Editing Template talk:Featured

OoOoOoOoOhhh... Nice idea! [[User:3dejong|3D]]
:Look out for a featured star image and a [[MarioWiki:Featured articles]] page soon. {{User:Wayoshi/sig}} 16:49, 11 December 2006 (EST)

{| cellspacing="4"
|- valign="top"
|width="50%" style="border: 2px solid #ffff88; padding: .5em 1em 1em; color: #000000; background-color: #fffFB0"|
{{featured}}
|}

Could we try putting a box around it? [[User:Yoshi Time|User:Yoshi Time/sig]] 13:13, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Steve doesn't want the FA to take up all the space and distract all the important links on the Main Page. I'm afraid a table would do just that. I did preview it, but it looked a bit messy. {{User:Wayoshi/sig}} 13:37, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

==Image==
Feel free to mess around with the image size to see what looks better on the front page. -- [[User: Son of Suns|Son of Suns]]
:Hmm, I tried any comments? {{User:Xzelion/Signature}}

Huh... Shouldn't the featured article be K. Rool?
[[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]]

== *Blink* ==

Didn't mean to mess up the rotation (still a couple FAs to go before SSBM), I apologize. But how are we so far behind on the rotation, anyways? {{User:Wayoshi/sig}} 11:34, 1 January 2008 (EST)

:I don't know, I think we somehow forgot about the FAs in the last days and weeks (Luigi's Mansion and SPM should have been featured earlier). That's why there are some articles waiting in the queue. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 11:42, 1 January 2008 (EST)

== Spoiler Tags ==

Just a quick question, since we have a final boss up today: what's our policy on spoiler tags for the FA template?  I'm trying to remember back from when the boss of ''Super Paper Mario'' was up. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 12:19, 24 May 2008 (EDT)
:[[Dimentio]]? This article has no spoiler tags. As for Tabuu, in my opinion we certainly don't need spoiler tags in the template. I mean, if we actually considered putting them there, we should rather consider not to feature the article at all. Good question though, 'cause featuring article that are spoilers seems like a contradiction. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 12:29, 24 May 2008 (EDT)
::Ok, not ''technically'' a spoiler template, but here you go: [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Template%3AFeatured&diff=385200&oldid=294446 Check out the history page]. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 12:35, 24 May 2008 (EDT)
:::Thanks. I could live with such a notice. But do we actually need it? Is the fact that  Tabuu is the final boss a spoiler? (I'm just asking, because I have no clue.) {{User:Time Q/sig}} 12:39, 24 May 2008 (EDT)

== Font ==

I think we should make the FA the same font as the rest of the Main Page so the Main Page looks more organized. We want our guests to have a good first impression when they see the Main Page. --{{User|Clay Mario}}

==Featured Image==
Wouldn't it make more sense to have the image in this template linking to the Featured Article rather than the image itself? What do you think? {{User:Time Q/sig}} 08:30, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
==I have an idea==
Lets use {{tem|random}} so each time the page's purged it's changing to another Featured Article and we no more need to change it every week! I think it's a good idea, but I'm need to discuss it before I do so. {{User:SWFlash/Sig}}

== Protection ==

Why is this template 100% protected? 

"''Please read: If '''you''' are going to replace the current information on the Featured template, please see here before doing that and look at which order our next FA's will be put on this page.'' "

"''Help us maintain the page''"

Who, me? Why should I care if I can't do that?

Besides, isn't it weird that the other main page templates aren't protected?

{{User:LeftyGreenMario/sig}} 14:08, 15 April 2012 (EDT)

== <font color=red>'''Moving risk'''</font> ==

Shouldn't this template be protected for preventing page move, ''but still allowing editing''? --{{User:MarioSmasher/sig}} 05:51, 19 April 2012 (EDT)

== Rotation ==

Does the FA rotation every Saturday go by GMT time?

{{User:YoshiKong/sig}} 22:14, 21 December 2012 (EST)

Believe it's by EST time.

{{User:Lindsay151/sig}}

Okay, thanks. Should it be mentioned on the template or {{tem|UpcomingFA}} to avoid future confusion?

{{User:YoshiKong/sig}} 22:21, 21 December 2012 (EST)

== April Fools! ==

Time for April Fools Day 2014!

For April Fools Day, we need to have fake news (presumably good news that will get excitement) with links to pages that would be created, fake or bad trivia, bad poll, and a fake featured article. Please post some ideas below that can be used tomorrow! {{User:Mario7/Sig}} 18:38, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

==Wait==
Shouldn't the current featured article on the main page be ''Super Mario 3D World''? It looks like it got skipped to me. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 18:03, 30 April 2017 (EDT)

== Questioning about something ==

I've recently found out from fellow user RickTommy that the article excerpt on the template can be changed slightly compared to the original article. I heavily oppose that finding for several reasons. Every single time before now, he/she/it would make the slightest adjustment and then it's usually reverted for the simple reason that is "it must match the original article exactly." I honestly wonder if there should be a rule that effectively discourages changing even the slightest bit of information from the template. It would discourage making things slightly different on the front page and the article in question, and to maintain consistency and all that. What do the rest of you think? &ndash; [[User:Owencrazyboy9|Owencrazyboy9]] ([[User talk:Owencrazyboy9|talk]]) 21:32, June 23, 2019 (EDT)
Latest revision		Your text
Line 85:		Line 85:

	I've recently found out from fellow user RickTommy that the article excerpt on the template can be changed slightly compared to the original article. I heavily oppose that finding for several reasons. Every single time before now, he/she/it would make the slightest adjustment and then it's usually reverted for the simple reason that is "it must match the original article exactly." I honestly wonder if there should be a rule that effectively discourages changing even the slightest bit of information from the template. It would discourage making things slightly different on the front page and the article in question, and to maintain consistency and all that. What do the rest of you think? – [[User:Owencrazyboy9\|Owencrazyboy9]] ([[User talk:Owencrazyboy9\|talk]]) 21:32, June 23, 2019 (EDT)		I've recently found out from fellow user RickTommy that the article excerpt on the template can be changed slightly compared to the original article. I heavily oppose that finding for several reasons. Every single time before now, he/she/it would make the slightest adjustment and then it's usually reverted for the simple reason that is "it must match the original article exactly." I honestly wonder if there should be a rule that effectively discourages changing even the slightest bit of information from the template. It would discourage making things slightly different on the front page and the article in question, and to maintain consistency and all that. What do the rest of you think? – [[User:Owencrazyboy9\|Owencrazyboy9]] ([[User talk:Owencrazyboy9\|talk]]) 21:32, June 23, 2019 (EDT)
	~~:If an improvement can be made to the text in the featured article, the same improvement can be made to the actual article. Not much of a problem here. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 21:34, June 23, 2019 (EDT)~~