Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article

September 11 Article Decision

(moved from here)

How was the decision to feature American Airlines Flight 11 on September 11 made? I recognize that it is the 25h anniversary of the event, I also recognize that it has been featured previously. Was there any further reflection made on the implications of featuring that article as Todays Featured Article on Wikipedia?

The terrorist attacks which were perpetrated against innocent Americans on 9/11 are used as a political tool this day by the United States to justify any number of destructive global actions. Making sure it stays fresh in the American consciousness serves an American political end, and reminds readers why it is important to support the genocide in Palestine ("to have an ally in the middle east wars against the people who did this to America") and betray NATO ("because they refused to support America after our people were murdered"). The context of America is not the same as the context of America even two or three years ago, actual jingoistic fascism is objectively on the rise and this is a tool of propaganda serving in its favor. Does Wikipedia's "neutrality" really lack any ability to confront that without construing me as using this as my soapbox?

Why was this an axis Wikipedia even chose to engage with? Inform people of something new that pertained to the tragedies perpetrated against innocent people on September 11. Bob10011001 (talk) 20:36, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry you did not care for my selection. But in late July I formalized what I had said in discussions at TFA/R previously, that as scheduling coordinator for September, we would be running on the 11th the article on a 9/11 flight that was eligible to run and in the best possible shape. Reaction was positive (the discussion is here).

But I don't feel inclined to hide behind the views of other people, I think it was the right decision to make. I should note that selecting an article as TFA says nothing about one's views concerning its subject matter, though Breitbart said otherwise when it criticized one of my selections once. Thank you for the feedback. Wehwalt (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Being previously accused of using your position to select featured articles to advance your personal beliefs by an established news organization, as distasteful and unreliable as I find that news organization, is not the flex you think it is, never mind a defence against an accusation of using your position to advance your personal beliefs...

I can't find much reference to this. I can find reference to the Charlie Kirk song being mocked in "Did You Know", are you referring to that? Regardless you seem to be freely admitting that it's not the first time you have been accused of this, this time it's just from the opposite political outlook? I am not suggesting that you be pro-me and anti-Breitbart. I am suggesting that you stop alienating people with your choices.

Or better yet: two people participated in that conversation, both explicitly American. No perspectives of English speaking Canadian or British or Iraqi or Afghan or Iranian or Chinese or Vietnamese or Indian or Saudi or French Wikipedia editors were sought or interpreted? Are they ever sought? Hundreds of projects aimed at removing Systemic bias and the featured English article is determined by three guys in a back room. Maybe a non-American gets a shot once a week or something? Cragmar (talk) 22:37, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

No, they were upset I ran George Washington and slavery on Juneteenth. Breitbart doesn't know I exist, they objected that it was an example of Wikipedia bias. I made that decision, but that article had been nominated and other editors had supported the nomination. I have nothing to do with DYK other than submitting a few articles years ago. TFA discussions are usually not well attended, that three people addressed that point is pretty good. As for bias, first, I can only run the articles that pass FAC. There's no way to be biased in this job. Wehwalt (talk) 00:50, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

As for American bias, I am American but one of the other coordinators is English. And from today, eight of the next nine TFAs are on non-American topics. Wehwalt (talk) 00:53, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

I am another TFA co-ordinator, and I approved of the September TFA list, including running an article related to 9/11 on Sept 11. Even though it was a re-run, it was a significant anniversary (25 years since the event), the article was in good enough shape to run again, and there are no other FAs pertaining to 9/11 that are waiting for their first TFA run. I am a Canadian editor, who writes articles on Canadian topics, and I think it is fine to run articles at TFA pertaining to American history on their significant anniversary. If the consensus for this changes, I am happy to oblige, but I don't see that consensus yet. Z1720 (talk) 01:43, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Running a FA about the September 11 terrorist attacks on the 25th anniversary seems totally uncontroversial, and very sensible. The article got almost 179,000 page views, which indicates a high level of interest by Wikipedia's readers. Nick-D (talk) 02:01, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Echoing the above: it seems a suitable article to select on such an anniversary. (It doesn’t matter too much, but I’m British and a former TFA co-ord and I would have selected that article to run on that day too). - SchroCat (talk) 05:18, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

November TFA schedule

A draft of November's TFA schedule has been posted at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/November 2026. Feedback is welcome. If there are no major changes, the TFAs will start to be formally scheduled in a couple of days. Z1720 (talk) 22:59, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Just voicing my opinion

While I know Wikipedia is no stranger to controversial topics, I would still like to express my dislike to featuring Genshin Impact on the Main Page. Given that it is a gacha game riddled with predatory practices, I find it distasteful to promote it by showcasing it on the Main Page, especially since it targets children. Unfortunately, because the harm remains mostly invisible to the general public, this kind of issue tends to fly under the radar. Eduardo7z (talk) 13:00, 28 September 2026 (UTC) Eduardo7z (talk) 13:00, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Much obliged. The article passed through the TFA/R process unopposed. I appreciate the concern We generally do not bar specific articles from appearing, and trust in the community and the FAC process to assure balance. From what I can gather, you oppose the article appearing at all as TFA, rather than having concerns about its content. Wehwalt (talk) 13:29, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

References

Changes to instructions

The coordinators have decided to make two modifications to the instructions to nominate TFAs. They are here. The first removes obsolete language that was taken care of after the 2017 RFC that allows us to run articles twice. The other says that if you nominate an article, especially an older one, you are saying that the article meets present FA criteria, and will help fix any problems that arise on those grounds. There are no consequences stated, that's not the way this page works, but coordinators reserve the right to ask about this point during the nomination. Wehwalt (talk) 17:27, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

Request for the community to confirm new coordinators

As the TFA coordinator with the longest present service, it is again my duty to ask the community's confirmation to new coordinators. Gog the Mild has resigned, and I'm sure we wish him the very best. Z1720 and I will be remaining as coordinators and to spread the workload, AirshipJungleman29 and Premeditated Chaos have agreed to be coordinators, subject as always to community confirmation. Accordingly, I wish to extend the thanks of the community to Gog, and to confirm AirshipJungleman29 and Premeditated Chaos as coordinators.

Support--Wehwalt (talk) 21:26, 1 October 2026 (UTC)

• Support - ... and thanks to Gog the Mild. Noleander (talk) 21:35, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support, with huge thanks to Gog for all that he has done at TFA, and also with thanks to the two new co-ords for stepping up. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 21:37, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:03, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support both and thanks to all three. I hope this means that Gog will now have more time to put out new FAs of his own. Surtsicna (talk) 22:03, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support proposal, all of it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:11, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support both, and many thanks to Gog, with hopes that we see more of his articles now. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:41, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support, with thanks to the existing, new and retiring coordinators. Stephen 23:45, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support Aoba47 (talk) 23:54, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support and thanks to Gog the Mild. If PmC had thirty four awards I would trust them, but I guess it'll do for the time being. Panini! • 🥪 00:31, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support both, great appreciation for Gog. CMD (talk) 00:34, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support both and thanks to all three. Johnbod (talk) 00:44, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support great candidates, thanks for stepping up, and big thanks to Gog for all your hard work. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:18, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support Really happy that you two volunteered. Gog, thanks for your dedication and competence. - Dank (push to talk) 01:29, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support. Also many thanks to Gog for their service.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 03:21, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support wholeheartedly. I know how much work and grief goes into being a co-coord, so a huge thank you to Gog too. - SchroCat (talk) 05:21, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support. Also thanks to Gog the Mild for his services. MSincccc (talk) 06:39, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:48, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:40, 2 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support Both great choices, and a thank you to Gog.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:13, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Support both. Thanks for your contributions, Gog. Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 14:22, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Support both and a huge thank you to Gog. Schwede66 18:15, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

Support both. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:23, 2 October 2026 (UTC)

• Support Thanks to Gog for his service, and thanks to these two for being great editors who will excel in the role. QuicoleJR (talk|edits) 12:17, 3 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support. Once again sad to see Gog go but these two editors are more than capable of the task at hand. ThaesOfereode (talk) 16:33, 3 October 2026 (UTC)
• Support --Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 05:34, 4 October 2026 (UTC)

New FAC coordinator

There's a request for the community to confirm a new FAC coordinator, here. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:50, 2 October 2026 (UTC)