Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus

Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus edit

This is the archived discussion of the TFAR nomination for the article below. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests). Please do not modify this page unless you are renominating the article at TFAR. For renominations, please add {{collapse top|Previous nomination}} to the top of the discussion and {{collapse bottom}} at the bottom, then complete a new nomination underneath. To do this, see the instructions at {{TFAR nom/doc}}.

The result was: not scheduled by Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Virginia in question

Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! How dreary would be the world if there were no Santa Claus! It would be as dreary as if there were no Virginias. There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished. Not believe in Santa Claus! You might as well not believe in fairies. You might get your papa to hire men to watch in all the chimneys on Christmas eve to catch Santa Claus, but even if you did not see Santa Claus coming down, what would that prove? Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is no Santa Claus. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see.^{[April Fools!]} (Full article...)

Most recent similar article(s): Dime Mystery Magazine, featured on January 26, 2023
Main editors: Eddie891
Promoted: January 3, 2023
Reasons for nomination: April Fools' day is upon us, and so I thought having the blurb just be an excerpt from the editorial would be amusing, due to the lack of context that a reader would have. I included the April Fools' tag at the end so readers would know why it lacked context (as was similarly included for the Groundhog's Day feature on April 1, 2021).
Support as nominator. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 14:25, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment. See the discussion here. I really think we're more minded to wait until December on this one. Interesting idea to print the editorial rather than a standard blurb, might be worth thinking about.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:56, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wehwalt: Ah, I see then. Thanks for letting me know, I'll see if there's another publication that could have a re-run and use a similar idea. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 02:15, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I think this would be better for Christmas, per the discussion linked above. Z1720 (talk) 19:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:08, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]