A Christmas Carol is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 25, 2018.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 17, 2010 Peer review Not reviewed December 11, 2014 Good article nominee Not listed January 10, 2015 Good article nominee Not listed February 4, 2017 Peer review Reviewed May 9, 2017 Good article nominee Listed September 26, 2018 Featured article candidate Promoted Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 17, 2004, December 17, 2005, December 17, 2007, December 17, 2008, December 17, 2009, December 17, 2011, December 17, 2013, December 17, 2014, December 17, 2015, December 17, 2016, and December 17, 2017. Current status: Featured article

Template:Vital article

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Novels: 19th century FA‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by 19th century task force (assessed as High-importance). Holidays: Christmas FA‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Holidays, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of holidays on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HolidaysWikipedia:WikiProject HolidaysTemplate:WikiProject HolidaysHolidays articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Christmas task force (assessed as High-importance). Christianity: Christmas FA‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Christmas task force (assessed as High-importance).

2600:100F:B11F:EC:18C7:D7E3:82AE:F489, Please STOP edit warring on this article. This article is written in British English. In Britain we can manage with lists of more than two items without needing a comma for each one: the "and" acts as a substitute for the comma. I see you are editing in the US, where comma use differs. Per out WP:ENGVAR guidelines, we use British spelling and punctuation for British subjects, so we don't use the serial comma here, regardless of what you may use in your 'home' country. - SchroCat (talk) 11:50, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I recently added the above two images to this article. My edits were summarily reverted, in one go, and with the edit summary "Meh. Ridiculous quote, uninformative image of books etc"

The portrait as the caption stated, shows "Dickens... during the period when he was writing A Christmas Carol", and replaced one described as being "Dickens in 1842, the year before the publication of A Christmas Carol". An image contemporary with the subject under discussion is surely better than one that predates it. The image is arguably artistically better, and at 576 Kb (replacing one of just 42knb) is inarguably of higher resolution than the one it replaced. It is after all, used on our article about Dickens himself.

The image of editions is far from uninformative; it amply illustrates that the work has been published in multiple editions, in various formats. Furthermore, it appears in an area of the article which had no previous image an where the preceding images are all monochrome or nearly so.

I am not sure what is meant by "etc" in this case.

Both images should be restored. If there is consensus that the quote in the portrait's caption (which also appears under the copy in the Dickens biography) is "ridiculous" then it can of course be removed or replaced here. But that would - of course - not be a reason to remove the image. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:52, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The first image (with the ridiculously long and pointless quote).

The image is contemporary to a year and actually shows Dickens writing, rather than just a head and shoulders. It's a better image, given it provides him 'at work', as it were. The quote is ridiculous - even for a biography, let alone one of his novellas.

• The pointless book picture.

See WP:IRELEV, which says that picture should not be "primarily decorative". The claim that the image "illustrates that the work has been published in multiple editions" is an extremely thin rationale. It is something that can't be explained with words (and already is. As to the claim that "it appears in an area of the article which had no previous image" is somewhat puzzling, given there is already an image in the section – one that has been there for some time. - SchroCat (talk) 22:21, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Contemporary to a year" is a year away from being "contemporary". An image which "amply illustrates that the work has been published in multiple editions, in various formats" is not "primarily decorative". There were, and currently are, no images from the paragraph beginning "Dickens advocated a humanitarian..." onwards. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:34, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A whole year? Not really a problem, is it, particularly given it's a more fitting image with Dicken writing. I'm glad you've changed from "an area of the article which had no previous image" (which wasn't true) to "from the paragraph ... onwards", which is entirely different (although the fact it's the final section somewhat weakens the impact of your point). It's still decorative, and still doesn't really inform readers, unless they are so bereft of imagination they need an image to show them only a very small number of the printings from over the year. - SchroCat (talk) 12:20, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Francis Alexander - Charles Dickens 1842.jpeg is the better image of the two due to the fact that it displays Dickens in the act of writing. But I do think that the other proposed image, with the variety of editions, would serve nicely in this article. It demonstrates the wide popularity of the book.HAL333 18:23, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]