Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors

To report an error in content currently or imminently on the Main Page, use the appropriate section below.

• Where is the error? An exact quotation of the text in question helps.
• Offer a correction if possible.
• References are helpful, especially when reporting an obscure factual or grammatical error.
• Time zones. The Main Page runs on Coordinated Universal Time (UTC, currently 13:04 on 12 July 2024) and is not adjusted to your local time zone.
• Can you resolve the problem yourself? If the error lies primarily in the content of an article linked from the Main Page, fix the problem there before reporting it here. Text on the Main Page generally defers to the articles with bolded links. Upcoming content on the Main Page is usually only protected from editing beginning 24 hours before its scheduled appearance. Before that period, you can be bold and fix any issues yourself.
• Do not use {{edit fully-protected}} on this page, which will not get a faster response. It is unnecessary, because this page is not protected, and causes display problems because this is not a talk page. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
• No chit-chat. Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere, such as the talk page of the relevant article or project.
• Respect other editors. Another user wrote the text you want changed, or reported an issue they see in something you wrote. Everyone's goal should be producing the best Main Page possible. The compressed time frame of the Main Page means sometimes action must be taken before there has been time for everyone to comment. Be civil to fellow users.
• Reports are removed when resolved. Once an error has been addressed or determined not to be an error, or the item has been rotated off the Main Page, the report will be removed from this page. Check the revision history for a record of any discussion or action taken; no archives are kept.

Administrators: Clear all reports

Errors in the current or next Did you know...

Considering that the article itself talks about the popularity of cats online dating back to the earliest days of the world wide web, it would be pretty hard for there to actually have been a "precedent". Does the blurb writer perhaps mean "unrivaled"? --Khajidha (talk) 13:38, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I took it to mean that the popularity of cats on the internet has sees no cultural precedent in "real life" beforehand; it wasn't just an online expression of an existing love for cats amongst society at the time. GRAPPLE ^X 16:43, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I guess it's about to rotate off, so probably not worth doing anything about it now, but "unprecedented" is needless hype as well as incorrectly used. "Unrivaled" wouldn't be too much better. This hyperbole is not supported by the article, and the fact that such phrasing probably attracts more clicks isn't a justification for putting unsupported hyperbole on our main page. Perhaps tone it down to something like what the article actually says:

• ... that although cats have an iconic status on the internet, no one is entirely sure why?

--Floquenbeam (talk) 21:53, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Errors in the summary of the current or next featured list

Please report any such problems or suggestions for improvement at the General discussion section of Talk:Main Page.