Wikipedia:April Fools' Main Page/Featured Article/Archive 2011

Please use this page for discussions surrounding the creation of a Featured Article for April Fool's day 2011

Areas of work needed to complete the front page are:

Ground rules for this activity along with a list or participants may be found on the Main talk page.

Mission[edit]

In the past, various unusual articles have been improved to featured article status. These include exploding whale, heavy metal umlaut, Japanese toilet, spoo, Joshua A. Norton, George Washington (inventor), and Ima Hogg. People seeing some of these articles listed on the Main Page sometimes believe that it is a joke, when in fact, these articles are well-written and quite deserving of featured article status.

An unusual article (such as exploding toad or Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch) will be edited up to Featured article status and listed on the Main Page on 1 April, 2011. The "recently featured" sentence could be changed to "other featured", and link to the above-mentioned unusual featured articles.

Given the amount of time it takes to bring an article up to Featured article status, an alternative solution would be to use an article that has already been made a Featured article, but has not yet been listed on the Main Page.

Requirements[edit]

Raul is willing to consider any article for April Fools' Day, as long as it meets three requirements:

It must be a featured article by April 1, 2011
It must not have already been used as the main page featured article.
It is not too risqué (more so than any other article that would be used on the front page)

Action items[edit]

What are we going to write/promote? We need to pick either a new topic or an existing article to nominate for FA. I think we need half a dozen nominees - then we vote/get consensus on which one is most suitable.
We have to work hard to get it up to featured status. This may be very difficult and might take several attempts.
We have to usher it through all of the phases leading up to FA.
We need to make sure it's on the front page on April 1st. This means starting in on it fairly soon.

Proposals[edit]

Doggerland – Like wife selling (English custom) this article has the advantage that it's all pretty unbelievable even without manipulation, and the disadvantage that some people may have heard about the topic before. The blurb could focus on the art left to us by the people who lived on the ground of the North Sea and refer to the confluence of the River Thames and the River Rhine as if it still existed. We might decide not to mention mammoths and woolly rhinos so as not to be too obvious, and refer to the slow flooding as "the deluge". If we can find a more recent photo than this one of the forests that used to spread between Britain, the Netherlands and Germany, then it could work well on the main page. Or we could just use a map that shows a huge Dogger Island halfway between Great Britain and Denmark.

The article needs a lot of well-researched work, which is why I am proposing this so early. Hans Adler 09:54, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it all that unbelievable? The North Sea is really shallow, a quality the Dutch have famously exploited. And most Americans are at least vaguely aware of the Bering land bridge that used to connect Alaska and Russia. If the joke is the name, I think most Americans and Canadians at least won't get it... dogging is pretty much just British slang. -kotra (talk) 22:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, the joke is not in the name. In Europe we are generally not aware of coast changes that were so recent that they affected our ancestors, who were learning about agriculture around that time. I am sure most people simply have no idea that the first settlers in Ireland had come by land via Great Britain, only having to cross a big river on the way. But if it doesn't work for Americans otherwise we can still formulate it as if they actually lived under the sea. Hans Adler 23:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That could possibly work; telling it so that it would be interpreted as an underwater people currently living in the middle of the North Sea (at the same time being technically accurate). As in, "Scientists in the middle of the North Sea have found evidence of a primitive civilization living there." It would be a very tricky one to pull off (actually convince people) though. -kotra (talk) 00:57, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am American and I think this article is excellent for the purpose. I can't think of a possible better FA without an example. I was not aware of this topic, and if I saw it on April 1, I would immediately suspect a hoax.Jarhed (talk) 01:06, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: This doesn't work for me. It's too much like a DYK entry. The front page blurb may fool people - but as soon as they open the article and read that it's an ancient archeological thing - the whole thing is no longer funny. For the front page FA, we need the reader to continue to be fooled even as they read the article itself. That's what made wife selling so incredible...it's not that we twisted the wording of the lede or the front page blurb - it's that the entire concept that wife selling was actually real, and legal and somewhat commonplace is utterly unbelievable to most people. When you followed the link from the front page and read more, most readers were completely fooled into believing that we'd faked the entire article. This story fails at that - the blub might be amazing, but the article can't be. It would make a great DYK entry - but it's a non-starter for the April 1 FA. SteveBaker (talk) 18:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mike the Headless Chicken —Kevin Myers 23:40, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caganer. Holy shit, is this for real? —Kevin Myers 23:40, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this one is really good as well. I spent some time in Barcelona (but not Christmas), and while I haven't seen this it sounds plausible. Hans Adler 12:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

William Windsor (goat) seems to have potential. Currently a GA and has been through peer review. Modest Genius ^talk 00:49, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- +1. And already a GA, so that's a good starting point. --Cybercobra (talk) 20:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- This one has potential, however, do we have time and motivation to bring it to FA status in less then a month? --Tone 18:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exploding head syndrome - I always thought this would make a great FA for an April Fool's Day. Remember (talk) 12:23, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, the title of this one is pretty amusing. It reminds me of an old National Inquirer headline I saw once: "Priest's Head Explodes". I like it!—RJH (talk) 17:41, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
4477th Test and Evaluation Squadron very obscure, with a tad of manipulation it would be great. WikiCopter^Radio_Checklist^{Formerly AirplanePro} 23:41, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pigeon photographer -- Great photo for the front page...it looks completely faked. SteveBaker (talk) 00:48, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Not my personal favourite, but as the main author I would be willing to take this through FA. It shouldn't be too hard. I can provide scans of the offline sources, but most of them are in German. Hans Adler 18:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I love this article! I tried to nominate it last year but did so in the wrong place. Please consider this one. It is funny, and barely believable for someone who hasn't heard of it. I'll try to help if I can. A friend of mine is a native speaker of German and I'll ask if he'd like to help too. If not next year, then 2012. This definately should be TFA at some point! --T1980 (talk) 01:26, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I am the main author of this article. With this proposal in mind I have taken it through the GA process. I am willing to take it through FAC as well. It will be my first experience with FAC, but nevertheless I think it shouldn't be hard. Hans Adler 10:01, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Only someone who hasn't been through FAC would imagine that it wouldn't be hard! :-( However, any help I can offer, I will. In fact, I'll do a quick proof-read of the article now. I strongly recommend looking at the various checklists for FA's and making 100% certain that you don't miss a single point on any of them! At any rate, I think this article has the best chance for April 1st's FA - and (with the photograph of that gigantic, clunky-looking camera strapped to the front of the pigeon), it's hard to believe it's not faked! SteveBaker (talk) 19:00, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Having re-read it, I'm even more convinced this is our AF FA. When it starts to get into mobile pidgeon lofts with integral dark room and the idea of carrying pigeons (with cameras) behind enemy lines using trained dogs...it seems completely impossible! I love it. SteveBaker (talk) 19:28, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - OK, you have convinced me. I am willing to take it to FA. I haven't implemented all the feedback from the peer review yet, though. After that it's good to go unless someone has further input. Hans Adler 10:40, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The London Beer Flood SteveBaker (talk) 00:48, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Or the Boston Molasses Disaster. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 03:12, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
British-made concrete truck SteveBaker (talk) 00:48, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Common side-blotched lizard plays Rock-Paper-Scissors. SteveBaker (talk) 00:48, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Quehanna Wild Area is already an FA (do not think that any of the others suggested here are) and was in the running for the 2010 April Fool's TFA - see here. A possible blurb is something like:

Quehanna Wild Area in the U.S. state of Pennsylvania was established in 1955 as a habitat for the rare nuclear jet engine. Quehanna was also home to endangered radioactive species like Cobalt-60 and Strontium-90, and was the only wild area in the state with it own nuclear reactor and hot cells. The 48,000-acre (19,000 ha) wild area is Pennsylvania's largest; its great size allows visitors to track migrating tornados. The land was acquired by the state in the early 20th century as a preserve for tree stumps and ashes. Wapiti became locally extinct in the 19th century and were successfully reintroduced by the commonwealth in the 1920s; in 1992 Pennsylvania estrablished a small colony of prisoners in the wild area.

The blurb can be tweaked and there is a free image of a robot that could be the blurb image. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:51, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I remember this one from last year. Hm, where is the discussion? It's a nice one and a safe option if we don't find anything considerably stronger. --Tone 18:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Skotywa's proposals (don't meet criteria)
Alternate proposal 1 The City of New York vs. H. Simpson was a landmark court case both in the history of New York state law and in state and national vehicular law. The 5–4 decision of the New York Supreme Court, delivered on September 21, 1997, established a new precident covering responsibility when a privately owned car or truck, whose owner does not reside in the state of New York, is illegally parked or abandoned near a large building or skyscraper. It also set limits on how long car owners need to wait before police must remove wheel clamps from violating vehicles when the owner has requested it. The defendant in the case had gone to such great lengths as to use a jackhammer to remove the wheel clamp on his car. The decision had a significant impact on how parking tickets are now issued in the state of New York. (more...) Alternate images This is the first of two ideas I had for April Fool's Day. To further disguise the article we could abreviate the last name also resulting in "H. S." --SkotyWA^T_C 01:36, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Oppose. As per The Ground Rules, we are limited to truthful changes. I have no problems with an April 1 TFA implying (but just implying) a published fictional narrative is real. That being said, creating a court case that is not even mentioned in the television episode's plot clearly falls outside the acceptable scope of truthful changes. --Allen3 ^talk 02:04, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Ahh, bummer. I missed that. Maybe not this one then. Most of the things I mentioned in the blurb are references to things in the article though. --SkotyWA^T_C 02:09, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Alternate proposal 2 HMS Endeavour was a British Royal Navy research vessel commanded by Lieutenant James Cook on his first voyage of discovery, to Australia and New Zealand from 1769 to 1771. Today, she is one of three currently operational orbiters in the Space Shuttle fleet of NASA, the space agency of the United States. Launched in 1764 as the collier Earl of Pembroke, she was purchased by the Navy in 1768 for a scientific mission to the Pacific Ocean, and to explore the seas for the surmised Terra Australis Incognita or "unknown southern land". Before its decommissioning, NASA expects to use Endeavour for the STS-134 mission in April 2011, which will make it the last shuttle to fly a mission for the Space Shuttle Program. (more...) This is the other idea I had. This one has a couple of inspiration points. First, for April Fools Day in 2007, a similar "mix up" was done with George Washington (the inventor and the president). And second, I think it might be worth calling some attention to the fact that the Space Shuttle Endeavour will be flying that month for the last time. --SkotyWA^T_C 02:09, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Actually, this one might be disqualified as well since I'm mixing in facts from a different article. Okay, I give up. Maybe I've provided inspiration to someone though. --SkotyWA^T_C 04:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] The problem with both Alt1 and Alt2 is that they are more in the spirit of "Did you know..." entries for April 1st than for the FA. With DYK's, the basic idea is that you read the DYK - imagine that it must be wrong because it violates what you are already pretty sure of - but upon reading the actual article, you'll pretty much always spot the joke immediately. That certainly applies to both Alt 1 and Alt 2. Once you know that Alt1 is about a Simpson's episode, you're completely unamazed. But the FA for April 1st is generally such that even as your read the in-depth article, you can't believe it's true. When we get it right, you get a bunch of people posting to the FA's talk page telling us that we shouldn't be putting this stuff into an encyclopedia...and it is often quite hard to convince them that it's actually true. That's how we know we did good! When the accurately written article is about a subject that's so ridiculous that most people won't believe it. Sadly, neither of these two suggestions are going to cut it for that reason. However, one of them might maybe make it into the DYK section if you propose them there - however, they have the restriction that articles must either have been written during the last year - or have been expanded at least 5x since last year...I don't think either of these suggestions meets that criterion. SteveBaker (talk) 19:35, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Agreed. What first seemed like a good idea to me turned out to be definitely not what we're looking for here. I almost removed my comments completely, but thought they might provide some inspiration to others maybe. Perhaps I should just pull them though. How about I collapse them instead. --SkotyWA^T_C 04:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is my favorite so far. The photo of the still lake is excellent and would provide excellent contrast to the article. Or the robot picture would work well too. Royal broil 02:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While this one seemed a safe candidate a couple of weeks ago, at this moment, the timing may not be the best, given the fact that Japan currently has serious problems with the radioactive contamination. So we should save it for another occasion... Do we have any other suitable articles? --Tone 23:13, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Browsing the FAs that have not yet appeared on the Main page (as there probably is not enough time to bring new articles to FA status), I found some potentially interesting. Anarky, a comic book character with a funny name. Freak Out!, an album with an interesting name for the MP, again. Only Fools and Horses, has Fools in the name already. Barton Fink, a surreal movie. Or, we could go with a completely serious topic, such as Painted turtle or Statue of Liberty, with focusing on unusual details in the articles (like the famous Planet of the Apes scene etc.) --Tone 23:52, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If we had a few people with expertise in getting through FAC, I think Pigeon_photographer is the strongest candidate. It's well referenced, not bad length, has compelling photos - all we really need is some polish on the grammar, etc. SteveBaker (talk) 13:39, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is a good article and a great topic for the occasion. Well, I guess you should open a FA nomination and the details can be polished during the process. At least that will draw more attention to it. --Tone 10:57, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, I'm too snowed under with real-world work right now to shepherd this through the FAC process...but I encourage someone to do it. SteveBaker (talk) 12:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently too late now anway, see WP:FAC#April 1st. Hans Adler 12:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anarky may also be an appropriate choice beyond the spelling of the character's name. Reading the article, you'll see that the character has been used by authors in a number of ways to trick readers into believing false premises and cliff hangers. In the 1989 debut story for the character, Anarky's identity was a fake-out on the part of the author. Designed to appear as an adult, the character was in fact a child who's costume disguised his youth. The child's father was used as a red herring to distract the reader to believe the latter was the vigilante Anarky. In 1997, Anarky was given a limited series in which he succeeds in his goals of liberating humanity from government, only for his utopia to implode with the realization that it "was just a dream." In 2005, following a period of obscurity due to lack of publication, the character was featured in a guest appearance that was touted as "The Return of Anarky!" —then character promptly fell back into obscurity for several years. Finally, in 2008, the character was returned to print with a bit of fanfare in the lead-up to the publication, only for the story to reveal that a new character had donned the Anarky mantle. Fans were not pleased, prompting a series of rebuttles by the author. That said, I'll admit there are stronger contenders, but I thought the article deserved a better argument put in its favor.--Cast (talk) 04:34, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]