Forum:Article of the Month

TL;DR: I like featured articles and, independently from the discussion above, propose to implement a similar system that's more fun!

I've just selected (semi-randomly) featured articles for the rest of February. I think these should be the final featured articles, i.e. from March 1, there won't be any featured articles anymore.

However, I'm quite fond of featured articles myself – they highlight lesser-known articles on the wiki, both towards readers and editors. But it's been clear that the implementation of them, and especially the selection process, did not work out at all. I'm not convinced that tweaking that system will help.

Thinking about this a bit I've come up with a different idea that I think could work nicely. Here it is: Articles of the Month! (Each main page section would have its own article of the month, i.e. one general one on the "main" main page, "Earth Article of the Month", "Movie Article of the Month", etc.)

The process for selecting an article of the month would work as follows:

• On the 20th of a month, a bot creates a page like Minecraft Wiki:Article of the month/Minecraft/March 2026 with links to 5 random content articles as nominations for the "article of the month", e.g. as follows:

  * [[Creeper]]
  * [[Piglin]]
  * [[Spider]]
  * [[Windswept Hills]]
  * [[Packed Mud]]
  

• Until the end of the month, editors can change these links, but it should always stay at exactly five.
• At the start of the month, the template displaying the "article of the month" section on the main page then displays a poll between these options.
  • It would look kinda similar to this (a bit nicer in any case, I'd probably implement our own polling thing):
    Voting is disabled.

    Article of the month (March 2026)

    6

    0

    1

    3

    0

    There were 10 votes since the poll was created on 12:01, 10 February 2026.

    
    
  • Anyone can vote in that poll, though we could weigh votes of temporary accounts and (active) editor accounts higher (by different amounts) to prevent abuse
  • (But either way, it's not a serious thing so it doesn't really matter if the poll were to be manipulated lol)
• At the 10th of the month, the bot replaces the page at Minecraft Wiki:Article of the month/Minecraft/March 2026 with the winner of the poll.
  • This would look similar to how we currently have featured articles, e.g. MCW:Featured articles/Minecraft/2026/7.
  • By default, it'd include:
    • The introduction of the article (abbreviated if that introduction is too long)
    • An image from the page (the image defined as preview image, if available)
  • This page can then be adjusted/improved by admins if necessary.
  • The talk page can be used to suggest changes.
• This page is shown as the "article of the month" until the end of the month.

Reasons for why I think this is a good idea:

• Fully automated article selection process that happens even if noone is actively tending to it
• An interactive element, giving wiki readers the ability to easily contribute!
  • IIRC in the survey, some respondents said that they'd like something interactive.
• It'd be fun!

I want to make it clear that I don't want to stand in the way of consensus above, and also propose that by March 2026, featured articles (as currently implemented) will be abolished. This system could just take their place in March or later, if we want. (I'd put it where currently the "coming back to the game?" section is, so "news" would still be above)

| violine1101 ^(talk) 12:16, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Let me know what you think! | violine1101 ^(talk) 12:16, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

I like this idea but I have two questions:

1. How does the random article selector work? It should not be like the Random page button because a lot of the time you get obscure articles, even with better random. Maybe let it pick articles with {{Featured}} and add that thing to some more? Letting editors pick results in the same problem as FAs: unnecessary discussions no one cares about.
2. I dislike the idea of making it similar to featured articles with a text introduction. That was one of the biggest motivation issues with featured articles: writing a good one (so not copying the intro) is hard and no one seems to care about it. I feel like it should be just a main page button with an image and the title, nothing more.

MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
12:33, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

1. Random article selection process:
   • The "Random page" button actually already weighs articles differently (see MediaWiki:Gadget-betterRandom.js). We could similarly bias the random nominations in the same or in a similar way. A separate template would again introduce unnecessary work, which we should avoid.
     • IMO it's perfectly okay if a "less than ideal" article shows up in the poll; that's what the poll is for, to sort out the bad articles :)
     • "Letting editors pick results in the same problem as FAs: unnecessary discussions no one cares about." – I don't think there should be any discussions about the poll pick. Just click your favorite and you're done.
   • For the nomination phase, the purpose of having the nomination list be editable first is mainly to weed out bad candidates if someone notices.
     • I can see discussions arising here, but deciding on five nominations should be much easier than deciding on a single article, especially if there's already a (randomly generated) proposal. So I don't think discussions wouldn't pose much of an issue in practice.
     • The featured articles have also not exactly had many discussions, which was (IMO) part of the problem. This system works entirely without discussions; they're optional.
2. Text introduction:
   • As I mentioned, the default introduction is the one from the article. If that text isn't good enough, it should first be improved in the article itself.
     • E.g. for dirt it'd just be: "Dirt is a block found abundantly in most biomes under a layer of grass blocks at the top of the Overworld as well as in patches underground."
   • Admins can then tweak that text if they want and have time. Again, this is optional.
   • That being said, I'm totally open to trying another format. I just think the main issue was with writing a completely new introduction text, which my idea makes optional.

Hope that clarifies my idea. Basically the process should be able to run in the background without anyone interfering; but if someone has time and wants to improve the selection/results a bit, they can! | violine1101 ^(talk) 12:54, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

The dates sound weird. So the poll opens on 20th and the article is shown from 10th to end of month? And are both shown between 20th and 31st? 👁 Image
Miner(👁 Image
talk 👁 Image
contributions) 14:04, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

No. The poll is just in "preparation" phase between 20th and 31st, and then only goes live on the main page on the 1st. So the main page would be:

• 1st - 9th: poll
• 10th - 31st: article of the month

Also the exact dates could be adjusted of course, I just thought 9 or 10 days would be a good timeframe for the poll and its preparation, respectively. | violine1101 ^(talk) 14:08, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support. As for placement, I agree with it replacing the "Coming back to the game?" section in the mainspace, as that would already be covered by the "news" section. For the main pages of other namespaces I think it should simply take the place of the current FAs, there is no need to have the news section on there as well. -- 👁 Image
Delycache ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 16:40, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support. I really like that idea and I think it could be a fun thing to experiment. Replacing "Coming back to the game" is a good idea (although I think this section was nice to have, it is pretty easy to find past updates on the wiki and the 2 latest ones are always part of the main page highlight anyway).

Though maybe be it may end up being somewhat too buried for an interactive section: perhaps it could be placed where "About the game" is, with that section being moved further down (where "Coming back to the game" is) instead, like this:

• Monthly article
• Franchise news

• About the game
• For creators

- Zamburger (talk) 21:05, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support - Your proposals are always so impressive. I would also remove "Coming back to the game?" for this, but I'd have it in the position of "About the game" and move said section down. A section that's interactive a third of the time and otherwise still important should not be so low down, "About the game" is nothing crazy.

Also I would strongly like that we remove the featured article hatnote and indicator that we put on all past featured articles (see Heart of Ender), no idea why we ever did that, very pointless. - Harri / Talk 👁 Image
23:01, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks <3

That ordering seems fine with me as well, but I don't really mind.

The featured article indicator (and message box) was championed mainly by a singular (now inactive) user. I've been against implementing it from the start and would fully support removing it completely. See also Template talk:Featured#Utility. | violine1101 ^(talk) 23:36, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support, though I do think there should be some guidelines of sort to prevent, or at the very least discourage, people from arguing over replacing "bad" articles. Everyone has different ways of determining what they think is good and bad, and something that someone may think is a lovely candidate, someone else may think is absolute hot garbage. 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
02:00, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong support In my opinion, this proposal completely replaces the removal of featured articles. I just believe that the system for selecting articles should exclude articles with maintenance templates like {{update}}. The only problem would be the image, since the preview image is usually a render, but this can be easily changed by administrators or even editors. I'm not sure if including a poll in place of the featured article during the voting period would be a good idea; perhaps adding a "Vote for the next article" button next to "Read more" would be better. That way, the article would remain for the entire month, and the poll could also have that duration. - 👁 Image
Herobrine222376 | Talk 14:11, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 I agree that the article should be up for the full month, with the poll available at the same time 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
14:27, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Hiding the poll behind a button would make it harder to discover and make less people participate, which kinda defeats the purpose of the poll. I don't personally think it'd be an issue to just not have an article for some time. | violine1101 ^(talk) 18:02, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't think the poll would stay hidden, but being without an article for a while isn't a problem either. - 👁 Image
Herobrine222376 | Talk 20:22, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose — Still complex to implement and still reliant on people being engaged. I thought we agreed to replace featured articles with wiki news; this idea almost feels conjured up to artificially prolong the discussion more than it needed to last. — BabylonAS 16:15, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Please read my proposal. I'm not tying this proposal to getting rid of featured articles. | violine1101 ^(talk) 17:39, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Then why is it on the same forum post? Given that you've named it "similar", it's clearly proposed to be a substitute. I'll be frank, I see no need in any form of "special page to be temporarily highlighted on the main page", especially if there are not enough people to maintain it. Even a bot needs to be maintained by someone. — BabylonAS 07:28, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Even with the way FAs are currently set up, there are enough people, there's just various complications 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
07:47, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Sure, I've moved it to a different one then. Thought it would be more convenient to have it in one place. | violine1101 ^(talk) 20:47, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support stronger than the Dunkelviking: Articles of the Month are four times less tedious than the weekly article featuring, and some bot featuring them will reduce the work of those editors struggling to publish an article feature properly. 👁 Image
Quake the Wind Fan 👁 Image
17:46, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support, seems like a good solution. Realshow19 (talk) 17:59, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support JhonGame (talk) 13:48, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Strong as Netherite Support Per Quake the Wind Fan. And another idea, if we wanted to make it rhyme or smth better, you could pull my idea from my userpage and create a Mob of the Month instead of article of the month. Obviously, not like put me in charge of it but use my idea. I'm fine with it. 👁 Image
Redstone Engineer (T/C/S/M) 15:47, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support Seems like a good idea I always liked this kind of stuff~2026-CookieMountainWitch1582 (talk) 03:22, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Noticed I never replied to this -- 👁 Image
 Strong support. But would this be implemented in spin-off spaces? -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  14:58, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Oppose any kind of voting for any reason. I believe the general consensus is that we just can't have that on the wiki at all. --   Simanelix   (T|C) 16:00, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support for the overall idea, the monthly format is way better than the currently weekly FAs, but 👁 Image
 Oppose for the vote, nominating an article with a community vote isn’t a good idea for the wiki, the general consensus is fine. 👁 Image
HugEnder13(talk)👁 Image
18:01, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

In reply to Simanelix and HugEnder:

Voting in this case is not the same case as community consensus. Community consensus takes a long time, which is part of the struggle were trying to eliminate. Articles of the month are of very little impact, and it's not like we're voting on a policy or guideline; that is where we do need consensus. But here the point is to be fast and easy, and with little impact. Community consensus doesn't mean any kind of voting at all is absolutely bad on wikis. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  22:56, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Good idea! And I think this is just one way to make the home page interesting. We could do even more to spice things up. How about the images for sections for each game change depending on the season? For example: During the fall, the brewing section for Minecraft could have its icon changed to an Ominous Potion to match Halloween, and for winter, the armor section for Dungeons could show Arctic Fox Armor. This might have a few flaws, but I think it sounds cool. As for the Article of the Month, it should not show irrelevant or obscure pages like old versions of games or things that are awkward like cracked nether bricks. Or were you planning to highlight less well-known pages like this? ~2026-HuskHorsePenguin12910 (talk) 20:10, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support Seems easy and fun.

I just used the random page selector to pick 5 random articles from any namespace, excluding discussions and disambiguation pages:

• Breeze Rod
• Earth:Flint
• Andreas Andersson
• Tiny Jens
• Biome Settlers Skin Pack 2

None of these articles are exactly the best on the wiki, but there are multiple decently-written articles, and for areas of the wiki that haven't been getting much featured pages, that could make all the difference. FluffyGuardian70 (talk) 23:34, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm pretty doubtful that we are able to find 5 good candidates every month for some of the spin-off namespaces (looking at Earth and Movie...), and I feel that the polls wouldn't get any meaningful interactions there. That said, this does seem much more manageable than featured articles. I agree with other users that the "About the game" should be moved down and this should take its place. --Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 23:45, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

We could always just not do it on the other namespaces. They dont get viewed as much, and if someone cares enough to ask about why they dont have one, we can just tell them exactly that 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
^(he/_they) 23:54, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

We can do a test run on the other namespaces, but I honestly can't see them working out in the long run except maybe in MCD/MCD2. --Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 23:57, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

I agree. Spin offs works not be able to let those articles survive for more than a couple of years. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  23:57, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Support this is much better but, 👁 Image
 Soft oppose for featured articles kept for historical reasons 👁 Image
Cube 459 GD 👁 Image
09:00, 19 June 2026 (UTC)