Talk:Main Page: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m →AIDS Conference: tweak my own comments |
move some to Archive 77 |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Main Page discussion header}} |
{{Main Page discussion header}} |
||
<!-- Please scroll down and post the latest talk at the BOTTOM. Thanks!! --> |
<!-- Please scroll down and post the latest talk at the BOTTOM. Thanks!! --> |
||
==Typo== |
|||
There's a typo in today's featured article, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. "Remedies" has only one 'i'. Could someone fix this? --[[User:D Monack|dm]] <sup>[[User talk:D Monack|(''talk'')]]</sup> 03:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: Try [[WP:ERRORS]]. --[[User:64.229.205.228|64.229.205.228]] 15:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Image Sizes == |
|||
The images currently seem very small (except for the featured picture). Can they perhaps be made a bit bigger? Thanks in advance. -- '''[[User:Tariqabjotu|<font color="black">tariq</font><font color="gray">abjotu</font>]]''' <small>(joturner)</small> 05:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*See [[#Main_Page_images]]. — <small>[[User:Brian0918|<b><font color=black>BRIAN</font></b>]][[User_talk:Brian0918|<font color=gray>0918</font>]] • 2006-08-02 05:33</small> |
|||
:* It's now [[Talk:Main Page/Archive 76#Main Page images]]. --[[User:199.71.174.100|199.71.174.100]] 00:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==Wikipedia as advertisement== |
|||
Practically all of your contemporary biographies read like advertisements. How can I trust you? |
|||
<small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:81.155.207.167|81.155.207.167]] ([[User talk:81.155.207.167|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/81.155.207.167|contribs]]) 18:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC).</small> |
|||
:Please add {{tl|Advert}} on articles that read like advertisements. Someone will clean them up shortly. Actually, you can start cleaning them up right away. -- [[User:64.229.223.126|64.229.223.126]] 19:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Read like adverts in what language? But seriously, I think it's a result of articles being created (usually) by people who like that individual and think they should have an article, or have their article expanded. It you want to see a mess, watch some of the "company" edits of for-profit colleges that turn them into brochures. As the person above stated, feel free to take a knife (edit) to it immediately if you wish --[[User:Bobak|Bobak]] 19:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Or the people trying to quietly slip a URI for their business into an article claiming it as further reading. We're watching (most of the time). --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 20:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::The IP editor 81.155.207.167 has been adding nonsense to [[Alan Hart (writer)]], and has received four warnings in little over 24 hours. --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 08:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: Wikipedia is not a commercial service for advertisers. Why not take it to Campus Life magazine for college admission endorsements? Articles should stay away from endorsing products or anything of the sort. You never will find an ad inside Encyclopedia Britannica or the World Book, would you? The thing is free enterprise doesn't really exist in academic research sources, so whoever placed the advertising-like articles should adhere to this rule. --[[User:Mike D 26|Mike D 26]] 12:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Finnish Sauna == |
|||
This is my first attempt to initiate a discussion: in the Northern Michigan area saunas used by American-Finns, bundles of cedar branches (instead of birch leaves) are provided to beat the skin to a rosy red and, as grandfather said, "to open the pores." |
|||
Also, I see no mention of "Tar Candles" as a folk medicine. In Finland, there is a saying: "If tar and the Sauna don't work, you're going to die." [[User:Commodore678|Commodore678]] 03:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:okay... you may want to find the appropriate article for that... like [[Sauna]]. --[[User:219.89.236.186|219.89.236.186]] 07:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Tisha B'Av == |
|||
Today is [[Tisha B'Av]] in the Hebrew Calendar, commemorating the day that both Temples were destroyed and several other tragedies befell the Jews throughout history. |
|||
Is this important holiday of one of the World's major religions not qualified for inclusion on the main page? [[User:Elipongo|Elipongo]] 09:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:<s>I'm sorry, but no. Lots of love, - [[Mel Gibson]] 09:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)</s><small>—The preceding comment purported to be made by Mel Gibson was added by [[User:219.89.236.186|219.89.236.186]] ([[User talk:219.89.236.186|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/219.89.236.186|contribs]]) 09:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC).</small> |
|||
: rude ;) |
|||
:You may like to read [[Wikipedia:Selected_anniversaries#Criteria_for_listing_items_on_this_set_of_pages|the guidelines]] for suggesting entries to on this day and then suggest it if it fits --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 10:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Good joke <g> Thanks for the link. However, although that page does state what the *criteria* for inclusion are, it does not state what *procedure* to use to request for events to be included! I just got done surfing around for fifteen minutes and could not find a page to *make* a suggestion. Maybe I'm just being dumb, but its rather user unfriendly, in my not so humble opinion! [[User:Elipongo|Elipongo]] 15:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Welcome to Wikipedia. Over a million guidelines and counting. Once you've been here a few months, you'll sometimes be lucky enough to find the procedure you're looking for. Often the best thing to do is post something here and hope someone notices and gives you a link or points you to the right person (the [[Wikimaster of Selected Anniversaries]]). [[User:Pietdesomere|Piet]] 17:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
That was a hearty laugh this morning --thanks, I needed it! --[[User:Bobak|Bobak]] 15:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
''Please scroll up to the top of this talkpage to see what to do when there is an omission on the Main Page.'' --[[User:64.229.205.128|64.229.205.128]] 20:40, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Elipongo, it is not that the holiday failed to meet criteria, but that it simply wasn't one of the 4 or 5 anniversaries chosen. There are many more anniversaries eveyr day than may feasibly be featured on the front page. --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 08:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== News items == |
|||
'''Huh?''' Isn't the North Korean flood more important than anything Floyd Landis will ever do? Call me crazy... -[[User:Koavf|Justin (koavf)]]·[[User talk:Koavf|T]]·[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]·[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]] 17:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:'''In The News is not Wikinews.''' In the News covers how articles have been updated to reflect new events. Create a good article on the North Korean flood, and it can be added to the ITN template. [[User:Dark Shikari|<span style="background-color:#DDDDFF; font-weight:bold"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF">Da</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000CC">rk</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#000099">Sh</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000066">ik</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000033">ar</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">i</FONT>]] <font color="#000088"><sup>[[User_talk:Dark_Shikari|''talk'']]</sup>'''/'''<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Dark_Shikari|''contribs'']]</sub></font></span> 18:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: You can start with posting a headline about the flood along with a few newslinks on [[Portal:Current events]]. Thanks. --[[User:64.229.205.128|64.229.205.128]] 20:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Featured Article == |
|||
Lindsay Lohan, "Music of the US" the featured article had gone down. Are we really short of anything substantial? Defining? Obscure? Needing exploration? May an article on "Everyday Life" next or "Pubic Hairs?" <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:ArthurianLegend|ArthurianLegend]] ([[User talk:ArthurianLegend|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ArthurianLegend|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small> |
|||
:Music of the United States is an article you might find in any encyclopedia. And you missed the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Nevertheless, if the article on [[pubic hair]] is improved to featured standards, I see no reason (other than taste) why it should not be, well, featured. Better we encourage even quotidian articles on popular culture to be of high quality than concentrate only on the quality of the "proper" articles, true? --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 08:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Israel-Lebanon Conflict == |
|||
Is it correct to call it a ''strife''? Can someone explain the difference between a ''conflict'' and a ''strife''?--[[User:Patchouli|Patchouli]] 18:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Strife is basically [[headlinese]] because it's short. It isn't much used in formal writing, though, and it's become a bit of a cliché with regard to the Middle East. Where do we use it, or is your issue with the word "conflict" that we do use? --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 20:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::I have no issue with ''conflict''. I think ''conflict'' should be used here unless Lebanon declares war; then, there is a war between two nations. Now it is a military engagement involving guerrillas. I just wanted to learn about ''strife''.--[[User:Patchouli|Patchouli]] 20:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Am I suppose to use quotation marks or italicize here for the two words I used?--[[User:Patchouli|Patchouli]] 20:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::You can do it either way you choose, this is only a Talk page and there isn't any requirement of style, only of being understood. I still do not understand your question. [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/strife Strife] is an English word very similar to [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/conflict conflict], but it is not used nearly as much in formal writing. Conflict is used in this case more often because the conflict is not always violent, whereas strife usually implies active violence. --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 22:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::: Patchouli, you may want to check out [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style]]. But on talkpages, anything goes. --[[User:199.71.174.100|199.71.174.100]] 22:31, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::"[C]onflict is not always violent, whereas strife usually implies active violence," is the explanation I was seeking.--[[User:Patchouli|Patchouli]] 08:26, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Isn't it about time that somebody with the proper clearance to edit the news box refreshed the news piece about the Israel-Lebanon conflict? The text has been the same since [[6 August]]. --[[User:Thomas Blomberg|Thomas Blomberg]] 15:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I think I just found out how it's done, so please forget what I just wrote. --[[User:Thomas Blomberg|Thomas Blomberg]] 15:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== The "duties" of "President" Fidel Castro == |
|||
surely you meant to say "Cuban ''Italic text''dictator, Fidel Castro, handed over ''Italic text''power to his brother...yada yada yada... {{unsigned|Madmax5|01:53, 5 August 2006}} |
|||
:Officially, Castro is the President. That is the proper way to address him. -- [[User:Psy guy|Psy guy]] <sup>[[User_talk:Psy_guy|Talk]]</sup> 01:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:No, we didnt. The still-President of Cuba handed over his duties. Is this in any way inaccurate? [[User:Bloodsorr0w|Preston]] 02:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:: Not quite, Castro never took an oath to cease presidential duties, and his brother Raul is placed in duty (temporarily) until Fidel is fully recovered. Interestingly, Fidel's 80th birthday is due around the corner and the world watches to see Fidel will remain president, the longest-running dictator at this time for 47 years may continue to hold that title. --[[User:Mike D 26|Mike D 26]] 12:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Shouldn't "Debian" be hyperlinked in the Ubuntu article? == |
|||
Shouldn't "Debian" be hyperlinked in the Ubuntu article? --[[User:Irrevenant|Irrevenant]] 03:06, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Don't worry, they're probably writing a script to do it as we speak. --[[User:Tess Tickle|Tess Tickle]] 03:13, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:It's there now. If it was there already and I missed it: sorry. If it wasn't: thanks. --[[User:Irrevenant|Irrevenant]] 04:25, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==link To Kidspedia On Main Page Recest== |
|||
[http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/Kidspedia Kidspedia]is at the moment a mini wiki wich is going to be a kids vershon of wikipedia. The link is part of an atempt to stop it having 1000's of unfinesht pages. |
|||
Plase reply on the kidspedia discoshen page. I cant get a link but just go to the scrchcard bit on wikia and you will find it on all mini wikis. [[User:JosephK19|JosephK19]] 17:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Nice: Kids' spellings, too! |
|||
Kids spelling - I thought you were dyslexic :-) --[[User:Radioactive turnip|Radioactive turnip]] 11:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
What discussion page? Can we get a link? And [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|sign your posts, please]]. — [[User:Ceejayoz|ceejayoz]] <sup><font color="darkred">[[User_talk:Ceejayoz|talk]]</font></sup> 14:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Now that there's a link, it won't be happening. It's a non-Wikipedia Foundation site with only 9 articles, and none of those have any content. — [[User:Ceejayoz|ceejayoz]] <sup><font color="darkred">[[User_talk:Ceejayoz|talk]]</font></sup> 20:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Probally shouldnt be using the wikipedia logo on it, even if you have changed the colours. Its copyrighted and your use of it could cause confusion as the site's affiliation with wikipedia. [[User:Jmount|Rafy]] 01:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Dosen't the [[Simple:Main Page|simple english 'pedia]] fill that purpose? <font face="Lucida Grande">[[User:Pacific Coast Highway|Pacific Coast Highway]] <sup>([[User talk:Pacific Coast Highway|blah]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pacific Coast Highway|I'm a hot toe picker]])</sup> 02:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)</font> |
|||
:: Simple is also meant for those not proficient in the English language, including adults who may not be interested in articles on toys or other things kids care about. The content's emphasis is different. BTW, this section has nothing to do with the [[Main Page]] and should be remove from [[Talk: Main Page]]. --[[User:64.229.228.195|64.229.228.195]] 12:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Featured Article - Ubuntu == |
|||
I'm generally a massive fan of the featured article, but I thought this one was far below the usual high standards. It reads very much like an advert or some sought of promotional blurb. |
|||
Regards, |
|||
Smiffy <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Oismiffy|Oismiffy]] ([[User talk:Oismiffy|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Oismiffy|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small> |
|||
:You want "some soft of", not "some sought of". YRTE. Also, if you don't like the writing, participate to make it better. - [[User:UtherSRG|UtherSRG]] [[User_talk:UtherSRG|(talk)]] 19:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::In a similar manner to the way in which you want "some sort of", not "some soft of". [[User:81.132.80.88|81.132.80.88]] 19:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Eek - I thought that about the correction but didn't like to say it. Just proves anyone can make a mistake in the excitement of the moment!! Anyway, thanks for the pointers - I don't really have a problem with how its written, just the content. I take your point about getting involved - I know the featured articles are strongly scrutinised and discussed, hence my dissapointment that this made it through. Maybe I will put my money where my mouth is. Regards. [[User:Oismiffy|Oismiffy]] 20:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::I think it's comprehensive, concise, and clear, even if it doesn't "sizzle". Is that enough for featured? I dunno. --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 23:26, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::First people complain that it sounds like a marketing blurb, then they complain it doesn't "sizzle". Yeah, like, let's have it both ways or something. The cool thing about Wikipedia is, you just tell people what you want and they make it for you. Must feel like paradise. - [[User:Samsara|{{{2|Samsara}}}]] ([[User talk:Samsara|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Samsara|contribs]]) 17:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== In the news pictures == |
|||
I have noted this plenty in the past, but this one is just too easy to have a light-hearted go at. Is it not possible for the pictures to be formatted to be inline with the news bullet that it is exemplifying? We currently have the top headline of: |
|||
"[[Spanish]] cyclist [[Oscar Pereiro Sio]] claims he is the true 2006 Tour de France winner" |
|||
Across from that we have a picture of an ageing man with a beard, who, on closer inspection, is a notorious president/dictator (delete as appropriate). I am not sure if Castro could win the tour de France - but I doubt it! |
|||
Is it difficult to align the picture with the bullet? I know the (pictured) text is used, but to the casual viewer it just looks wrong (and in some cases, such as this one) makes WP look a bit embarrassing/daft. Apologies if this was covered before during the redraft discussions at the start of the year, but I can't see any technical reason why the pic could not move up and down as appropriate (thus I am guessing this is a stylistic choice). [[User:SFC9394|SFC9394]] 00:27, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:This has come up several times. There was an attempt at a solution a few months back that gained support but was never implemented and more recently there was an a period where an attempt was made to at least have a flag or some logo related to the top item. But people kept complaining that a flag was boring... Perhaps we should just keep the pictured item on top? --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 02:05, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::It has never bothered me. Newspapers often have strange juxtapositions of photographs and news stories, too. --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 21:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Don't newspapers normally have a caption under each picture though? Also, you should never hold a newspaper up as an example of good page layout. ;) --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 01:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::: I agree, the picture should carry a caption below and prevents confusion to the reader. Let's not make Wikipedia's main page a sloppy one, because an encyclopedia is well organized and most newspapers are that way. The Libyan flag isn't the issue, this is the country's official flag and to remove it is illogical like for one to remove the Sri Lankan flag in recent main page news articles. --[[User:Mike D 26|Mike D 26]] 12:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Mel Gibson]] == |
|||
I realise this is too late—but why didn’t Mel Gibson make it onto the Main Page?! Its dominated the news far more than some of the other things listed. But ah, well… it’s in the past... the incident that is and not the ramifications.--[[User:Greasysteve13|Greasysteve13]] 03:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:It maybe newsworthy but this is an encyclopedia. Try Wikinews. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 03:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::I know, I was just surprised [[Mel Gibson]] didn't make it in the in the news section of Wikipedia's main page. Who does he have to kill?--[[User:Greasysteve13|Greasysteve13]] 05:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::lol how'd you find out about that? I thought Mel's people had that all hushed up? ;) I was a bit terse above, sorry, what I mean is items featured in ITN need to be of encyclopedic value, have an article that has been substantially updated with the new information and (finally) be nominated for inclusion. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 08:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::Okay.--[[User:Greasysteve13|Greasysteve13]] 11:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Also, the in the news section isn't just for US news, but worldwide. Entertainment gossip isn't exactly high profile news world wide. --<b><font color="666666">[[User:Lightdarkness|light]]</font><font color="#000000">[[User:Lightdarkness|darkness]]</font></b><sup> ([[User_talk:Lightdarkness|talk]])</sup> 04:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::I wasn't suggesting that the in the news section was just for US news but this Mel news in general has been heavy in a lot of Western news, thats not to say Eastern news insn't just as Important. And it may surprise you all but I am not American.--[[User:Greasysteve13|Greasysteve13]] 05:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::Say, isn't Britney pregnant again? --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 21:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Who cares?! If she was it never garnered signifigant media atenttion--[[User:Greasysteve13|Greasysteve13]] 04:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== go go Azeri peeps! == |
|||
Big ups on today's selection which put the FA in phat! ''w00t?!'' --[[User:70.209.187.182|70.209.187.182]] 07:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== 40th birthday of Jimbo Wales == |
|||
Should the 40th birthday of Jimbo Wales be mentioned in the Main Page tomorrow? [[User:Hardee67|Hardee67]] 18:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:No. [[User:Shanes|Shanes]] 18:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Ditto. Maybe when he is 100 we will :-) --[[User:HappyCamper|HappyCamper]] 18:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::I guess this means that his birthday should not be mentioned on the main page. [[User:Hardee67|Hardee67]] 18:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::I think the birthday needs to be intrinsically notable for it on the main page. For example, if we go by our article on Preident Bush, last July 6th would have been his 60th birthday, but this was not announced on the main page as we can see [[Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/July 6|here]]. --[[User:HappyCamper|HappyCamper]] 19:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::President Bush is not the founder of Wikipedia however. The birthday of Jimbo Wales is different, in that he's the found of the Wikipedia project which is this encyclopedia. [[User:Hardee67|Hardee67]] 01:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::::He's made it clear in the past that he should recieve no more or less attention than any other subject with regards to items about him. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 01:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Oooohhh!!! Wikipedians - look at ''[[User:Jimbo Wales/Birthday Wishes|this]]''! Well, you gotta admit, spontaneous birthday wishes are pretty sweet. --[[User:HappyCamper|HappyCamper]] 19:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: Jimbo Wales may not prefer not have his birthday on the main page, this is his decision...and Wikipedia rules forbids birthday announcements. I may want to greet him anyway, but doesn't mean I place it on an article. Check out the link Happy Camper placed above and feel free to greet him. --[[User:Mike D 26|Mike D 26]] 12:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== stereotypical progressive bias in Israeli-Hezbollah news == |
|||
Every time I see the main page in the last month, I've learned about a new airstrike by the Isreali military and how many "people" it killed, with no distinction between civilians, soldiers, terrorists (ok, sorry, militants). I've never seen one bit about any attacks by Hezbollah, which many people can assure you are on-going and more often targetted at civilians. Why is it we only need to hear about the casualties caused by the democracy? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:B. Phillips|B. Phillips]] ([[User talk:B. Phillips|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/B. Phillips|contribs]]) 22:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC).</small> |
|||
: To help us, please identify (or write up) a decent article on a recent attack by Hezbollah and post a suggested headline on [[Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates]]. Thanks. -- [[User:199.71.174.100|199.71.174.100]] 00:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Complaint == |
|||
You should give a contact link. I recently edited my entry - SHANE BRIANT - recently. You took me out of the main encyclopaedia for doing so. BUT EVERYTHING WAS VERIFIABLE - all you had to do was check with the IMDb (Internet Movie Data Base). I did it only because your entries showed my worst work (hooro films) and omitted my best work (the other 30 films). I thought it would be of interest - if you are an encyclopaedia - to have on record that I am a prolific novelist too. Also easily verifiable. |
|||
I did it only because my friends in America pressed me to do it - not because I have a big egos. My Google links are currently over 74,000. But I do not appear right now in your Encyclopaedia. |
|||
Kind regards |
|||
Shane Briant |
|||
sbriant@bigpond.net.au |
|||
:I think you should write this at the talk page or the one who moved the page ([[User_talk:RHaworth]]). While it might be bad practice to edit an article about oneslef you didn't create the article, so I think that your complaint is valid. But the best course of action is to contact RHworth before doing anything else. [[User:83.227.141.19|83.227.141.19]] 23:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC) <small>– Sorry I was not logged in whil writing this [[user:Jeltz|Jeltz]] [[user talk:Jeltz|<small>talk</small>]] 23:31, 6 August 2006 (UTC)</small> |
|||
::Indeed, I would suggest asking RHaworth to move the article back. Moving an article to userspace in this way is effectively [[WP:SD|speedy deletion]], and as the biography asserted notability, it doesn't seem to have been eligible. If you don't get any joy from him, try [[WP:DRV|deletion review]] to get the decision reviewed. --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 23:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::(Actually looking at Shane's talk page he may be ahead of me.) --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 23:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Moved back to [[Shane Briant]]. There was no call for 1 user to invoke his 1 opinion like that, especially when he was claiming unverifiability despite the prominence on IMDB and Google. — <small>[[User:Brian0918|<b><font color=black>BRIAN</font></b>]][[User_talk:Brian0918|<font color=gray>0918</font>]] • 2006-08-07 00:37</small> |
|||
== Category? == |
|||
The main pages doesn't seem to have a category. Maybe it should have one?-[[User:70.92.246.98|70.92.246.98]] 02:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: How about [[CatAgory:Main Page]] or [[CatAgory:Pages people complain about]] ;) *snigger* If you're serious I think a category on the main page would be a bit redundent and clutter it somewhat. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 06:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Misspelling == |
|||
''Israeli'' is misspelled ''Isareli''. Please correct, <font style="color:#22AA00;">'''[[User:Tewfik|Tewfik]]'''</font><font style="color:#888888;"><sup>[[User Talk:Tewfik|Talk]]</sup></font> 03:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Copied to [[Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors]]. If you notice errors or ommisions in the future please post them there. Thanks :) --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 06:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Kfar Giladi == |
|||
I've written an atticle on Kfar Giladi. Could someone please link it? --[[User:PiMaster3|PiMaster3]] [[User talk:PiMaster3|<sup>talk</sup>]] 14:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Sorry could you be more clear with regards to what you want? "link it"? --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 15:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::I assume he's talking about the second news item, which refers to [[Kfar Giladi]]. I've turned it into a wikilink. --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 17:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thanks, I'm not an admin so I couldn't change it myself. --[[User:PiMaster3|PiMaster3]] [[User talk:PiMaster3|<sup>talk</sup>]] 22:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Worst flag ever == |
|||
Most users will just think there's a problem with the image for the Libya FA. Are there no free images of the countryside or Tripoli or something? --[[User:Nricardo|Nelson Ricardo]] 00:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't think the simplicity of [[Libya]]'s flag should prevent it from appearing on the Main Page. Perhaps those readers unfamiliar with the Libyan flag will click on it or open the article and learn something they didn't know before. -- '''[[User:Tariqabjotu|<font color="black">tariq</font><font color="gray">abjotu</font>]]''' <small>(joturner)</small> 00:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Shouldn't mock other cultures, but: "The top right corner of the flag represents peace, the top left represents life, the bottom right represents faithfulness to the country and the bottom left represents unity" ([[Flag of Libya]]). Say what you want about that there green rectangle, but it sure is pulling its weight. --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 00:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::If they think there's a problem with the image for the flag, I guess they'll be pleasantly surprised when they learn something --taking another step away from ignorance and into the insatiable beast that is knowledge (or some other gobbledygook) --[[User:Bobak|Bobak]] 00:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::We could use a map of Libya though; that represents Libya just as wlel as its flag. —[[User:Cuivienen|Cuivi]]<font color=green>[[User:Cuivienen/Esperanza|é]]</font>[[User talk:Cuivienen|nen]] 00:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::I'm actually skeptical about the 4 corners thing. It sounds like a joke. Not that the flag doesn't look like a joke, of course... --[[User:Kinst|Kinst]] 01:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::IIRC, the green on the flag is mainly for the Green revolution, but I will check out my flag books later and get back to yall. [[User:Zscout370]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Zscout370|(Return Fire)]]</sup></small> 01:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I prefer to use national flags when (and only when) an article about a country is run. Maps make TERRIBLE main page images (at 100px wide it's basically an incomprehensible blob of color) and should never, ever be used under any circumstances. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 01:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I sent an email to the Libya Embassy in the US, should expect an answer by the end of the week. My flag books debunk the four corners theory for now, and even my boys (FOTW) are scratching our heads, since not much flag info comes from Libya. [[User:Zscout370]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Zscout370|(Return Fire)]]</sup></small> 01:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
How about using the coat of arms? [[User_talk:Ziggur|Ziggur]] 02:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I just swapped out the PNG image for the arms, but as Raul said before, let's stick with the flag. [[User:Zscout370]] <small><sup>[[User_talk:Zscout370|(Return Fire)]]</sup></small> 02:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
'''Keep.''' Honestly, I've always thought it was kind of a dumb idea for a flag, but you have to admit, it sure is attention-grabbing in its simplicity. People are used to seeing photos and diagrams on the main page, and seeing a big green box is sure to make the Libya page a popular destination for casual readers and hardcore editors alike. [[User:Lovelac7|<span style="font-family:times new roman, times; color:darkblue;">Lovelac7</span>]] 03:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*By the way, I know this isn't a vote page, I just wanted to make my thoughts clear. [[User:Lovelac7|<span style="font-family:times new roman, times; color:darkblue;">Lovelac7</span>]] 03:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Leave it there of course. I never knew there was a country flag with just one color. Brilliant idea. Way better than all those boring red-white-blue flags. [[User:Pietdesomere|Piet]] 07:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Leave it, though I don't think we should be nominating it as a featured image any time soon. In other news I think the four corners thing is a joke (no mention [http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/ly.html here] and they seem to have most details about other flags and I can't find it anywhere else.) [[User:Jellypuzzle|Jellypuzzle]] | <sup>[[User talk:Jellypuzzle|Talk]]</sup> 10:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Wikiality strikes again! Frankly I'm filing that under 'if it isn't true, it should be'. --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 12:12, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::''<nowiki>***GASP!***</nowiki>'' ...did you dare use a Colbert reference in the rest of Wikipedia? Be careful, the "anti-colberrorists" may burn you for spreading the "virus". --[[User:Bobak|Bobak]] 19:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Please mention the all-green flag in the TFA text. --[[User:64.229.228.195|64.229.228.195]] 12:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
The phrase about what the corners refer to appears to have been [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Flag_of_Libya&diff=prev&oldid=27239944 added] by an anon IP that [http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/ipall.ch?domain=66.178.22.82 belongs to] the [http://www.aub.edu.lb/ American University of Beirut]. The nonsense stuck around for almost a year. Wow. -- [[User:Plutor|Plutor]] 13:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
[[Green]] is my least favorite colour; but I still prefer that [[Flag of Libya|original flag]] over some [[Flag of the United States|gaudy ones with stars and stripes]] ;).--[[User:Cloviz|Cloviz]] 15:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Odd Phrasing == |
|||
"Libya is slightly larger in area than Alaska, the fourth largest nation in Africa, and the 17th largest in the world" makes it sound like Alaska is in Africa. Can it be changed? --[[User:194.217.191.10|194.217.191.10]] 09:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)Adam |
|||
:See the next section. [[user:graham87|Graham]] [[user talk:Graham87|talk]] 09:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Comparison of Lybia's area with Alaska == |
|||
I'd put this up on [[WP:ERRORS]], but it might deserve some discussion, so here goes. I have a problem with the following sentence: |
|||
<blockquote> "With an area of 1.8 million square kilometres, |
|||
90% of which is desert, Libya is slightly larger in area than [[Alaska]], the fourth largest nation in Africa, and the 17th largest in the world." </blockquote> |
|||
Firstly, it's badly worded and it could be interpreted to say that Alaska is the fourth-largest nation in Africa. Secondly, as an Australian, I don't find comparisons with the area of Alaska helpful, and they probably wouldn't be helpful for people outside North America. The sentence should be changed the way it was in the actual article to: |
|||
<blockquote> With an area of 1.8 million square kilometres, 90% of which is desert, Libya is the fourth largest nation-state in Africa by area, and the 17th largest in the world. </blockquote> |
|||
Hmmm, I see someone was also confused at [[WP:ERRORS]], so I'm not the only one. I'll redirect any discussion here, because this is a more suitable place for discussion. [[user:graham87|Graham]] [[user talk:Graham87|talk]] 09:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I changed it to match the article. You may need to [[Wikipedia:Bypass your cache|purge your cache]] in order to see the update on the Main page. [[User:Raven4x4x|Raven4x4x]] 10:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks; that clears things up a bit. [[user:graham87|Graham]] [[user talk:Graham87|talk]] 11:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::In addition, the usual comparison in cases like this is actually [[the size of Wales]] (Yeah, I know it's not really outside of the British media, but when else am I going to be able to link that article in a context that makes sense?) :) [[User:GeeJo|<span style="padding : 0px 1px 1px 1px; border : 1px solid #809EF5; cursor: wait; background: #FFFFFF ; color: #99B3FF">GeeJo</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:GeeJo|(t)]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/GeeJo|(c)]]</sub> <small>• 19:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)</small> |
|||
== Placements of images on the main page ... == |
|||
Hi guys, in the past I noticed several times that images are misplaced on the main page. Today, however, it’s the worst misplacement I’ve seen for quite some time. The picture of the "Warsaw radio mast" is placed on the very top of the "On this day" section, but the corresponding text is the last bullet point at the very end of that section. – Can't the layout of the main page (!) be checked that the images are always beside the corresponding text items? – Thanks. [[User:Michael Zimmermann|MikeZ]] 12:03, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: The image is not misplaced. It's always in that same spot no matter which of the bulleted item contains the corresponding text. --[[User:64.229.228.195|64.229.228.195]] 12:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:: Well then, shouldn't this practice be changed than? I find that kind of placement disturbing. [[User:Michael Zimmermann|MikeZ]] 12:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::: If it's moved down to the 5th item, it sticks out at the bottom. More so if it's a 'portrait' instead of a 'landscape' or 'square'. That's bad layout, too. --[[User:64.229.228.195|64.229.228.195]] 12:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::Surely we can find a picture for one of the first four items? This issue keeps coming up. — [[User:Ceejayoz|ceejayoz]] <sup><font color="darkred">[[User_talk:Ceejayoz|talk]]</font></sup> 13:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Yes it's one of the few recuring issues on the MP that people suggest solutions but nothing ever sticks. I think the best solution is to have the top item always the one with the picture. When a new pictured item is selected it can join its place in the queue. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 14:12, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Yes people keep mentioning this, and it contiunes to baffle me people think the image needs to correspond to the text right next to it. Most people can easily figure out what the picture relates to. [[User:160.79.140.254|160.79.140.254]] 15:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::::The ''On this day...'' entries are listed chronologically. Should we only include images pertaining to the earliest event highlighted on each date? If we have no suitable image for that entry, should we exclude it? —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 16:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::::: It's often hard to get an image to go with an item about something that took place centuries ago, which is often the first item. What we need is a brief image caption for each image (as per [[Wikipedia:Captions]]) but many people have previously said that this would take up too much space on the already crowded MainPage. For now, move the mouse over the image and read the ALT text. -- [[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 16:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::This may not have come across, but my questions were rhetorical. The answers, in my opinion, are "no" and "no." :-) —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 16:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::Both your rhetorical questions are strawman. The ''On this day...'' entries are '''currently''' listed chronologically, as are the ''In the News'' items. My suggestion was to leave that item on top until another decently illustrated item replaces it. If a newer item has no picture it goes to the second place. Would it really hurt the formatting that much to do so? The pictured item is already receiving more attention, as the others have no picture. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 09:12, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::My questions may have been inapplicable, but they weren't straw man arguments. I based them upon my honest interpretation of what you wrote. |
|||
::::::::::The ''In the news'' entries are not listed chronologically. They're listed reverse-chronologically (typically with respect to when they're added, not to when the events occurred), with no uniform update schedule or expiration. Conversely, ''On this day...'' is a chronological (with respect to the historical timeline) list of events that's replaced on a daily basis. (Entries aren't bumped down the list according to when they were added.) If I understand correctly, you're proposing the following: |
|||
{| align="right" cellspacing="3" width="45%" |
|||
|- valign="top" |
|||
| style="border:1px solid #c6c9ff; padding:1em; padding-top:.5em; color: #000; background-color:#f0f0ff"| |
|||
'''[[August 9]]''': [[National Day]] for '''[[Singapore]]''' ([[1965]]), '''[[Rakhi|Raksha Bandhan]]''' in [[Hinduism]] ([[2006]]), '''[[National Women's Day]]''' in [[South Africa]]. |
|||
<div style="float:right;margin-left:0.5em"> |
|||
[[image:nagasakibomb.jpg|100x100px|Mushroom cloud from the nuclear explosion over Nagasaki rising 18 km (60,000 feet) into the air on the morning of August 9th, 1945]] |
|||
</div> |
|||
* [[1945]] - [[World War II]]: [[United States Army Air Forces|USAAF]] [[bomber]] ''[[Bockscar]]'' [[Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki|dropped an atomic bomb]] named '''''[[Fat Man]]''''', devastating [[Nagasaki, Nagasaki|Nagasaki]], [[Japan]] ''(pictured)''. |
|||
* [[378]] - A large [[Roman Empire|Roman]] army led by [[Roman Emperor|Emperor]] [[Valens]] was destroyed by the [[Visigoth]]s in the '''[[Battle of Adrianople]]'''. |
|||
* [[1173]] - <!--In [[Pisa]], [[Italy]], the-->The construction of a [[campanile]], which would eventually become the '''[[Leaning Tower of Pisa]]''', began. |
|||
* [[1942]] - The [[British India|British Raj]] arrested [[Mahatma Gandhi]] and various leaders of the [[Indian National Congress|Congress Party]], beginning the suppression of the '''[[Quit India Movement]]'''. |
|||
* [[1974]] - The [[Watergate scandal]]: '''[[Richard Nixon]]''' became the first [[president of the United States]] to [[resignation|resign]] from office. |
|||
Recent days: [[August 8]] – [[August 7]] – [[August 6]] |
|||
{{SelAnnivFooter|Month=August}} |
|||
|} |
|||
<br clear="all"> |
|||
::::::::::I strongly prefer the current format. —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 12:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::David, your opinion means nothing! (lol jokeing) - I don't feel strongly either way, all I see is the constant (albeit occasional) posts on this page "pointing out our mistake". Where I see enough people being confused I tend to like to repair things. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 09:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::Well, on the German wikipedia pictures are located next to the corresponding bullet point. I still don't understand why this isn't possible in the English-language wikipedia... ;-) [[User:Michael Zimmermann|MikeZ]] 18:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Vandalism == |
|||
- Libya article: |
|||
- |
|||
- "Libya is led by revolutionary Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi, whose foreign policy has often brought him into conflict with the West." |
|||
- |
|||
- Main page: |
|||
- |
|||
- "Libya is led by revolutionary Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi, one of the most infamous political figures of the 20th century." |
|||
- |
|||
- Clever vandalism, but vandalism all the same. Can this be fixed? |
|||
- |
|||
- [[User:84.70.148.10|84.70.148.10]] 12:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: Try [[WP:ERRORS]]. --[[User:64.229.228.195|64.229.228.195]] 12:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: Vandalism? That was the original wording of the summary, as can be seen [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/August_8%2C_2006&diff=66868895&oldid=46495794 here]. The word vandalism shouldn't be thrown around so lightly. In fact, if you look at the history of what happened, you will find that Raul summarised from the article that he saw at the time, and that the article later got changed. Raul saved that summary at 15:37 on 31 July, and looking at the Libya article, the phrase "infamous" was indeed in the article at the time (Raul's minor edit on that day did, however, introduce the implication that Alaska is a nation in Africa, something that has been discussed elsewhere on this page). The phrase infamous was removed as POV with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Libya&diff=68301578&oldid=68299405 this edit] on 8 August by Gazpacho, which claims the reference did not support the assertion of "infamous", but no reference was provided to support the "conflict with the West" assertion. Anyway, I hope this little bit of detective work helps clear up any confusion. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] 14:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: Thanks for pointing this out. The "infamous" remark has been removed from MainPage. -- [[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 16:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Libya == |
|||
I think there should be a different picture for today's Article of the Day. It surprised me with a square of green until I realized it was actually the country's flag. Maybe a map of the country would be more suitable. [[User:Schyler|schyler]] 16:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: Please see above [[#Worst flag ever]]. --[[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 16:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Numbered items == |
|||
Is it my impression, or did the numbers before the items Today's featured article, Did you know..., In the news, On this day..., Today's featured picture, Other areas of Wikipedia, Wikipedia's sister projects, etc. Wikipedia languages disappear and re-appear (possibly a few times) over the past months? |
|||
For what it's worth: I like the home page so much better without the numbers. – [[User:Adhemar|Adhemar]] 20:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I've never seen numbers. Perhaps a browser setting? --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 07:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::This is controlled via a setting from [[Special:Preferences]]. Under the ''Misc'' tab is the option to "auto-number headings." —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 08:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::'''Confirmed''' – Logged out, I don’t see any numbering, neither on the home page and in the articles. Logged in, I do see the numbers. In the main articles, having the headings numbered makes sense. It gives a structured impression. But on the Main Page (and some other special pages) I hate it thoroughly. So I am going to switch them off completely, no matter how much sense they make in the articles. Thanks, David Levy, for pointing me where this can be controlled. – [[User:Adhemar|Adhemar]] 19:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Article count in the header == |
|||
Don't know if anyone has pointed this out already, but - there's a spelling mistake/omission in the main header. Where it lists the number of articles, it stops short at 'artic' instead of 'articles'. I had noticed this before but thought it may have been fixed, but it doesn't seem to have been :) [[User:Will2710|Will2710]] 21:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't see it. It spells articles for me. Perhaps its a problem with your browser settings? - [[User:Trevor macinnis|Trevor]] [[User talk:Trevor macinnis|MacInnis]] <small>([[Special:Contributions/Trevor macinnis|Contribs]])</small> 21:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::I also see the full phrase ("[[Special:Statistics|{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}]] articles in English"). I don't know how widespread the problem is, but I think that we've waited more than enough time for readers to adjust to the article count's presence at the bottom of the page. (It was awkwardly shoehorned into to the header bar—thereby compromising its appearance—as a stopgap.) How does everyone feel about finally pulling the plug on this redundant element? —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 22:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::I'm ok with it being removed, '''''with a caveat''''' - it '''must''' be allowed to return around at milestones. Specifically when we approach 2M, 2.5M etc articles. - [[User:Trevor macinnis|Trevor]] [[User talk:Trevor macinnis|MacInnis]] <small>([[Special:Contributions/Trevor macinnis|Contribs]])</small> 22:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Emphatically '''no'''. The article count isn't something technical, it's one of the first things that we get to say to new visitors. I've been an editor going on 21 months and it still catches my eye, so it's a morale thing even for old fogies. --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 07:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::This was heavily discussed during the main page redesign process, and more users than not seemed to agree on the following: |
|||
::::*Once we hit one million articles (which many people were watching for), the article count would no longer be of nearly as much interest as it once was. |
|||
::::*When it comes to articles, quality is far more important than quantity is. (Jimbo has made statements of this nature, and few have disagreed.) Placing the article count at the top of the page conveys the opposite to new visitors. ("We have {{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} articles, so we ''must'' be good!") Many of these articles are sources of pride, but others are...not. This really ''is'' more a technical statistic than anything else. |
|||
::::*The desire to keep the article count at the top of the page is based primarily upon tradition and nostalgia (as evidenced by your response). Morale should be boosted by seeing articles elevated to featured status, not by seeing another 10,000 stubs created. |
|||
::::*Moving the article count to the ''Wikipedia languages'' section (where it's contextually relevant) is a reasonable solution. It's still there for those who want to see it on the main page, but it isn't screamed at newbies and emphasized above all else. |
|||
::::We actually established a rough consensus for proceeding with such a setup, but we tacked the upper article count back on at the last minute (to avoid creating the appearance that the entire redesign was tied to this change). We retained the lower article count in anticipation of eventually revisiting the issue (as we're doing now). —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 08:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
How about changing one or both of the "article count" links to still link to the [[Special:Statistics]] page (as they do at the moment), but not having the actual number there. Call it something like "Article count" or "Article statistics" instead. That de-emphasises the actual number, but leaves the information accessible. That way, any long-time editor who wants to see the number can click to see the number, and any new readers who click through will end up reading more than just a single, unexplained figure. Really though, the "special:statistics" page should say more than it does. It should at least list the number of stubs (though this is complicated by many articles being more than stubs, but still having a stub label). [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] 08:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Disagree'''. At least ''{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} articles in English'' conveys some information. ''Article count'' without a number next to it, is just an extra cluttering link on the home page. It would also confuse visitors. Moving the count to the bottom of the page is fine, probably even an improvement. But the words ''Article count'' without a number next to it, is just plain silly. Far worse than not mentioning the count alltogether. – [[User:Adhemar|Adhemar]] 20:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Or perhaps substitute the [[WP:FA]] or [[WP:GA]] count there to focus attention on improving existing articles. Those counts are somewhere above 1000, that's nothing to be proud of. (Quantity v Quality again)--[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 09:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Imbalance == |
|||
Perhaps we could get a few more items for ''In the News'' to balance out the extra-long ''Featured Article of the Day'' excerpt. -- '''[[User:Tariqabjotu|<font color="black">tariq</font><font color="gray">abjotu</font>]]''' <small>(joturner)</small> 00:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
[http://supercharged.fortunecity.com/] |
|||
:Done. —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 00:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Underline links == |
|||
I think it was better to keep the links like they were. I don't like them underlined like Spanish wikipedia. What do you think? --[[User:Neo139|Neo139]] 02:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Go to "My Preferences" and click the "Misc" tab. {{User:Fredil Yupigo/sig}} 02:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::I've had a bug - probably in Firefox - where suddenly all links were underlined. Mysteriously it toggled every time I added or removed an article from my watchlist. Whenever it happened, I just added another article to my watchlist and the underlined links were gone. One of the funnier bugs I ever saw. Hasn't happened lately though. [[User:Pietdesomere|Piet]] 10:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::That's a common bug. You can fix it by simply pressing CTRL+F5 to force refresh the site whenever the bug occurs. — <small>[[User:Brian0918|<b><font color=black>BRIAN</font></b>]][[User_talk:Brian0918|<font color=gray>0918</font>]] • 2006-08-09 15:05</small> |
|||
::::Not in my case I think. I'm sure I would have found that out a lot sooner than finding that it toggles when adding/removing an item from the watchlist. [[User:Pietdesomere|Piet]] 18:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::The bug in Firefox goes away when you CTRL+F5. I can't speak for your ability to find things out. — <small>[[User:Brian0918|<b><font color=black>BRIAN</font></b>]][[User_talk:Brian0918|<font color=gray>0918</font>]] • 2006-08-10 07:40</small> |
|||
::::::I'm glad there is someone who knows all the bugs in Firefox. [[User:Pietdesomere|Piet]] 12:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Ah...so there's a way to fix that - brilliant. - [[User:Greatgavini|<font face="Paris"><strong>THE GREAT GAVINI</strong></font>]] {[[User talk:Greatgavini|T]]|[[Special:Contributions/Greatgavini|C]]|<span class="plainlinks" style="color:#002bb8">[http://tools.wikimedia.de/~essjay/edit_count/Count.php?username=Greatgavini #]</span>} 18:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::It's such a well-known bug, and you're relatively new, so I could safely say that it is most likely the same bug you encountered, and you simply didn't realize that CTRL+F5 fixed it. I didn't realize it either. — <small>[[User:Brian0918|<b><font color=black>BRIAN</font></b>]][[User_talk:Brian0918|<font color=gray>0918</font>]] • 2006-08-11 03:56</small> |
|||
== Lamont == |
|||
Someone needs to write a news item on the connecticut senate primary. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:24.63.22.47|24.63.22.47]] ([[User talk:24.63.22.47|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/24.63.22.47|contribs]]) 04:09, 9 August 2006.</small> |
|||
: Please see [[Connecticut United States Senate election, 2006]]. And please note that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news service like [[Wikinews]]. --[[User:199.71.174.100|199.71.174.100]] 04:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Unclear meaning in the featured article == |
|||
In todays fetured article it reads "Shotguns, though initially popular with the middle class as much as the poor, became a symbol of poverty in the mid-20th century, but opinion is now more mixed, with some the targets of bulldozing due to urban renewal". |
|||
It wasn't until it spoke about bulldozing I realised it still meant the houses. I think the word 'houses' needs to be added after shotguns. --[[User:194.217.191.10|194.217.191.10]] 10:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)adam |
|||
:Dude, the blurb starts with "The shotgun house is a type of house". I don;t see how much clearly it can be put in context. --[[User:Nricardo|Nelson Ricardo]] 10:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:: Simply by adding "houses" it is 100% more clear. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 12:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::: In addition, the sentence immediately follows one talking about shotguns (the guns), so in order to switch back to talking about shotguns (the houses), it is necessary to re-introduce the phrase "shotgun houses". This is manifestly a clear and necessary change. Anyone arguing against it needs to stop and reconsider. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] 12:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
This issue has already been posted in [[Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors|the correct place]] and is now corrected. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 12:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==American bias== |
|||
I would like to protest against the American bias in the Wikipedia news. |
|||
*In the Dutch news, it became apparent that the Mexican elections were probably fraudulent. A description as 'Alleged electoral irregularities' when one million people are occupying the city centre of Mexico City seems unappropriate to me. |
|||
*The Israelis are inflicting far more casualties in Lebanon then vice versa, so it would be more appropriate to mention the Israeli atrocities first. |
|||
*The Tour de France has proclaimed Pereiro Sio as winner of the Tour, so instead of 'claims he is the true', it should be 'has become the true'.--[[User:Daanschr|Daanschr]] 14:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
**How is any of that "American bias"??? — <small>[[User:Brian0918|<b><font color=black>BRIAN</font></b>]][[User_talk:Brian0918|<font color=gray>0918</font>]] • 2006-08-09 15:04</small> |
|||
That is my opinion.--[[User:Daanschr|Daanschr]] 15:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*How is any of that "American bias"??? — <small>[[User:Brian0918|<b><font color=black>BRIAN</font></b>]][[User_talk:Brian0918|<font color=gray>0918</font>]] • 2006-08-09 15:25</small> |
|||
Most of the atention in the Dutch media concerning the Mexican elections was directed at militant reaction of the opposition against possible fraud. During the news items, it became apparent that the American news hardly mentioned the reaction of the opposition and that the Americans didn't understand the dominance of socialism in Latin America. I was annoyed about the lack of prominence about the portrayal of the Mexican opposition in the english Wikipedia article on this subject. Now, the Wikipedia news mentions 'alleged electoral irregularities'. |
|||
America is one of the most prominent supporters of Israel. Russia, China, Latin America, the Arab world, many European countries have a neutral view at best. Main attention in other parts of the world is the destruction of Lebanon. The missiles hitting Israel are far less damaging in comparison. |
|||
Landis is an American and he has lost his title. The Tour de France declared Pereiro Sio winner, so he acknowledged his title. The words 'claims he is the true' are unapropriate and biased.--[[User:Daanschr|Daanschr]] 15:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*Are you sure the Tour de France declared him the winner? Others have said that that won't happen until all the appeals have been exhausted, which has yet to occur. — <small>[[User:Brian0918|<b><font color=black>BRIAN</font></b>]][[User_talk:Brian0918|<font color=gray>0918</font>]] • 2006-08-09 16:03</small> |
|||
:*He hasn't officially been declared the winner, so technically it is correct. However, I also thought the wording was not very good because it is not just himself who claims this: everyone now sees Perreiro Sio as the true winner. [[User:Pietdesomere|Piet]] 18:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::* While I agree that Perreiro Sio is the true winner, I've taken this bit off MainPage as this is not an official result. And because this Tour de France bit has been on ITN for so long. It's getting stale. I've replaced it with a blurb about a controversial dam in Turkey taken from the ITN candidates' page. -- [[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 18:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*And you're positive that everyone that recommends a news story is an american? [[User:Dposse|dposse]] 16:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*Since when is Israel inflicting more civilian casualties? The current ratio is about 500 Hezbollah kills to about 500 civilian kills, which is incredibly good compared to the American "war on terror." On the other hand, Hezbollah has killed nearly all civilians and no troops (and intends to do so). They sit inside UN ambulances and on UN posts, hoping that Israel will accidentally shoot the UN in the process. They base out of apartments on the tops of buildings, so that Israel knocks down the whole building trying to get them. They parade a single dead baby around to hundreds of reporters to inflate casualty reports. And you want more reporting on ''Israeli'' atrocities? I mean, its not as if Israel is completely justified in everything they are doing at the moment, but there are reasons why the majority of the world considers Hezbollah to be terrorists and not Israel. — [[User:Dark Shikari|<span style="background-color:#DDDDFF; font-weight:bold"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF">Da</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000CC">rk</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#000099">Sh</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000066">ik</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000033">ar</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">i</FONT>]] <font color="#000088"><sup>[[User_talk:Dark_Shikari|''talk'']]</sup>'''/'''<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Dark_Shikari|''contribs'']]</sub></font></span> 17:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*Wouldn't the first two items on your list be considered Mexican PAN party bias, and Israeli bias, if anything? Seems like you're the one being biased against the US here. Sweden holds diplomatic ties with North Korea, I guess news that North Korea launching the Taepodong 2 missle must've been Swedish bias. -- [[User:SmthManly|<font color="black">SmthManly</font>]] / <sup><font color="blue">[[User_talk:SmthManly|ManlyTalk]]</font></sup> / <sup><font color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/SmthManly|ManlyContribs]]</font></sup> 18:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
* [[User:Daanschr|Daanschr]], you are welcome to suggest revisions of poorly worded ITN items at [[WP:ERRORS]]. "Protesting" like this is not helpful. And please try not to read too much into things. Remember [[WP:FAITH]]. --[[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 19:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
**"WP:FAITH"? is it just me or does that abbreviation seem to imply that Wikipedia is "faith-based"? :op [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''ᛏ''')]]</small> 19:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::It's just you. [[WP:FAITH]] is just a acronym. It is a official policy that says that wikipedians should assume good faith while editing wikipedia. [[User:Dposse|dposse]] 19:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::: I should've typed in [[WP:AGF]]..... --[[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 19:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::I hope you realize I was joking? [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|('''ᛏ''')]]</small> 20:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::: Yes, dab. I saw your emoticon. ^_^ --[[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 20:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I had no problems with the intention of the editors, but with the visible result. To my opinion it was American biased.--[[User:Daanschr|Daanschr]] 20:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
In The News, Now with American Bias! |
|||
* The Apocolypse has begun. |
|||
* Mexican Anti-American Communist cries foul after free and fair election elects Conservative nominee for President of Mexico. |
|||
* 30,000 non-Americans die somewhere not in America. |
|||
* Muslim exteremists continue to attack Israel in a move long sense predicted by the Bible. |
|||
* Dam construction begins in Islamistan. |
|||
Comparing that to the current ITN box, I fail to see a real American bias. [[User:Bloodsorr0w|Preston]] 21:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:: Don't forget to include [[Connecticut United States Senate election, 2006]]. It's the biggest news item ever in some circles. -- [[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 22:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Shotgun houses? I am offended! Bias puts the camera in America! --[[User:Bobak|Bobak]] 21:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I know that Americans like to be as extreme as possible and it is very popular to ridiculise everybody who is non-American or non-patriotic. I just wanted to point out that the news was not according the the majority worldwide point of view. Nice to know that there are still some volunteers who want to live up to the worldwide felt prejudices towards America.--[[User:Daanschr|Daanschr]] 08:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Daanschr, you're stereotyping Americans, that's anti-American bias. Wikipedia is about keeping a [[WP:NPOV]], not any person, or groups point of view(be it [[America]]n, [[Russian]], the [[EU]]'s, the [[UK]]'s, the [[UN]]'s, [[NATO]]'s, [[OPEC]]'s, the [[World]]'s, etc.). --[[User:Dp462090|<b><tt><span style="color: blue">''ᎠᏢ''</span></tt></b>]][[user:Dp462090/Esperanza|<span style="color: green"><b><u>4</u></b></span>]][[User_talk:Dp462090|<span style="color: red"><tt><b>62090</b></tt></span>]] 10:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I am angry about the events of the last years and i blame America, just like many other people in the world. The NPOV policy has changed recently, i see. It clearly states to be against a national or geographical bias. An article should represent the opinion of different nations, if there is a certain difference in the debate. I just read in the newspaper that Obrador has threatened with a revolution in Mexico. The police is occupying many buildings. It could be a civil war.--[[User:Daanschr|Daanschr]] 11:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*No matter how many they are or what they do, the fraud goes no further than alleged unless they have good proves. About the Israel-Lebanon conflict, until some days ago it was centered in Hezbollah attacks; someone complained, and it seems (s)he was pleased. Maybe we all expect too much of the ITN section. And about the American-bias, we'll see what to do about it...perhaps we should all write all kind of trivia about our own countries and include research and statistic about our countries only in any global subject. Maybe one of these centuries we'll have a balanced encyclopedia.--[[User:Cloviz|Cloviz]] 12:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Please use the full width of the screen == |
|||
I am an avid reader of the wikipedia. I use it regularly to get more knowledge. One of the main problems that I face with it is that it is not using the full screen width to display the article. |
|||
A left navigation bar which is mostly less than one tenth of any article's height uses atleast one third of the screen thus making users scroll almost twice more than necessary to read the full article. This will result in more repetitive stress injury to the wrists due to the increased scrolling necessary. |
|||
Could you not put the left nav bar links at the top so that the article, which is what we concentrate most on can take up the full width of the window? |
|||
Shankar. |
|||
[[User:61.17.178.163|61.17.178.163]] 22:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Please create an account / sign in and select another skin under "my preferences". Try ''Nostalgia'' or ''MySkin'' if you prefer not to have a left nav bar. Hope this helps. --[[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 22:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Once you log in, you can click this link: [[Special:Mypage/monobook.css|link]], and add this to the page that the link takes you to: |
|||
<pre> |
|||
/* Wider content */ |
|||
.portlet { display:none; } |
|||
#column-content, #content { margin: 0 0 0 0 } |
|||
</pre> |
|||
. |
|||
[[User:GeorgeMoney|GeorgeMoney]] ([[User talk:GeorgeMoney|talk]]) 23:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*You must be at a very, very low resolution if the nav bar takes up 1/3 of the screen: it takes up about 1/8 of the screen for me and I'm at 1280x960. If you were on 640x480 that would explain it, but as far as I know Windows XP doesn't even support that anymore. — [[User:Dark Shikari|<span style="background-color:#DDDDFF; font-weight:bold"><FONT COLOR="#0000FF">Da</FONT><FONT COLOR="#0000CC">rk</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#000099">Sh</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000066">ik</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000033">ar</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000">i</FONT>]] <font color="#000088"><sup>[[User_talk:Dark_Shikari|''talk'']]</sup>'''/'''<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Dark_Shikari|''contribs'']]</sub></font></span> 10:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Thank you very much. The nostalgia skin is perfect. Though I could not do the code thing its ok. Perhaps nostalgia should be made default, because many users may not even bother to ask? I have been using wikipedia for years before it occurred to me to ask. I am using 800x600 and also I have specified Ignore Colors/Fonts/Sizes/Styles on webpages and set my text size to medium and set color to white text on blue. This reduces eyestrain, but also made the nav bar take up 1/3rd of the screen. -- [[User:Shankargiri|Shankargiri]] 20:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: You are welcome. --[[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 20:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
=== Sidebar redesign discussion === |
|||
A discussion is underway concerning the redesign of the sidebar which is displayed on every page of Wikipedia. See you at '''[[Wikipedia talk:Village pump (proposals)/Sidebar redesign]]''' --[[User:Nexus Seven|Nexus Seven]] 00:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Fair use images on main page? == |
|||
Are fair use images allowed on the main page? I have seen discussions about this before, but not sure what was reached, and can't find a final statement now. This pertaining to the FA pic. |
|||
:Fair use images may be used on the main page when no (salvagable) free alternative is available. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 14:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::We used the CUPS logo, when [[Common Unix Printing System]] was used, and there were valid GFDL images. However, that's the only valid exception I can ever think of. - [[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]] 14:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::What is considered "valid" may be questionable. The other images in that article aren't really readable as thumbnails, and definitely wouldn't look good on the main page. But that's just my opinion. — <small>[[User:Brian0918|<b><font color=black>BRIAN</font></b>]][[User_talk:Brian0918|<font color=gray>0918</font>]] • 2006-08-10 17:56</small> |
|||
:::And, in fact (and somewhat tangential to this discussion since the image was tagged as being fair use when it appeared on the main page,) the CUPS logo is in fact Free (GPLed) since it is included in the CUPS distribution, which is licensed under the GPL. I have edited the image description page to reflect this. -- [[User:AJR|AJR]] | [[User talk:AJR|Talk]] 00:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==Homepage== |
|||
There should be a link on the Main Page to make Wikipedia your homepage, if there isn't already. I don't see one. --[[User:Macarion|Macarion]] 00:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:That varies from browser to browser. It's simpler to allow the end user (you) to select it from their menu. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 04:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Wikipedia should also join a webring, and if Wikipedia will put my home page on the front page, I will put Wikipedia on mine. --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 01:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Larf. Behave you. (Wikipedia is in my top ten friends) --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 09:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Yes! Yes! 000! Yes! == |
|||
Manchester City's on the front page of Wikipedia! Yes! Take that United, we finally won something big! --[[User:Taoistlumberjak|Taoistlumberjak]] 01:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:As a [[Manchester United]] fan, I am disappointed that the article in question is not even a featured article to begin with. --<font style="background:gold">[[WP:EA|<font color="green">S</font>]][[User:Siva1979|iva1979]]</font><sup><font style="background:yellow">[[User talk:Siva1979|Talk to me]]</font></sup> 04:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Well, you know what to do ;) —[[User:Cuivienen|Cuivi]]<font color=green>[[User:Cuivienen/Esperanza|é]]</font>[[User talk:Cuivienen|nen]] 06:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: However, shouldn't it be ''[[Manchester City Football Club]] '''is''' an [[English]] [[Premier League]] [[football]] club based in [[Manchester]]''? --[[User:Surukai|Surukai]] 06:22, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Nevermind, It was my english that was lacking ( [[American_and_British_English_differences#Singular_and_plural_for_nouns|Singular and plural for nouns]]) --[[User:Surukai|Surukai]] 07:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==Blatant UK bias== |
|||
Three of the four features on the main page (Enric Miralles, Manchester FC, and the London terrorist plot) are UK topics. Why must Wikipedia be so Anglo-centric? [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 01:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:oh lord, it's even worse than I thought - [[Augustan drama|tomorrow's FA]] is another UK topic! [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 01:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I'd talk with that idiot who schedules the FAs... --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 04:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Positively anti-Djibouti-is<nowiki><nowiki>[Insert non-formatted text][http://supercharged.fortunecity.com/] here</nowiki><nowiki></nowiki></nowiki>t. - [[User:Ta bu shi da yu|Ta bu shi da yu]] 07:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: In defence, the majority of the entire site and almost every English wiki has a US bias, so please pack your trumpet away. --[[User:Dom0803|Dom0803]] 01:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::''WOOOOSH!'' (the sound of a joke going way, way over your head) — <small>[[User:Brian0918|<b><font color=black>BRIAN</font></b>]][[User_talk:Brian0918|<font color=gray>0918</font>]] • 2006-08-11 01:49</small> |
|||
: But that "bias" is due to America being more important.[[User:67.42.218.153|67.42.218.153]] 01:42, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:: I totally agree. [[User:75.15.147.56|75.15.147.56]] 02:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::: Being more important than what? Truth? |
|||
:Who are "Manchester FC"? It's Manchester City FC. [[User:Dancarney|Dancarney]] 07:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Can someone with the ability to edit this page please change the "are" to "is" in the first sentence of the featured article? It's driving me mad. It's been corrected on the MCFC topic page. As for the UK bias, well, I see the point but I would say it would be fairer to describe it as a temporary glut of UK articles. The fact that the foiled terrorist plot is the big news story at the minute is just a fact. Tomorrow's FA (Augustan drama) may refer to a style that had its origins in Britain, but has had a worldwide impact. If you have a big problem with a number of main page articles focussing on UK topics, get involved with the planning side of things and actually make a difference to the process rather than simply moaning about it here! [[User:Bedesboy|Bedesboy]] 10:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Yeah, [[User:Raul654|Raul654]], get involved with the planning side instead of simply moaning :-) This is getting funnier by the minute... [[User:Pietdesomere|Piet]] 10:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:C'mon now. Even a Brit can admit that this refers to the organization and not each member thereof. This Yankee thinks '''is''' is correct here. [[User:Nricardo|Nelson Ricardo]] 10:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::The usage is the same on both sides of the Atlantic. Like Nelson says, it's an organisation and needs "is". I'm about to thrombose on this one. [[User:Bedesboy|Bedesboy]] 11:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Please see [[American_and_British_English_differences#Singular_and_plural_for_nouns|Singular and plural for nouns]]. It's not the same on both sides of the Atlantic. [[User:GeeJo|<span style="padding : 0px 1px 1px 1px; border : 1px solid #809EF5; cursor: wait; background: #FFFFFF ; color: #99B3FF">GeeJo</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:GeeJo|(t)]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/GeeJo|(c)]]</sub> <small>• 12:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:::Ooops - fair play to you, sir. Interestingly, The Times Styleguide has organisations as sing and sports teams as plural - www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2941-576,00.html [[User:Bedesboy|Bedesboy]] 14:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
In return to "America being more important" - the only reason your country is where it is at today, is because Britain held you like the crybabies you are for so long. Without us you would be nothing and we would still be the number one, instead we must settle for number two. Stop being so pompous, that's the job of the British. Apparently. (But let's face facts, everyone prefers the British to the American's forceful ways.) --[[User:Dom0803|Dom0803]] 13:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree (although I am from America), the US sees itself as the best and that all other countries must bow down. This is the wrong way to look at, especially if the country in question does have so much power and money. ("with great power comes great responsibility"--[[Spiderman]] (the movie) BUT I don't agree with the part about America being a bunch of crybabies. We wanted freedom. Are you saying that if I caged someone up and told them what to do (it's called a slave...) then they would be a CRYBABY?? I think not. Here is some extra [http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm reading] for everyone, to learn about the nessisity of freedom. But enough about world politics. Back to the main page.--[[User:Superman181|Superman]] 16:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::My goodness, this is all so interesting! [[User:Pietdesomere|Piet]] 13:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Jeez - can we all just grow up a bit please? Wikipedia is supposed to be a contribution to civilised society. Not a slanging match. [[User:Bedesboy|Bedesboy]] 14:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Number two? What exactly is the U.K. number two at? The number two best country in the world at countrolling the English language version of Wikipedia, whoop-di-doo? --[[User:Kinst|Kinst]] 01:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*Never as opportune to say "Have a nice cup of [[Boston tea party|tea]]"; hehehe.--[[User:Cloviz|Cloviz]] 15:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I would love to see [[American English]] become a feature article before [[English English]]. Any fans of linguistics want to go take a stab? "Color", w00t!? --[[User:Bobak|Bobak]] 22:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:It won't happen. Ever. Might as well stop fighting and add vowels to everything. <font face="Lucida Grande">[[User:Pacific Coast Highway|Pacific Coast Highway]] <sup>([[User talk:Pacific Coast Highway|blah]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pacific Coast Highway|I'm a hot toe picker]])</sup> 03:37, 12 August 2006 (UTC)</font> |
|||
::lol it's colour, flavour and etceterour ;) so why does "US english" spell hour, "h o u r"? If [[Bigotry|you people]] anounciated we wouldn't have this problem. I say. By George. What? Crumpet. ;) --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 06:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:By Jingo, the yanks are so stupid. i mean blackadder is FAR FAR FAR better than the simpsons.--[[User:Greg.loutsenko|Greg.loutsenko]] 12:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I love when people spell things wrong in these sort of arguments. [[User:89.100.128.72|89.100.128.72]] 14:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Spork? == |
|||
:''Moved to [[Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/August 11]]. -- 20:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Danae == |
== Danae == |
||
Revision as of 12:53, 14 August 2006
 | This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
 | Template:Main Page discussion header is deprecated, and is preserved only for historical reasons. Please see [[Template:]] instead. |
This is the talk page for discussing changes to the Wikipedia Main Page: please read the information below to find the best place for your comment or question. For error reports, go here. Thank you.
|
Today's featured article
Did you know...
|
In the news
On this day...
|
Today's featured picture
- Today's featured picture is taken from the list of successful featured pictures, If you would like to nominate a picture to be featured see Picture of the Day.
- To report an error with "Today's featured picture...", add a note at the Error Report.
Main Page and beyond
- Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about the Main Page
- Preview tomorrow's Main Page at Main Page/Tomorrow. To report an error on tomorrow's Main Page, leave a note at the Error Report.
- If you want to start a new article seek help here.
- If you see something wrong with a particular article, raise your concerns on that article's own discussion page, or fix it yourself. Do not talk about other articles here.
- Wikipedia running slowly? Check the server status.
- If you have an opinion, comment, question or are looking for help regarding Wikipedia in general, find the place where your post will get the most attention here.
Otherwise; please read through this page to see if your comment has already been made by someone else before adding a new section by clicking the little + sign at the top of the page.
Main page discussion
- This page is for the discussion of technical issues with the main page's operations. See the help boxes above for possible better places for your post.
- Please add new topics to the bottom of this page. If you press the plus sign to the right of the edit this page button it will automatically add a new section for your post.
- Please sign your post with --~~~~. It will add the time and your name automatically.
Danae
There was a typo in the article, which is now featured on the main page. Sulphurous acid, not sulphuric.
- This has already been fixed. (Not by me.) Next time, please report errors on MainPage to WP:ERRORS. Thanks. -- PFHLai 23:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
The Article of the Day should be changed at midnight
Why is the Article of the Day changed at around 4:00PM? Shouldn't it be changed at midnight? I sometimes click out of the internet for a while at around 3:00PM, and at 4:00PM, it is changed.
- Hi!! The article is changed at midnight according to UTC time, which is the official Wikipedia time. Srose (talk) 21:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Phh... see the section on "Blatant UK bias" above; why don't they just make HRH the Queen our ceremonial figurehead?! Actually, I initially assumed Jimbo was English because of that. Of course, how many people out of the American South are named "Jimbo"? --Bobak 22:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- This is the "Englsih encyclopeadia" i dont see it anywhere saying the "American.." hehe. Matthew Fenton (Talk | Contribs) 08:21, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- I thought Jimbo came from Wales, so we use Wales time in Wikipedia. No ? (Hahaha.) -- PFHLai 23:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Phh... see the section on "Blatant UK bias" above; why don't they just make HRH the Queen our ceremonial figurehead?! Actually, I initially assumed Jimbo was English because of that. Of course, how many people out of the American South are named "Jimbo"? --Bobak 22:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Don't be silly. If we were on Cardiff Mean Time we would be using UTC - 12mins 44secs, not UTC. :-P -- AJR | Talk 02:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
actually UTC time is not UK time because we add an hour onto our time during the summer, so the featured article changes at 1pm uk time during the summer. i dont really want BUSH as our head of wikipedia.--Greg.loutsenko 12:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- That would be the joke going WAY over your head. —Cuiviénen 14:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- or 1am. violet/riga (t) 15:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Excuse me, but the discussion page isn't a chatroom. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.121.73.22 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 12 August 2006 (UTC).
Languages section
I don't think it's been discussed here but obviously the languages on the bottom of the main page have been trimmed recently. The English names for the languages were also unfortunately trimmed. Having the English names next to each language wasn't too pretty but it was very functional. I'd like to see them return. Ziggur 07:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- You "don't thinked" wrong. ;) It's been discussed recently at length including here, here and here and possibly one more place that I can't find. The resu,ting consensus (which was a bit contested) was to remove the translations as they are redundant for people who speak/read a particular language anyway, if someone wants to see the complete list they can go here. The reason for the reformation was to make it look less like a jumble of text. There were those against the change entirely and those who wanted the list removed completely, either with a link to the wp.org homepage only or with the list moved to the sidebar as per some other language versions. --Monotonehell 07:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Unneeded Romaji Redirects
68.72.116.165 has made some redirects to articles in Romaji form. I doubt someone would search "Burajiru" or whatever it was to get to Brazil articles. --FlareNUKE 08:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- Not really to do with the main page, I don't see the harm in these redirects if they help people who can't remember the "english name" of something. WP is not paper and these redirects don't cost much. No harm? Any other opinions? --Monotonehell 09:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- I thought they were harmless as well. Titoxd(?!?) 09:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- Not really to do with the main page, I don't see the harm in these redirects if they help people who can't remember the "english name" of something. WP is not paper and these redirects don't cost much. No harm? Any other opinions? --Monotonehell 09:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
100,000 article sites
While I do agree with the 25k and 50k article sites, could there still be the 100k list still including the 25k and 50k lists? Pronoun 14:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- There isn't much reason for one; most of the Wikipedias with more than 50k articles also have more than 100k (only Russian, Finnish, Swedish and Chinese do not, and all are rapidly approaching 100k). —Cuiviénen 19:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
On this Day entry for Berlin wall construction
Just a suggestion that maybe the boldfaced words in the blub shouldn't be West Berlin but rather Berlin Wall, as it's the anniversary of the Berlin Wall construction after all! --Canuckguy 00:20, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed. And if West Berlin is gonna be bolded, oughtn't East Berlin be bolded as well? -Elmer Clark 01:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- Done. Evil Monkey - Hello 02:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
- On MainPage, the boldfaced links indicate featured wikicontent. On TFA, the link to the FA is bolded. On ITN, the link to the wikiarticle updated with the news materials is bolded. On DYK, the link to the new article is bolded. For Selected Anniversaries, the bolded link must refer to an article with the date in the text (one of several rules in editing this section on MainPage). Berlin Wall, West Berlin & East Berlin fit the bill here. However, the Berlin Wall page is slated to be featured on the anniversary of the destruction of the wall. To avoid double-featuring the same article within the same year (another rule), "West Berlin" was bolded on today's template on the anniversary of the construction. "East Berlin" could have been bolded, too, but one is enough for each line. Perhaps we can alternate each year till one of them becomes a markedly better article. This year, there are only 4 events on the template (a mistake on my part), so I've bent the rules and bolded both East & West Berlin. -- PFHLai 21:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Eight-Nation Alliance on Aug 14
Can we add the Eight-Nation Alliance occupation of Beijing in 1900 for "On this Day" of Aug 14? I guess I don't have the authority to do it. Thanks. Pseudotriton 04:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- I am not still not sure yet if that article passes #7 of Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries#Criteria for listing items on this set of pages: "preferably it should be a relatively complete and well-formatted article". I would still like more references cited before putting it on the main page. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:50, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- The main article for the topic is Boxer Rebellion, which is pretty solid (though not FA ready). --Dhartung | Talk 07:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestion. This is not on MainPage because I couldn't confirm the date. In the first paragraph, the Boxer Rebellion article says "The brutal uprising crumbled on August 4, 1900 when 20,000 foreign troops entered the Chinese capital, Peking (Beijing)". Scroll down a bit, it says "The International force reached and occupied Beijing on August 14." I question both dates. The equivalent article in Chinese Wikipedia has August 14 as the date the Eight-Nation Alliance (minus the Germans) reaching the outskirts of Peking on the 14th, taking the city gates on the 15th, and occupying most of the city on the 16th. So, was it August 4th, August 14th or August 16th ? We need references. A "safer" anniversary to feature the whole Boxer Rebellion would be the anniversary of the signing of the Boxer Protocol. (The date is on the document, available in Chinese Wikisource.) -- PFHLai 12:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Zhejiang Death Toll
The death toll has risen to 114 in Zhejiang, according to CTV Newsnet. JodoYodo 05:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reminder. Actually, the article on the typhoon says 214 (+2 more in the Philippines). I've changed the text on MainPage to "more than 200". Hopefully, we don't need to update the number anymore. BTW, please use Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors next time you propose similar minor tweaks of MainPage contents. You may get a quicker response there. --PFHLai 12:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
AIDS Conference
I think that the XVI International AIDS Conference, 2006 that started last night in Toronto, Canada, warrents inclusion in the "In The News" section. It's the largest conference on HIV/AIDS ever and this is an event that affects the whole world. Jeff 11:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestion. Please make use of Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates if you really think this is major international news that should be on ITN. (I ain't so sure, unless they announce a new treatment and we have a wikiarticle on it.) -- PFHLai 12:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
To Pluto or not to be, that is the planet
The planet Pluto should be featured on the wikipedia or wikinews front page, because this may be the last time you can do so. Right now there is an astronomical congress in Prague going on, with 3.000 top nerds, who get to decide whether or not Pluto should be demoted to a space pebble and cease to belong to full-glory planets.
See the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4789531.stm
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.70.32.136 (talk • contribs) 12:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC).
- Thanks for the suggestion. When such a decision has been made, please update relevent wikiarticles and then propose a headline for In The News at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Don't forget to update Current events. Thanks. -- PFHLai 12:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)