, a main page template called
1179:- I need to be clear: I don't have any problem with including featured lists on the main page. I have a problem with
384:. The main opposition seems to deal with minor implementation concerns, rather than the idea and the proposal. --
2513:
Voting for a daily TFL is illogical, cumbersome, and completely unnecessary, and trying to institute some sort of
684:: I like the idea of featured lists getting more exposure; the manner of choosing does not really matter to me.--
2695:
2609:
2519:
2261:
2218:
1805:
985:
850:
300:
258:
224:
1332:
778:
730:
2304:
1409:
1262:
2744:
2633:
2585:
2544:
2130:
2093:
2010:
1981:
1907:
1781:
1705:
1647:
1593:
1446:
1360:
1080:
1026:
943:
904:
753:
657:
626:
570:
530:
476:
353:
285:
171:
76:
524:. I think details of the format should be ironed out later if we can get this idea approved in theory.--
2774:
2370:
2208:
1201:
248:
214:
1975:
at night until 8:00 in the morning wherever you are. You could miss one by virtue of your location. --
1875:
and as I've just realised, a much better idea than combining them into the featured article queue. ~
1862:
1538:
and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When
1229:
1213:
the way this is implemented. I don't mind seeing FLs on the Main Page, but not under this procedure.
1166:
1151:
372:
348:
155:
2429:
order (although we try to not to put pictures of the same subject too close to each other). Cheers.
1692:
930:
1324:
1270:
843:
674:
193:
I'm sure Portals would be widely accepted once the main 8 portals on the Main page are all features
118:
2066:. For clarification, how does this proposal for FLs specifically differ from the FA system? --
113:- The whole idea of working with a list to take it to Featured List status should be to having it
2495:
Oh, look - that is your sample format 2. I think you need to tidy it up a bit first, though. --
1417:
1245:
1056:
1020:. You can see examples of what the FL main page section will look like by looking at that page.--
996:
784:
2682:
1543:
416:
412:
2739:
2628:
2580:
2539:
2433:
2312:
2125:
2088:
2005:
1976:
1902:
1776:
1700:
1642:
1588:
1441:
1355:
1311:
1299:
1075:
1021:
938:
929:
P.S. although TFAs are only eligible once, several pictures have been POTD more than once. At
899:
748:
621:
Support, but display a link only, and schedule them in the order they received featured status
565:
525:
471:
280:
166:
71:
2735:
2410:
1971:
1584:
2769:
2661:
2365:
2202:
2067:
1196:
703:
685:
385:
242:
208:
2417:
was implemented in which DYK was shown on weekdays and POTDs on weekends. It was not until
1539:
1437:
2396:
2355:
2337:
2291:
2239:
2185:
2038:
1947:
1886:
1859:
1764:
1495:
1163:
1125:
885:
556:
368:
330:
152:
2351:
1580:
1551:
1547:
1535:
1433:
1347:
1017:
810:- There's enough lists for there to be one, and it would be an interesting new feature.
463:
276:
2452:
I agree with this - and the featured content portal shows how it can be done. Create a
2443:
2156:
1632:
1266:
973:
669:
610:
605:
510:
505:
449:
444:
420:
398:
2686:
2571:
2456:
1672:
1470:
1413:
1241:
1050:
1016:
You may have missed my point below that the formatting has already been layed out at
990:
772:
102:
2499:
2486:
2473:
2430:
2308:
2116:
2078:
1959:
1836:
1750:
1519:
1293:
1184:
831:
2462:
template, encourage people to add it to their user pages, and see what happens.
873:
1682:
1622:
830:, but won't get too wound up if it goes the other way. Good idea, hope it works.
2657:
1824:
1737:
1389:
1214:
1139:
698:
443:
Has an example page been made to see what it would look like on the main page?
2421:, implemented in March 2006, that POTDs started to appear seven days a week.
2329:
2231:
2177:
2034:
1943:
1878:
1756:
1566:
1559:
1491:
1117:
881:
811:
799:
718:
432:
322:
2727:
1803:
So get another director who's active at FLC, but keep the process the same.
1573:
1555:
1351:
467:
2326:
I support FLs on the main page, but I do not support the voting system. ~
564:
It is not as good as Chris' above that demonstrates the whole main page.--
2567:
522:
Knowledge (XXG):Village_pump_(proposals)#Featured_lists_on_the_Main_Page
2496:
2483:
2470:
1490:, making it the 54th most popular page. Other lists come higher still
606:
506:
445:
411:
It took me a little while to figure out what was going on at the
2426:
1576:
1569:
1562:
431:(though alternatively I would also support a List of the Week).
1436:
shows wide variety. Second, we surely have as much variety as
668:- I've thought about this before and think it's long overdue.
24:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Today's featured list/First proposal
56:, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.
1587:
started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge.--
554:
Wikipedia_talk:Featured_lists#This_month.27s_featured_list
1354:
using the work that has already been done for starters.--
1346:
I don’t know if you noticed that it was pointed out that
470:
using the work that has already been done for starters.--
462:
I don’t know if you noticed that it was pointed out that
18:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Today's featured list proposal
977:
2509:
The proposal, as it stands, is a massive waste of time
1671:
I like the calendar idea similar to that of the POTD.
1333:
1325:
298:- I think it's an excellent and long overdue idea.
2722:helped with the support is the production of the
552:Look at this, it is the best I have seen so far:
520:Yes, but there is some talk of another format at
2738:. However, I see that sample2 is preferable.--
2734:because I did not want to take space away from
2608:This proposal is doing more harm than good. --
2364:before the second discussion can move forward.
1960:
2658:Ă‹zhiki (Igels HĂ©rissonovich ĂŹzhakoff-Amursky)
828:non-selective first in line calendar approach
8:
1621:Page. Just my glorious opinion. Mahalo. --
2405:Recommendation: Start small like POTD did
611:
511:
450:
1697:Category:Top-importance Chicago articles
1440:did when it started with 200 articles.--
1554:was when they started appearing on the
500:Ah ok, so it would look something like
2415:Knowledge (XXG):Today's second feature
864:Survey - in opposition to the proposal
2757:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
2646:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
2598:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
2557:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
2198:Knowledge (XXG):Today's featured list
2143:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
2106:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
2023:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
1994:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
1920:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
1794:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
1718:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
1660:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
1606:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
1459:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
1373:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
1093:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
1039:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
956:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
917:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
583:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
543:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
489:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
184:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
89:tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM
7:
976:(see last version of the discussion
2419:the current design of the main page
1572:and main page appearances starting
62:Survey - in support of the proposal
2338:
2240:
2186:
1887:
1765:
1126:
31:
2250:
2196:I think this should be moved to
934:Image:Livestock_chicago_1947.jpg
874:Commons:Picture of the Year/2006
656:: I think it's a great idea. --
2330:
2232:
2178:
1879:
1757:
1118:
699:
623:- the same as pic of the day.
704:
1:
1480:List of The Simpsons episodes
331:
2779:15:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
2762:12:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
2709:23:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
2690:21:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
2685:. Just a friendly heads-up.
2666:20:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
2651:15:26, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
2623:22:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
2603:21:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
2575:19:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
2562:16:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
2533:02:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
2503:14:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
2490:10:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
2477:17:51, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
2447:09:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
2437:06:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
2400:03:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
2375:03:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
2359:21:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
2343:21:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
2321:21:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
2295:21:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
2275:03:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
2245:00:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
2228:Yeah, that sounds better. ~
2224:00:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
2191:21:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
2160:02:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
2148:13:22, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
2120:21:38, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
2111:20:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
2082:19:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
2071:19:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
2041:20:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
2028:16:53, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1999:16:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1966:10:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1950:15:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1925:05:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1892:04:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1868:02:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1840:02:44, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1831:00:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1819:00:34, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1799:23:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1770:22:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1744:21:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1723:21:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1686:21:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1676:20:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1665:21:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1636:20:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1626:20:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1611:14:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1523:21:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
1498:21:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
1474:20:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
1464:15:46, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
1397:03:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
1390:
1378:13:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
1339:05:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
1315:04:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
1302:02:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
1281:02:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
1251:19:01, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1233:03:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1221:03:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1206:02:56, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1188:02:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1172:02:19, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1155:01:52, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1143:01:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
1131:22:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1098:21:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1069:21:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1044:20:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1009:20:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
961:23:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
922:21:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
888:20:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
858:21:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
851:
835:20:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
815:20:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
803:17:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
791:16:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
763:20:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
734:01:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
722:14:35, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
710:11:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
689:01:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
677:00:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
661:23:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
649:22:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
616:00:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
588:00:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
560:19:59, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
548:16:41, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
516:15:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
494:13:19, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
455:21:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
436:20:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
424:20:57, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
402:19:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
389:19:10, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
377:13:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
359:10:46, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
340:00:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
323:
314:00:33, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
291:22:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
264:00:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
230:22:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
189:15:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
161:02:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
146:22:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
106:20:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
94:14:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
1546:), they only had about 200
844:
2795:
1581:the featured content page
1482:was viewed 131,647 times
2717:Message to Closing admin
1540:Today's featured article
986:List of California birds
981:
2059:Arbitrary section break
1432:First, a quick look at
824:abbreviated text format
1534:We now have over 400
2696:Jeffrey O. Gustafson
2610:Jeffrey O. Gustafson
2520:Jeffrey O. Gustafson
2732:other sample format
2726:of the prospective
2262:Dihydrogen Monoxide
2200:per TFA and TFP. –
1806:Dihydrogen Monoxide
301:Dihydrogen Monoxide
2393:at this subsection
2387:Discussion started
1585:Picture of the day
1565:, voting starting
1256:Very strong oppose
731:The Placebo Effect
2760:
2649:
2601:
2560:
2323:
2307:comment added by
2222:
2146:
2109:
2026:
1997:
1923:
1797:
1721:
1663:
1609:
1552:featured articles
1548:featured articles
1462:
1426:
1412:comment added by
1376:
1337:
1279:
1265:comment added by
1248:
1096:
1042:
959:
920:
761:
727:Support in theory
658:Underneath-it-All
586:
546:
492:
375:
262:
228:
187:
92:
22:(Redirected from
2786:
2742:
2631:
2583:
2542:
2461:
2455:
2339:
2332:
2302:
2258:
2254:
2253:
2241:
2234:
2206:
2187:
2180:
2128:
2091:
2008:
1979:
1962:
1905:
1888:
1881:
1865:
1828:
1779:
1766:
1759:
1741:
1703:
1645:
1591:
1444:
1425:
1406:
1394:
1358:
1335:
1331:
1329:
1296:
1278:
1259:
1246:
1218:
1169:
1127:
1120:
1078:
1067:
1064:
1061:
1053:
1024:
1007:
1004:
1001:
993:
983:
941:
902:
855:
848:
787:
781:
775:
751:
706:
701:
644:
641:
638:
635:
632:
629:
613:
608:
568:
528:
513:
508:
474:
452:
447:
371:
356:
351:
337:
327:
288:
283:
246:
212:
169:
158:
142:
139:
136:
134:
132:
131:
129:
74:
27:
2794:
2793:
2789:
2788:
2787:
2785:
2784:
2783:
2719:
2511:
2459:
2453:
2407:
2389:
2341:
2287:
2270:
2251:
2249:
2243:
2189:
2172:
2170:Wrong namespace
2061:
1890:
1863:
1858:, not lists? --
1826:
1814:
1768:
1739:
1542:(TFA) started (
1532:
1407:
1294:
1260:
1230:Judgesurreal777
1216:
1181:everything else
1167:
1152:Espresso Addict
1129:
1062:
1057:
1051:
1049:
1002:
997:
991:
989:
866:
785:
779:
773:
642:
639:
636:
633:
630:
627:
354:
349:
309:
286:
281:
156:
140:
137:
127:
125:
123:
121:
120:
70:as nominator.--
64:
50:
44:
43:# '''Support'''
36:
29:
28:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2792:
2790:
2782:
2781:
2724:sample2 format
2718:
2715:
2714:
2713:
2712:
2711:
2678:
2677:
2676:
2675:
2674:
2673:
2672:
2671:
2670:
2669:
2668:
2510:
2507:
2506:
2505:
2450:
2449:
2406:
2403:
2388:
2385:
2384:
2383:
2382:
2381:
2380:
2379:
2378:
2377:
2350:anywhere near
2336:
2324:
2286:
2283:
2282:
2281:
2280:
2279:
2278:
2277:
2268:
2238:
2184:
2171:
2168:
2167:
2166:
2165:
2164:
2163:
2162:
2152:
2151:
2150:
2060:
2057:
2056:
2055:
2054:
2053:
2052:
2051:
2050:
2049:
2048:
2047:
2046:
2045:
2044:
2043:
1939:
1935:
1931:
1898:
1885:
1872:
1871:
1870:
1848:
1847:
1846:
1845:
1844:
1843:
1842:
1821:
1812:
1763:
1732:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1727:
1726:
1725:
1695:to select the
1669:
1668:
1667:
1536:featured lists
1531:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1512:
1511:
1510:
1509:
1508:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1504:
1399:
1382:
1381:
1380:
1317:
1304:
1283:
1253:
1235:
1223:
1208:
1190:
1174:
1157:
1145:
1133:
1124:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1100:
974:Talk:Main Page
967:
966:
965:
964:
963:
891:
890:
865:
862:
861:
860:
837:
817:
805:
793:
765:
736:
724:
712:
691:
679:
663:
651:
618:
598:
597:
596:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
590:
498:
497:
496:
426:
406:
405:
404:
379:
361:
342:
316:
307:
296:Strong support
293:
270:
269:
268:
267:
266:
200:
199:
198:
197:
196:
195:
194:
108:
96:
63:
60:
59:
58:
51:
49:# '''Oppose'''
48:
45:
42:
35:
32:
30:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2791:
2780:
2777:
2776:
2773:
2772:
2766:
2765:
2764:
2763:
2758:
2754:
2750:
2746:
2741:
2737:
2733:
2729:
2725:
2716:
2710:
2707:
2703:
2702:
2697:
2693:
2692:
2691:
2688:
2684:
2679:
2667:
2663:
2659:
2654:
2653:
2652:
2647:
2643:
2639:
2635:
2630:
2626:
2625:
2624:
2621:
2617:
2616:
2611:
2606:
2605:
2604:
2599:
2595:
2591:
2587:
2582:
2578:
2577:
2576:
2573:
2569:
2565:
2564:
2563:
2558:
2554:
2550:
2546:
2541:
2537:
2536:
2535:
2534:
2531:
2527:
2526:
2521:
2516:
2508:
2504:
2501:
2498:
2494:
2493:
2492:
2491:
2488:
2485:
2479:
2478:
2475:
2472:
2467:
2463:
2458:
2448:
2445:
2441:
2440:
2439:
2438:
2435:
2432:
2428:
2422:
2420:
2416:
2412:
2404:
2402:
2401:
2398:
2394:
2386:
2376:
2373:
2372:
2369:
2368:
2362:
2361:
2360:
2357:
2353:
2348:
2347:
2346:
2345:
2344:
2340:
2335:
2334:
2333:
2325:
2322:
2318:
2314:
2310:
2306:
2299:
2298:
2297:
2296:
2293:
2284:
2276:
2272:
2264:
2263:
2257:
2248:
2247:
2246:
2242:
2237:
2236:
2235:
2227:
2226:
2225:
2221:
2220:
2215:
2214:
2210:
2205:
2204:
2199:
2195:
2194:
2193:
2192:
2188:
2183:
2182:
2181:
2169:
2161:
2158:
2153:
2149:
2144:
2140:
2136:
2132:
2127:
2123:
2122:
2121:
2118:
2114:
2113:
2112:
2107:
2103:
2099:
2095:
2090:
2085:
2084:
2083:
2080:
2075:
2074:
2073:
2072:
2069:
2065:
2058:
2042:
2039:
2036:
2031:
2030:
2029:
2024:
2020:
2016:
2012:
2007:
2002:
2001:
2000:
1995:
1991:
1987:
1983:
1978:
1973:
1969:
1968:
1967:
1964:
1963:
1956:
1953:
1952:
1951:
1948:
1945:
1940:
1936:
1932:
1928:
1927:
1926:
1921:
1917:
1913:
1909:
1904:
1899:
1895:
1894:
1893:
1889:
1884:
1883:
1882:
1873:
1869:
1866:
1861:
1857:
1853:
1849:
1841:
1838:
1834:
1833:
1832:
1829:
1822:
1820:
1816:
1808:
1807:
1802:
1801:
1800:
1795:
1791:
1787:
1783:
1778:
1775:uninvolved.--
1773:
1772:
1771:
1767:
1762:
1761:
1760:
1752:
1747:
1746:
1745:
1742:
1734:
1733:
1724:
1719:
1715:
1711:
1707:
1702:
1698:
1694:
1689:
1688:
1687:
1684:
1679:
1678:
1677:
1674:
1670:
1666:
1661:
1657:
1653:
1649:
1644:
1639:
1638:
1637:
1634:
1629:
1628:
1627:
1624:
1619:
1615:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1607:
1603:
1599:
1595:
1590:
1586:
1582:
1578:
1575:
1571:
1568:
1564:
1561:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1537:
1529:
1524:
1521:
1516:
1513:
1501:
1500:
1499:
1496:
1493:
1489:
1486:according to
1485:
1481:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1472:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1460:
1456:
1452:
1448:
1443:
1439:
1435:
1431:
1428:
1427:
1423:
1419:
1415:
1411:
1403:
1400:
1398:
1395:
1393:
1386:
1383:
1379:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1357:
1353:
1349:
1345:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1336:
1330:
1328:
1321:
1318:
1316:
1313:
1308:
1305:
1303:
1300:
1298:
1297:
1292:
1287:
1284:
1282:
1276:
1272:
1268:
1264:
1257:
1254:
1252:
1249:
1243:
1239:
1236:
1234:
1231:
1227:
1224:
1222:
1219:
1212:
1209:
1207:
1204:
1203:
1200:
1199:
1194:
1191:
1189:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1175:
1173:
1170:
1165:
1161:
1158:
1156:
1153:
1149:
1146:
1144:
1141:
1137:
1134:
1132:
1128:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1112:
1107:
1099:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1077:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1066:
1065:
1060:
1054:
1047:
1046:
1045:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1006:
1005:
1000:
994:
987:
984:, lists like
979:
975:
971:
968:
962:
957:
953:
949:
945:
940:
935:
932:
928:
925:
924:
923:
918:
914:
910:
906:
901:
898:candidates.--
896:
893:
892:
889:
886:
883:
878:
877:
875:
871:
868:
867:
863:
859:
856:
854:
849:
847:
841:
838:
836:
833:
829:
825:
821:
818:
816:
813:
809:
806:
804:
801:
797:
794:
792:
789:
788:
782:
777:
776:
770:- Good idea.
769:
766:
764:
759:
755:
750:
746:
745:
740:
737:
735:
732:
728:
725:
723:
720:
716:
713:
711:
708:
707:
702:
695:
692:
690:
687:
683:
680:
678:
675:
673:
672:
667:
664:
662:
659:
655:
652:
650:
647:
646:
645:
622:
619:
617:
614:
609:
602:
599:
589:
584:
580:
576:
572:
567:
563:
562:
561:
558:
555:
551:
550:
549:
544:
540:
536:
532:
527:
523:
519:
518:
517:
514:
509:
503:
499:
495:
490:
486:
482:
478:
473:
469:
465:
461:
458:
457:
456:
453:
448:
442:
439:
438:
437:
434:
430:
427:
425:
422:
418:
414:
410:
407:
403:
400:
395:
392:
391:
390:
387:
383:
380:
378:
374:
370:
365:
362:
360:
357:
352:
346:
343:
341:
338:
336:
335:
328:
326:
320:
317:
315:
311:
303:
302:
297:
294:
292:
289:
284:
278:
274:
271:
265:
261:
260:
255:
254:
250:
245:
244:
239:
235:
234:
233:
232:
231:
227:
226:
221:
220:
216:
211:
210:
205:
201:
192:
191:
190:
185:
181:
177:
173:
168:
164:
163:
162:
159:
154:
149:
148:
147:
144:
143:
116:
112:
109:
107:
104:
100:
97:
95:
90:
86:
82:
78:
73:
69:
66:
65:
61:
57:
55:
47:
41:
38:
37:
33:
25:
19:
2775:
2770:
2740:TonyTheTiger
2720:
2699:
2629:TonyTheTiger
2613:
2581:TonyTheTiger
2540:TonyTheTiger
2523:
2514:
2512:
2480:
2468:
2464:
2451:
2423:
2408:
2390:
2371:
2366:
2328:
2327:
2288:
2260:
2255:
2230:
2229:
2217:
2207:
2201:
2176:
2175:
2173:
2126:TonyTheTiger
2089:TonyTheTiger
2063:
2062:
2006:TonyTheTiger
1977:TonyTheTiger
1958:
1954:
1903:TonyTheTiger
1877:
1876:
1855:
1852:encyclopedia
1851:
1804:
1777:TonyTheTiger
1755:
1754:
1701:TonyTheTiger
1643:TonyTheTiger
1617:
1589:TonyTheTiger
1533:
1514:
1483:
1442:TonyTheTiger
1429:
1408:— Preceding
1401:
1391:
1384:
1356:TonyTheTiger
1343:
1326:
1319:
1306:
1289:
1285:
1261:— Preceding
1255:
1237:
1225:
1210:
1202:
1197:
1192:
1180:
1176:
1159:
1147:
1135:
1116:
1115:
1110:
1076:TonyTheTiger
1058:
1055:
1022:TonyTheTiger
1013:
998:
995:
969:
939:TonyTheTiger
926:
900:TonyTheTiger
894:
869:
852:
845:
839:
827:
823:
819:
807:
795:
783:
771:
767:
749:Arctic Gnome
742:
738:
726:
714:
697:
693:
681:
670:
665:
653:
625:
624:
620:
600:
566:TonyTheTiger
526:TonyTheTiger
472:TonyTheTiger
459:
440:
428:
408:
393:
381:
363:
344:
333:
332:
324:
318:
299:
295:
272:
257:
247:
241:
223:
213:
207:
203:
167:TonyTheTiger
119:
114:
110:
98:
72:TonyTheTiger
67:
39:
2771:OhanaUnited
2367:OhanaUnited
2303:—Preceding
2285:So it seems
2203:thedemonhog
2068:Wikipedical
1970:Both ] and
1198:OhanaUnited
686:Legionarius
386:Wikipedical
243:thedemonhog
209:thedemonhog
2706:<*: -->
2620:<*: -->
2530:<*: -->
2397:IvoShandor
2356:IvoShandor
2292:IvoShandor
1860:Spangineer
1693:WP:CHICAGO
1641:example.--
1567:December 1
1560:November 1
1544:2004-02-22
1530:Discussion
1488:WikiCharts
1164:Spangineer
931:WP:CHICAGO
557:IvoShandor
369:Ben MacDui
153:Spangineer
54:not a vote
2728:main page
2444:Nil Einne
2259:- Moved.
2157:Nil Einne
1864:(háblame)
1633:Woodym555
1574:January 1
1556:main page
1478:LOL. The
1352:main page
1267:Nil Einne
1168:(háblame)
982:tiny font
671:Bsroiaadn
468:main page
421:Jeff Dahl
399:Jeff Dahl
157:(háblame)
2701:Shazaam!
2615:Shazaam!
2525:Shazaam!
2317:contribs
2305:unsigned
1856:articles
1673:GreenJoe
1471:Ridernyc
1422:contribs
1414:Ridernyc
1410:unsigned
1312:Scorpion
1275:contribs
1263:unsigned
1242:Awadewit
846:Southern
826:and the
758:contribs
612:hris_huh
512:hris_huh
451:hris_huh
433:Ben Finn
417:WP:LOTDP
413:WP:LOTDP
115:featured
103:GreenJoe
2736:WP:POTD
2683:uncivil
2431:Zzyzx11
2411:WP:POTD
2309:Atropos
2117:Atropos
2079:Atropos
2064:Comment
1972:WP:POTD
1961:Miranda
1955:Comment
1837:Atropos
1751:Raul654
1520:SEWilco
1484:per day
1430:Comment
1344:Comment
1185:Atropos
1177:Opposte
1014:Comment
970:Oppose,
937:time.--
927:Comment
895:Comment
840:Support
832:Dincher
820:Support
808:Support
796:Support
768:Support
744:Sample2
739:Support
715:Support
694:Support
682:Support
666:Support
654:Support
601:Support
460:Comment
441:Comment
429:Support
409:Support
394:Comment
382:Support
364:Support
345:Support
319:Support
282:Beloved
273:Support
238:Sample2
236:I like
204:support
202:Mostly
111:Support
99:Support
68:Support
2515:stupid
2434:(Talk)
1938:brake.
1515:Oppose
1438:WP:TFA
1402:Oppose
1392:Shudde
1385:Oppose
1320:Oppose
1307:Oppose
1286:Oppose
1238:Oppose
1226:Oppose
1211:Oppose
1193:Oppose
1160:Oppose
1148:Oppose
1140:17Drew
1136:Oppose
1111:voting
870:Oppose
373:(Talk)
34:Survey
2687:Dylan
2352:WP:FL
2213:edits
2035:Colin
1944:Colin
1683:Ali'i
1623:Ali'i
1618:might
1503:(UTC)
1492:Colin
1434:WP:FL
1348:WP:FC
1327:97198
1291:.....
1074:do.--
1018:WP:FC
882:Colin
853:Texas
812:Xihix
719:Ccson
464:WP:FC
355:linca
350:linca
287:Freak
277:WP:FC
253:edits
219:edits
40:Add
16:<
2572:Talk
2457:lotd
2427:FIFO
2331:Sebi
2313:talk
2256:Done
2233:Sebi
2209:talk
2179:Sebi
1880:Sebi
1825:Tito
1758:Sebi
1738:Tito
1577:2008
1570:2007
1563:2007
1418:talk
1334:talk
1295:Todd
1271:talk
1247:talk
1215:Tito
1119:Sebi
978:here
800:Gran
786:Love
774:Lara
754:talk
700:Chwe
631:e Tr
502:this
249:talk
240:. –
215:talk
46:or
2753:bio
2664:);
2662:yo?
2660:• (
2642:bio
2594:bio
2568:RHB
2553:bio
2219:box
2139:bio
2102:bio
2019:bio
1990:bio
1916:bio
1790:bio
1714:bio
1656:bio
1616:It
1602:bio
1455:bio
1369:bio
1089:bio
1063:man
1052:Mr.
1035:bio
1003:man
992:Mr.
952:bio
913:bio
643:ist
640:man
634:ans
579:bio
539:bio
485:bio
325:Rai
259:box
225:box
180:bio
85:bio
2759:)
2704:-
2698:-
2648:)
2618:-
2612:-
2600:)
2570:-
2559:)
2528:-
2522:-
2500:??
2497:!!
2487:??
2484:!!
2474:??
2471:!!
2460:}}
2454:{{
2395:.
2354:.
2319:)
2315:•
2273:)
2216:•
2211:•
2145:)
2108:)
2025:)
1996:)
1922:)
1827:xd
1817:)
1796:)
1740:xd
1720:)
1662:)
1608:)
1461:)
1424:)
1420:•
1375:)
1277:)
1273:•
1244:|
1217:xd
1095:)
1059:Z-
1041:)
999:Z-
958:)
919:)
756:•
705:ch
637:hu
628:Th
585:)
545:)
504:?
491:)
334:me
312:)
256:•
251:•
222:•
217:•
186:)
141:Q.
138:H.
126:bb
124:ri
122:Ca
91:)
2755:/
2751:/
2749:c
2747:/
2745:t
2743:(
2644:/
2640:/
2638:c
2636:/
2634:t
2632:(
2596:/
2592:/
2590:c
2588:/
2586:t
2584:(
2555:/
2551:/
2549:c
2547:/
2545:t
2543:(
2311:(
2271:O
2269:2
2267:H
2265:(
2141:/
2137:/
2135:c
2133:/
2131:t
2129:(
2104:/
2100:/
2098:c
2096:/
2094:t
2092:(
2037:°
2021:/
2017:/
2015:c
2013:/
2011:t
2009:(
1992:/
1988:/
1986:c
1984:/
1982:t
1980:(
1946:°
1918:/
1914:/
1912:c
1910:/
1908:t
1906:(
1815:O
1813:2
1811:H
1809:(
1792:/
1788:/
1786:c
1784:/
1782:t
1780:(
1716:/
1712:/
1710:c
1708:/
1706:t
1704:(
1658:/
1654:/
1652:c
1650:/
1648:t
1646:(
1604:/
1600:/
1598:c
1596:/
1594:t
1592:(
1525:)
1518:(
1494:°
1457:/
1453:/
1451:c
1449:/
1447:t
1445:(
1416:(
1371:/
1367:/
1365:c
1363:/
1361:t
1359:(
1323:•
1269:(
1091:/
1087:/
1085:c
1083:/
1081:t
1079:(
1037:/
1033:/
1031:c
1029:/
1027:t
1025:(
954:/
950:/
948:c
946:/
944:t
942:(
915:/
911:/
909:c
907:/
905:t
903:(
884:°
780:❤
760:)
752:(
607:C
581:/
577:/
575:c
573:/
571:t
569:(
541:/
537:/
535:c
533:/
531:t
529:(
507:C
487:/
483:/
481:c
479:/
477:t
475:(
446:C
329:-
310:O
308:2
306:H
304:(
182:/
178:/
176:c
174:/
172:t
170:(
135:~
133:n
130:a
128:e
87:/
83:/
81:c
79:/
77:t
75:(
26:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.