Talk:Main Page: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Great job on the sidebar: comment |
←Blanked the page |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Main Page discussion header}} |
|||
{{Main Page discussion footer}} |
|||
<!-- Please start new discussions at the bottom of this talk page, Thank you. --> |
|||
== Ipswich serial killer deserves mention? == |
|||
I am not entirely thrilled with the inclusion of the investigation into a serial killer that killed five prostitutes in Ipswich, England. Please tell me if even more heinous incidents in the past, like the Prospect Avenue murders of 2004 in Kansas City (as many as 12 women linked to one murderer; Terrance Gillard is awaiting trial on those murder charges), BTK, or anything comparable worldwide have been included on the front page before. --[[User:KHill-LTown|KHill-LTown]] 01:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Entries are considered on their own merits, not on precedents, and "heinousness" of an event is up to your POV. If you really do want to go into statistics, the number of fatalities so far in this case matches that of the [[Amish school shooting]] mentioned in ITN a while back. Albeit that was a single event, but then you could compare this serial killer case with [[Jack the Ripper]] – again, five fatalities. Note that I'm not saying that five killings is the bar for inclusion. I'm just saying that using precedents to back up or discredit an entry is a bad idea. In this case, the murders are getting worldwide news coverage and we have an updated article. Technically the requirements for inclusion are met. [[User:GeeJo|GeeJo]] <sup>[[User talk:GeeJo|(t)]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/GeeJo|(c)]]</sub> <small>• 01:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:As an addendum, I do sometimes wonder why people get so hung up about notability of ITN items. Noone protests when DYK gets entries about obscure twelfth-century Romanian warlords (though Eurovision entries do seem to get some people worked up). In my opinion, if an article is current, and notable enough to avoid AFD, it can be considered for ITN. [[User:GeeJo|GeeJo]] <sup>[[User talk:GeeJo|(t)]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/GeeJo|(c)]]</sub> <small>• 01:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:It seems ITN can't win. Further above is someone complaining of its exclusion (non-incusion?) and here is someone complaining of its inclusion. On its merits, it's been featured on UK, Australian and US TV network news. Just because something of greater "heinousness" has missed out in the past has no bering on a current consideration. ITN inclusions rely on editor submissions. If something is never suggested; no matter how newsworthy, encyclopedic and noteworthy; it will miss out. |
|||
That's it! One more complaint and no one shall have ITN! ;) jokes ;) --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 03:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Yeah, lets get rid of it.--[[User:Greasysteve13|Greasysteve13]] 06:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I don't get it; why is no one complaining about the Chinese River Dolphin or the election of a president in an unrecognized state that sat on ITN for days? I agree the item is questionable, but I fear we won't be able to please everyone. -- '''[[User:Tariqabjotu|<font color="black">tariq</font><font color="gray">abjotu</font>]]''' 20:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Those things you meantioned are heaps more important.--[[User:Greasysteve13|Greasysteve13]] 11:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Somebody is being questioned over the murders. I think this should be added. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/6189409.stm]. <small><span style="border: 1px solid green; -moz-border-radius:10px">[[User:Codu|'''<span style="background-color:White; color:FireBrick; -moz-border-radius-topleft:10px; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft:10px"> Codu </span>''']][[User talk:Codu|<span style="background-color:green; color:white; -moz-border-radius-bottomleft:10px; -moz-border-radius-topleft:10px"> talk </span>]][[Special:Contributions/Codu|<span style="background-color:green; color:white"> contribs </span>]][[Special:Emailuser/Codu|<span style="background-color:green; color:white; -moz-border-radius-bottomright:10px; -moz-border-radius-topright:10px"> email </span>]]</span></small> 12:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
{{seealso|Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates#12 December}} |
|||
==Announcements about Wikibooks== |
|||
Is it possible to make major announcements about Wikibooks on the main Wikipedia page? [[User:Robinhw|Robinhw]] 11:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
What about one of your nice boxes with: |
|||
[http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Main_Page Wikibooks!] From books for university such as [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikibooks/en/3/3b/Special_relativity.pdf Special Relativity] to books for infants such as [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikibooks/en/c/cc/Big_Cats.pdf Big Cats] Wikibooks has a book for everyone. |
|||
[[User:Robinhw|Robinhw]] 12:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Not really; we have nine sister projects, not even including other-language Wikipedias, Wikibooks is only one of them. The English Wikipedia may be the biggest Wikimedia project, but it's still a separate project, and isn't really the place to promote other ones. Anyway, is that really a major annoucement? Looks more like an advert to me. --[[User:Samuel Blanning|Sam Blanning]]<sup>[[User talk:Samuel Blanning|(talk)]]</sup> 13:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Wikibooks is Wikipedia's closest relative in terms of purpose. It aims to give students anywhere in the world free access to otherwise expensive factual texts. My guess is that Wikibooks will go through the same development cycle as Wikipedia but over a period of 3-5 times as long because books are time consuming. This is why some publicity to draw in Wikipedia contributors would be useful. In 2 years Wikipedia went from a big encyclopaedia to the biggest encyclopaedia, the growth was explosive. Having 3-5 times the lead time, in 6-10 years Wikibooks will probably be THE source for on-line textbooks. But a bit more publicity could cut this lead time in half. So, yes, I am asking for an advert! [[User:Robinhw|Robinhw]] 10:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==From a recent new user== |
|||
It would be great if there was a very ''clear'' way for folks to post comments on featured articles if they want to. I mean a redirect from "discuss this article" to this page whenever a page is featured (or something like that). I inadvertently went to the article's talk page for a featured article to post a comment, and think that was incorrect. I spent something like 20 minutes looking for the right link to post, because I knew it had to be there somewhere. Please consider it. Thank you.<span class="plainlinks">[[User:NinaEliza|NinaEliza]] ([[User talk:NinaEliza|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/NinaEliza|contribs]] <small>•</small> [http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate?username={{urlencode:NinaEliza}}&site=en.wikipedia.org <span style="color:#002bb8">count</span>] <small>•</small> [{{SERVER}}/wiki/Special:Log?user={{urlencode:NinaEliza}} <span style="color:#002bb8">logs</span>] <small>•</small> [[Special:Emailuser/NinaEliza|email]]</span>) 18:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:The article's talk page is always the proper location to discuss the article, even if it is on the Main Page (as a Featured Article or anything else). Those discussing it here are doing so in the wrong place, not you. —[[User:Cuivienen|Cuivi]]<font color=green>[[User:Cuivienen/Esperanza|é]]</font>[[User talk:Cuivienen|nen]] 18:14, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::I see. Thanks for the information.<span class="plainlinks">[[User:NinaEliza|NinaEliza]] ([[User talk:NinaEliza|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/NinaEliza|contribs]] <small>•</small> [http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate?username={{urlencode:NinaEliza}}&site=en.wikipedia.org <span style="color:#002bb8">count</span>] <small>•</small> [{{SERVER}}/wiki/Special:Log?user={{urlencode:NinaEliza}} <span style="color:#002bb8">logs</span>] <small>•</small> [[Special:Emailuser/NinaEliza|email]]</span>) 18:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Help! Vandalized User Page! == |
|||
I didn't know where else to go for help because most of my user page was deleted. Can you please restore it to it's original form? Can you also trace the IP that vandalized it. Please and thank you! Season Greetings!--[[User:Kitsumiti|kitsumiti]] 19:35, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Done. I reverted back to your last edit. If you go to 'history' on your user page you can see who did it.--[[User:Bryson109|Bryson]] 19:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Okay thank you Bryson! I found out the IP of the vndalizer is 216.36.138.14 Can you please give them heck from me? Thanks! |
|||
--[[User:Kitsumiti|kitsumiti]] 19:55, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Well, the best we can do now is just warn him, and that's what Bryson109 did. '''[[User:Nishkid64|<span style="background:#009;color:#7FFF00">Nish</span><span style="background:cyan;color:#009">kid</span>]][[User talk:Nishkid64|<span style="background:orange;color:navy blue">64</span>]]''' 22:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Vandals do this for attention, so "giving them heck" is the worst thing you can do. Revert, warn, ignore. That's how you deal with them. [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 23:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::I'd say just revert and ignore. Warning just eggs them on. Eventually they get bored with being destructive. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 10:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::Completely agree. [[User:Aranherunar|Aran]]|[[User_talk:Aranherunar|heru]]|[[Special:Contributions/Aranherunar|nar]] 04:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Okay! Thanks everybody! I havn't been here for a while soI can forget a few things.[[User:Kitsumiti|kitsumiti]] 19:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Heavy Britain in OTD == |
|||
I have no particular objection to Britain, but it seems as if we have too many British entries: two entries dealing explicitly with Britain and one that deals with Britain and the future US. However, before I replace one of them (probably Cromwell) with something else significant from [[December 16]] (probably the Polish president assassination), I'd like to see some others' opinions. —[[User:Cuivienen|Cuivi]]<font color=green>[[User:Cuivienen/Esperanza|é]]</font>[[User talk:Cuivienen|nen]] 01:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: I object. You are comparing Britain to the rest of the encyclopedia. It may not be that Britain has too many entries, but that other entries you are comparing it with are too few in content. The point of Wikipedia is to add true knowledge not remove it. Merge, maybe, but thats for another discussion. Don't delete simply because theres alot of facts!! Add facts to other entries. In an encyclopedia, there are entries with an article each for many variants. This is inevitable. Sometimes theres more to talk about one topic then another. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:68.6.230.65|68.6.230.65]] ([[User talk:68.6.230.65|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/68.6.230.65|contribs]]){{#if:{{{2|}}}| {{{2}}}|}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> |
|||
::The various sections don't coordinate, and sometimes we get a lot of articles on the main page on the same topic. There was a day where the headline articles in the news section, Featured Article, and Did you know were all about Poland. I personally don't think it's a big deal, but you can suggest articles in the main page here: [[Wikipedia:In the news]], [[Wikipedia:Did you know?]] and [[Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests]] [[User:Borisblue|Borisblue]] 05:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::As 68.6.230.65 alluded to, many of the entries listed on [[December 16]] fail the requirements of [[WP:SA#Criteria for listing items on this set of pages]]. Either the events are not moderate to great historical significance, or they are still relatively incomplete or stub articles. [[User:Zzyzx11|Zzyzx11]] [[User talk:Zzyzx11|(Talk)]] 06:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::The emphasis on Britain is an artefact of the fact that en.wikipedia is the english language Wikipedia and Britain, having a first world, internetworked, cosmopolitan society is home to a large number of Wikipedia contributors and readers. [[User:Robinhw|Robinhw]] 10:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Someone may complain there are too many American articles... [[User:86.129.93.175|86.129.93.175]] 13:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Of course. However, the guidelines, especially for individual sections of the Main Page, are to always have no more than two articles, usually only one unless absolutely unavoidable, about a specific topic or country. Of course, we often have many articles spaced across the Main Page about the same country or topic, but that is neither here nor there. [[Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries]] says, "If at all possible, the array of topics should be varied, and not exhibit, just for example, tech-centrism or Amerocentrism," which includes Britannocentricism. —[[User:Cuivienen|Cuivi]]<font color=green>[[User:Cuivienen/Esperanza|é]]</font>[[User talk:Cuivienen|nen]] 15:54, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::::: Yes, variety is preferred, but replacing the UK stuffs with some other items that fail the criteria for listing items there is not the solution. We would just end up with a different complaint from a different complainer. [[Gabriel Narutowicz]] ? Seems too stubby to me. Please consider beefing up other pages with historical significance on that day and then feature them instead. -- [[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 20:34, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::::: I like the first [[Canterbury Pilgrims]] reaching [[Christchurch]], [[New Zealand]], i.e. very far away from the UK. Would this still be Britannocentric ? --[[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 20:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Top Bar== |
|||
Time this took up a bit less space. The bit about donations could be merged with the bit below.[[User:81.168.46.189|81.168.46.189]] 10:07, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: Click dismiss (after you've donated! :) ) you never need gaze upon it again. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 10:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Doesn't answer my question. Suppose I don't want to donate: it doesn't cause WP any harm to squash that.[[User:81.168.125.50|81.168.125.50]] 11:27, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:I didn't donate but it disappeared. How can I bring it back ? [[User:Frigo|Frigo]] 12:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::It will come back if you log out --[[User:Melburnian|Melburnian]] 12:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: If you don't want to see the donations message, just <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Special:Userlogin|type=signup}} create an account]</span>. This not only hides the message but allows you to customize the interface however you want – [[User:Gurch|Gurch]] 16:02, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
=== Donations === |
|||
Please remove the "Donate via PayPal" button on every page <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/85.130.164.38|85.130.164.38]] ([[User talk:85.130.164.38|talk]]) 12:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned --> |
|||
: See the button labelled "dismiss" on the right-hand side? Click it. Then <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Special:Userlogin|type=signup}} create an account]</span>. That way you don't see the standard non-fundraiser message either – [[User talk:Gloy|Gloy]] 16:05, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::There isn't a dismiss button. [[User:147.197.251.136|147.197.251.136]] 18:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Only logged in users see the dismiss button. Perhaps the template should be fixed so it can be dismissed for IP addresses as well? [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 18:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::I can't see the dismiss button either. Strange... [[User:FellowWikipedian|FellowWikip]]<font color="green">[[User:FellowWikipedian/Esperanza|e]]</font>[[User talk:FellowWikipedian|dian]] 01:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Obituaries? == |
|||
Why do we not have links to recently deceased notables like the German Wiki? I've always found that very interesting. [[User:Samsara|Samsara]] ([[User talk:Samsara|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/Samsara|contribs]]) 13:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I agree. {{unsigned|2006 168.215.59.254}} |
|||
:We do put them in the In the News section, under certain circumstances. See [[Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page]] for what gets listed. For recently deceased people, the qualification is: |
|||
::''A death should only be placed on ITN if it meets one of the following criteria: (a) the deceased was in a high ranking office of power at the time of death, (b) the deceased was a key figure in their field of expertise, and died unexpectedly or tragically, (c) the death has a major international impact that affects current events. The modification or creation of multiple articles to take into account the ramifications of a death is a sign that it meets the third criterion.'' |
|||
:So if the death is newsworthy (but just being famous and dieing doesn't qualify) it will get listed. [[User:Koweja|Koweja]] 17:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: The link [[Recent deaths]] is at the bottom of the ITN section on MainPage. --[[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] 19:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Wangchuck? == |
|||
Wangchuck? That's really the name of the Bhutanese royal family? Oh my God ... |
|||
Thank God this didn't happen on a weekday. The vandalism would have been off the scale until we protected the article. [[User:Daniel Case|Daniel Case]] 19:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== English Bill of Rights 1689 == |
|||
The summary says that the English [[Bill of Rights 1689]] asserts ''positive'' rights, but the rights listed in the article are all negative ("freedom from") or at least arguably so ("freedom to"). —[[User:Tamfang|Tamfang]] 20:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== "x of which are Featured Articles" == |
|||
{{seealso|Talk:Main Page/Archive 84#Number of FAs mentioned as well as total number of articles, please!}} |
|||
I think that it's kind of strange that the "featured articles" text on the main page header is in title caps. I.e. "1198 of which are Featured Articles" instead of "1198 of which are featured articles". Isn't it so that this should just be the latter, i.e. "featured articles", instead of with a capital for every word? <tt><span style="color: orange;">function</span> '''msikma'''(user:<span style="color: #002bb8;">[[User:Msikma|UserPage]]</span>, talk:<span style="color: #002bb8;">[[User_talk:Msikma|TalkPage]]</span>):<span style="color: #002bb8;">[[Void]]</span></tt> 16:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Yes, that bit's just been added and still needs refining. I've already edited it once to add a missing comma; someone else has reworded it. I've just changed "Featured Articles" to lowercase as you suggest; it'll probably be changed again soon, so I suggest you check back tomorrow and see if it's still to your liking – [[User:Gurch|Gurch]] 16:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::I've removed the featured article count from the header. Please revert me if its inclusion was discussed somewhere and reflects consensus, but this statistic already was added to the top of the main page (in the ''Today's featured article'' section, where it looks much better and makes far more sense to newbies). —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 17:17, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Hmm. Well, that's the end of that, I guess – [[User:Gurch|Gurch]] 23:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Zarqawi article deleted? == |
|||
What happened to the [[Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi]] article?--[[User:Azer Red|<font color="Darkred">'''Azer Red'''</font>]] [[User talk:Azer Red|<font color="Red">''Si?''</font>]] 17:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Yeah I just noticed that too. [[User:JP06035|<font color="black">→</font> <font color="#0084C9">J</font><small><font color="#FCA311">A</font><font color="black">R</font><font color="#009E49">E</font><font color="#E5053A">D</font></small>]] <sup>[[User_talk:JP06035|<font color="black">(t)</font>]]</sup>  17:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::When sensitive information (such as a Wikipedia user's personal contact information) is put into an article as vandalism, the entire article is deleted and then every edit but the offending edit is restored. This leads to FAs (most commonly) being deleted for short periods of time, usually less than a minute. It doesn't happen too often. —[[User:Cuivienen|Cuivi]]<font color=green>[[User:Cuivienen/Esperanza|é]]</font>[[User talk:Cuivienen|nen]] 19:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::Merci. [[User:JP06035|<font color="black">→</font> <font color="#0084C9">J</font><small><font color="#FCA311">A</font><font color="black">R</font><font color="#009E49">E</font><font color="#E5053A">D</font></small>]] <sup>[[User_talk:JP06035|<font color="black">(t)</font>]]</sup>  19:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Can someone PLEASE take that big ass donation thing off the top of the page? == |
|||
Please? - Anonymous, 2:13 12/17.06 <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/208.19.12.207|208.19.12.207]] ([[User talk:208.19.12.207|talk]]) 22:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned --> |
|||
:Just click the "dismiss" link to the right of it. That sets a [[HTTP cookie|cookie]] that will prevent the donation bar from appearing. If you do not have a cookie-enabled browser, however, I guess you're out of luck --[[User:Jmax-|Jmax-]] 22:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::Plus you have to be a registered user. [[User:Chris as I am Chris|Chris as I am Chris]] 22:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
How about moving it to the sidebar? It would be still prominent on every page, but less intrusive. [[User:Jmount|Rafy]] 00:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:It's ''supposed'' to be intrusive. If it's easily ignored, people won't get guilted/annoyed into contributing. See [[pledge drive]] for background on the annoyance factor, though people outside the U.S. that have state-funded public stations may find this whole idea weird. - [[User:BanyanTree|Banyan]][[User talk:BanyanTree|Tree]] 00:35, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:: Believe it or not, in previous fund drives, people have looked at the size of the notice vs. the number of donations, and it actually does increase donations significantly to make it slightly more intrusive. It's a bit of a pain, but it's worth it for the Foundation. [[User:Ral315|Ral315]] ([[User talk:Ral315|talk]]) 07:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::well, if this is an arms race of sorts, does this mean it will take up half the screen, flash and play jingle-bells in two years' time? I find it bearable still, but the 'dismiss' link will prompt many people in reflexively switching it off without even looking at it -- so maybe a small bar that cannot be switched off will turn out to produce a greater effect than a big annoying banner you switch off and forget §about in two seconds. [[User:Dbachmann|dab]] <small>[[User_talk:Dbachmann|(𒁳)]]</small> 10:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::: No, it won't. For starters, not all English Wikipedia readers are Christian or in the Northern Hemisphere, and thus ''[[Jingle Bells]]'' is irrelevant. Anyway, take a look at the pledge drive. As you may seem, there's multiple people/organizations matching donations, something we have never had before. This trend will continue, and will mean our goals are reached quicker. There is no other way to keep Wikimedia running as one of the top 10 most visited websites internationally, other than soliciting money. So get over it. -- [[User:Zanimum|Zanimum]] 16:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Choose one of the following actions: |
|||
* Create an account, log in, donate, click dismiss. |
|||
* Create an account, log in, don't donate, click dismiss. |
|||
* Don't create an account, put up with it, stop complaining, it won't be there forever. |
|||
--[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 06:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
: i just use adblock to remove them... [[User:The Uber Ninja|The Uber Ninja]] 09:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::If you're logged in just press "dismiss". --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 09:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:: Yes, and adblock shouldn't be able to remove it, as it's hosted on-site. -- [[User:Zanimum|Zanimum]] 16:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::: Uh... why not? The Adblock extension for Firefox, and most other decent ad blockers, can block individual scripts, images or objects without blocking an entire site – [[User:Gurch|Gurch]] 23:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Who changes it? == |
|||
Who changes the main page articles? |
|||
[[User:Comperr|Comperr]] 05:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:It's not just one person, it's a whole process. Each section is handled by a different project. See the help boxes at the top of this page for the individual sections. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 06:00, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
[[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]] '''Done''' <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Comperr|Comperr]] ([[User talk:Comperr|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Comperr|contribs]]){{#if:16:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)| 16:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)|}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> |
|||
== Sidebar changed == |
|||
Just in case anyone noticed... (I didn't!) the sidebar has changed. I've started a little thread at the [[Wikipedia_talk:Village_pump_%28proposals%29/Sidebar_redesign#Sidebar_changed.21|talk page of the redesign page]]. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] 10:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Languages of Wikipedia == |
|||
I'm used to use only the english Wikipedia, although my native tongue is finnish. I think it's best to participate to the most active Wikipedia in order to gain the most synergia through diversity and confrontation. We should build our native Wikipedia as a translation, not as an original version. But I've discovered a boundary, namely that history articles seem to be written only in the native language, and it seems appropriate to do so rather than to leave it for other nationalities. It would be negligence towards one's own cultural identity and linguistic distictiveness to write the history of his own culture in a foreign language. English is probably the most wide-spread language in the world. This can be measured by defining the areas of the world where some fixed percentage of people who know english. Thus I ask, should we write our own history in our own language, or write it first in english, while having a comfort of the idea that it's going to be translated? [[User:Teemu Ruskeepää|Teemu Ruskeepää]] 11:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Bear in mind that posting the question here will introduce a major bias to the answers you receive. Editors of the English-language Wikipedia are more likely to encourage you to edit the English-language version, just as editors on the Finnish Wikipedia would encourage you to post there. Ultimately it's up to you which you contribute to, there are pros and cons for both choices. [[User:GeeJo|GeeJo]] <sup>[[User talk:GeeJo|(t)]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/GeeJo|(c)]]</sub> <small>• 12:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:Firstly, this is probably not the best place to start such a discussion. Try [[Wikipedia:Village pump]] or possibly somewhere up in the meta. But I think that since you have a grasp of both Finnish and English that you should contribute to both language versions of "your history". Once in Finnish and once in English. The only neglegence would be denying one or the other language groups the knowledge. --[[User:Monotonehell|Monotonehell]] 13:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Featured Pictures == |
|||
There should be a way to nominate pictures for the main page without the pics having to be featured first. Although the title is "featured pictures," many stunning and amazing pics are not featured. There should be some sort of a voting process. [[User:Seldon1|Seldon1]] 15:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates|There is.]] --[[User:Maxamegalon2000|Maxamegalon2000]] 16:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Seem to be in the middle of the something == |
|||
Hello. I recently started an account today and seem to have been drawn into something really nasty. Someone is posting that I am a different person who has apparently committed crimes against this site. It was also posted out where I live by an ip address, which is kind of unsettling. I want to clear this up right now, especially after a strange message was left for me. I was introduced to this website by a couple of different people and just came over to have a good time. -[[User:CamelCommodore|CamelCommodore]] 16:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*CamelCommodor's IP address and address was not posted. The matter has been referred to the ArbCom. --[[User:Durin|Durin]] 16:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
* Try [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard]] for help. --[[User:64.229.4.143|64.229.4.143]] 18:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Great job on the sidebar == |
|||
Great job! Now the "search box" is lower on the screen, so I am forced to scroll down to get to it. I am very happy that this change took place. I wish you the best of luck with future changes! Maybe next time the box could change positions or disappear when the mouse pointer hovers above it. The great thing is that, if changes keep making Wikipedia worse, all articles are soon going to end up like what is written above about Dr. R. Vaithilingam (I see that the Vaithilingam part was removed; it was a rambling about some professor in India, written in poor English). [[User:89.120.193.125|89.120.193.125]] 21:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:Are you running on 640x480 resolution or something? —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']] • 21:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::The box could feasibly disappear at 800x600 if you were using Internet Explorer and had toolbars and other dodgy junk cluttering the thing up. If that's the case here, then get rid of it rather than moaning at Wikipedia – [[User:Gurch|Gurch]] 23:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::I use Firefox with the navigation bar only, at an 800x600 resolution. With the scroll bar up, I only see half of the search bar. I can write but I must scroll down to see the buttons, if I need to.--[[User:Cloviz|cloviz]] 23:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::::Ah, so it does, if you use the default skin. Yes, that is a bit of a problem. Perhaps "interaction" should be below "search"? – [[User:Gurch|Gurch]] 23:31, 18 December 2006 (UTC) |
|||