Talk:Main Page

Sections of this page older than three days are automatically archived.

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

• Where is the error? An exact quotation of the text in question helps.
• Offer a correction if possible.
• References are helpful, especially when reporting an obscure factual or grammatical error.
• Time zones. The Main Page runs on Coordinated Universal Time (UTC, currently 23:41 on 3 June 2024) and is not adjusted to your local time zone.
• Can you resolve the problem yourself? If the error lies primarily in the content of an article linked from the Main Page, fix the problem there before reporting it here. Text on the Main Page generally defers to the articles with bolded links. Upcoming content on the Main Page is usually only protected from editing beginning 24 hours before its scheduled appearance. Before that period, you can be bold and fix any issues yourself.
• Do not use {{edit fully-protected}} on this page, which will not get a faster response. It is unnecessary, because this page is not protected, and causes display problems. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
• No chit-chat. Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere, such as the talk page of the relevant article or project.
• Respect other editors. Another user wrote the text you want changed, or reported an issue they see in something you wrote. Everyone's goal should be producing the best Main Page possible. The compressed time frame of the Main Page means sometimes action must be taken before there has been time for everyone to comment. Be civil to fellow users.
• Reports are removed when resolved. Once an error has been addressed, determined not to be an error, or the item has rotated off the Main Page, the report will be removed from this page. Check the revision history for a record of any discussion or action taken; no archives are kept.

Administrators: Clear all reports

Errors in the summary of the featured article

Please do not remove this invisible timestamp. See WT:ERRORS and WP:SUBSCRIBE. - Dank (push to talk) 01:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(June 7)

Monday's FL

(June 3, today)

Errors in the summary of the featured picture

Notice to administrators: When fixing POTD errors, please update the corresponding regular version (i.e. without "protected" in the page title) in addition to the Main Page version linked below.

Main page general discussion

1,800,000

Does anybody know which was the 1,800,000th article? --Camptown 18:56, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

You never know since all these articles being made may be deleted. And why does everyone want to know what the article was? AxG ^{@ ►talk} 19:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Morbid curiosity. Ouro (blah blah) 12:42, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

In the same line of thinking, does anybody know which was the 1,532,774th article? I just happen to like that number. Numero4 14:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

If you haven't noticed, mankind finds numbers that start a new set interesting. Where else 1,532,774 is not a new number, 1,800,000 starts the next 800th thousandth article in the second set of million. Just like reaching 100 starts another set of hundred, which is 200, so then 1,800,000 marks the beginning of the set of articles numbered from 1,800,000 to 1,899,999. When we reach 1,900,000, many will look forward to the articles numbered from 1,900,000 to 1,999,999. I hope that concludes that.In short, even clean numbers are fun to look at. Tourskin 20:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't mean to be a dick or anything, but 1,532,774 sets a new set in the ones place. With it I looked forward to article 1,532,775. And 1,532,774 is even, and I haven't seen it doing any drugs lately so I'll assume it's clean. RageGarden 04:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, 1,800,000 ends a set of articles from 1,700,001 to 1,800,000, in the same way that 2000 was technically the last year of the 20th century rather than the first year of the 21st. There was no year 0 or article 0. *Dan T.* 23:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

You guys are freaky. --Ouro (blah blah) 10:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok well I'm not gonna say your wrong and I am right. But which way is north? Which way is south? From whos perspective? Why is it that solar system is drawn in one particulary way? The answer to all these questions are standardized ones. My point above is that numbers that are whole and easily divisible such as 1,800,000,000 are "clean numbers", coz you cando all sorts of calculations on them. Yes, we measure using ones, as you craftly pointed out. We also measure using tens, hundreds, thousands and millions. Thats why we look forward to articles which take the 1st place, tenth place, hundredth place, thousandth place, millionth place. The number 1,532,774 is the 1.532774 millionth article. That is more of an "ugly" number (ugly being that its not easily divisible nor whole) than 1.8 (as in 1.8 millionth article) coz 1.8 is an easier number to work with. Why do you think they make money in 100, or ten or 5 bills instead of 1.5344 bills? Coz clean numbers are easier to work with, and easier to relate to.

If you want "clean" numbers, then why not find out what the 2,097,152nd article is? It is a factor of two and binary is far "cleaner" than decimal. Or better yet, let's find the 1,759,943rd article, since that's a prime number. Why does he want to know? He's curious. Quit trying to explain why 1,800,000 is a nice number (to you), or what he needs with this information, and answer the question. Oh, and in case you care, 1,532,774 is by all means a whole number (hopefully you know what that means). ♠ Åpeirophobia ♠ 06:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

"Speed of Speak". Speak the number one million five hundred and thirty two thousand seven hundred seventy four. At the same time, have your friend say one point eight million. See who finishes speaking first. Trigam41 15:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

North and South are actually standard wherever you go, because the magnetic field doesn't just change around as you move around the globe.

Yes it does: see magnetic north pole. It actually moves slightly more or less constantly, and there's the concept of magnetic reversals as well. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 00:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

but the general direction is the same.

I would guess that depends on how far away from the magnetic north pole you were when you started measuring.

It's only because you have ten fingers that you have bias towards these numbers! What if you had eleven ala the famous Dr. Seuss? 70.17.200.56 02:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Then the standard would change. We have a counting system that is in base 10. I have no bias to ten, all of teh scientific and mathematical community prefer tens. Thats why we use Logarithms in Mathematics most commonly in base 10 or natural base of e. Look here people, I am not saying you are all wrong and I am right. Everything is relative, everything has been standardized. All dimensions in Physics require an origin. Numbers have an origin, its zero thats we say 1 which means a single unit away from the origin. Don't bother with pointless arguments. Why are you being insulting ♠ Åpeirophobia ♠? Of course I know what whole numbers mean. I took A level Maths and Further Mathematics and got an A grade. I have taken two semesters of Calculus in the United States, I am well accomplished in Mathematics. You seem to lack the understanding of how multiples of 10 in numbers like 1,800,000 are cleaner because they are easier to deal with. Your ridiculous number of 1,532,774 generates a remainder when trying to divide it into tens. Do you know what that means?Tourskin 19:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Just because a number is divisble by ten doesn't mean it's easier to work with. I can divide 10 into factors of 5 and 2 (and 10 and 1 I guess), but I can divide 12 by 6,4,3,2. A number being divisible by ten doesn't mean it's more useful. --Ybbor^Talk 21:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, 12 and its multiples are much easier numbers to work with. For similar reasons, we do not buy eggs by the kilogram (rather, we count by the number of eggs), or firewood for that matter (rather, by volume). —Centrx→talk • 22:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

My intent is not to insult, I'm just pointing out the flaw in arbitrarily claiming that 1,800,000 is a "clean" number. Yes, it's perspective. 1,800,000's nice because it's divisible by 10, but 2,097,152 can easily be written as 2^21, whereas 1,800,000 would be 2^6 x 3^2 x 5^5, making it much uglier to work with sometimes. If you're working with calculus, anything that's a multiple of e is far simpler (in fact, in higher levels of math, logarithms of base 10 are almost never used and the natural logarithm is commonly written as just "log"), and multiples of pi are heaven when exercising your trigonometry muscles. My point with the prime number was that it could be just as interesting to someone as the 1,800,000th article. The Pengrowth Saddledome in Calgary holds 19,289 people during a Flames game, which just so happens to be a prime number. I'm sure someone should find that interesting. And I tore at you for the "whole number" thing because it annoys me when people attempt to explain mathematical concepts and apply their terminology wrong. ♠ Åpeirophobia ♠ 23:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I am glad we have reached an understanding then. My final point is that when counting articles, its easier to work with tens. Yes, in calculus you heavily rely on Natural logarithms rather than the artificial base 10 logarithims and pie radians are heaven for trig. There are other pretty numbers too like 12 and 2^21 isn't too bad a number either. My point earlier got a little corrupted as I argued forward. 1,800,000 is an easy number to work with certainly, relative to say working with a number that was 3.945734848. There are certainly easier numbers. Also, why do we have "Who wants to be a millionare as opposed to who wants to be an e^15 aire?" That was the point I was just trying to explain why some people wanted to know what the 1,800,000th article was. There wasn't an argument about it when wikipedia reached 1,500,000 articles not too long ago.Tourskin 00:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

By the way I meant 1.8 million was a whole number.Tourskin 23:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

So does all of that discussion mean that nobody knows what the 1,800,000^th article is? And also, I think that we should wait to continue this discussion when Wikipedia reaches 2 million articles and then see how easy that is to work with. Or maybe even 10 million, another new era. Or we should wait even longer until it reaches 100 million articles, if it ever happens. (I like "perfect" numbers that have only one digit and the rest are all 0's.) Powerfulmind ^please_talk^to_me! ^look_at^all_of^my_edits! 18:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

A perfect number is something entirely different than what you said. Oh, long sig. --Ouro (blah blah) 18:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

This is such a fun discussion and yet we did not answer the original question. I guess you can track what article no. 1,800,000 not what article reached that number first but what that article currently is.Tourskin 00:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Technically speaking, You could randomly pick any article and say it was article 180000 and you would be correct, as to which one reached it first, we'll never know Wardhog 20:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

A. What really is a perfect number?

B. When I said "perfect", I meant numbers that only have 1 unique digit, like 10,000,000 and not 1,800,000.

C. I figured out what the first article is! The Main Page! I know it doesn't help, but I just wanted to say something new!

D. I like making things colorful. Please ignore the fact that the D has no weird color. Powerfulmind ^please_talk^to_me! ^look_at^all_of^my_edits! 20:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

You fail at trying to be funny... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.100.43.102 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to be funny, Mr. No-Signature. I only said I like making things colorful. Powerfulmind ^please_talk^to_me! ^look_at^all_of^my_edits! 22:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

yeah, but your terminology is completely wrong. A perfect number is a number whose factors add up to the number. Eg. 6 has factors 1,2,and 3, which add up to 6. If you read the article it would make sense. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RageGarden (talk • contribs) 01:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

What does this chat have to do with the main page? --74.14.19.102 17:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

A. Good point, 74.14.19.102.

B. I don't care about what a "perfect" number really is. I'm just trying to make a point that I like numbers that have 1 unique digit with the rest 0's, no matter what they are called.

C. I'm not going to read the article because I don't care.

D. Please remember to sign your posts with ~~~~. I hate it when people don't sign. It's so anonymous. Powerfulmind ^please_talk^to_me! ^look_at^all_of^my_edits! 19:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Please remember that this talkpage is intended for discussions on topics related to the main page only. I hate it when people go off topic. It's so annoying. --74.13.129.83 04:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Good point, 74.13.129.83. This gave me a great idea. Let's create an article called For Talk Only and use it just for the talk page. Powerfulmind ^{please talk to me!} _{look at all of my edits!} 11:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Go to WP:VP. It's not a chatroom, though. --74.14.20.186 13:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Clocks

It would be nice if there'd be a clock table on the main page to display diffirent timezones around the world. like London Copenhagen Helsinki Moscow etc. Peace keeper II 07:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Creating something like the world clock and linking to it from the main page sounds worthwhile. El_C 21:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

it could be used to file that white space between the Welcome and the subject links. Mbisanz 05:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

A big issue is caching - what happens when that clock is inaccurate? How would caching affect such a clock for logged-out users? Ral315 » 06:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the logging in/out would be an issue, since the page content doesn't to my knowledge change based on in/out status. Caching is a problem to some degree, one answer would be an applet of some sort that kept the time constantly moving (like this http://www.time.gov/timezone.cgi?Eastern/d/-5/java), but that could burden the page with extra code, another idea might be an automatic re-loader on the main page (like this http://drudgereport.com/). Or we could treat it like this talk page and just give readers a purge link.Mbisanz 06:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

What white space? We don't all have large windows or displays. Bazza 12:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Probably the white space between "Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." and the links to the portals. We don't need large windows or displays to get that. BTW, I like this white space. It makes "Welcome to Wikipedia..." stand out. --74.14.17.161 12:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I have a pretty high res monitor, but I rarely browse full screen. Especially not reference sites like Wikipedia. I usually wind up with something like this: [1] Also, I've got a tablet PC that I often browse the web on that's 768x1024, which isn't much bigger than that screenshot. 69.95.50.15 13:19, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Why not browse full screen? --74.14.17.161 13:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Main Page alternative (PDA version) on your Tablet PC. Maybe easier to read? --74.14.17.161 13:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Uh, well, for a couple of reasons. One is that since I'm often using wikipedia as a reference I'm probably doing something in one of the other gazillion windows I have open and I like looking back and forth. (Sure, I'm a little disorganized.) The other main reason is more aesthetic; with my large widescreen monitor, lines of text get very long. I prefer text in vertical columns. Anyway, my point is just that right now Wikipedia is very forgiving of the shape and size of your browser window, and that's a quality I value. Just my two cents. 69.95.50.15 13:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Whoops, I hadn't thought about the sizing issue. Looking at your "no_whitespace image, I see there is empty space under the accounting sign in/create account text where a time-zone selector drop-down. Would everyone have that space "free" regardless of window size?Mbisanz 23:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

What time zone would the clock show? S. Randall 13:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Either all zones, a zone chooser, or UTC, probably. ffm ✎talk 15:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Could the clock be tied to the user that's logged in? For example, I could tell Wiki that I'm in the central time zone of the US and the clock would show 10:02 am. If my brother were logged in in Cali, the clock on his page would show 8:02 am. Trigam41 15:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

There's not enough room to show all time zones, there's no point in showing just the user's local time as most computer desktops have a clock showing already. What's left? UTC? Is there any point in having that on the Main Page? It's important here in talk, and it's at the top of this page. I don't see it adding any value on the main page. --Monotonehell 01:09, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually I'm pretty sure it's (UTC on the main page) been proposed before and I would argue it's more important there then here. Since the main page works on UTC, it would help people to understand why OTD is June 1st if it's no longer June 1st for them anymore or if it's not June 1st yet. It will also help people understand when TFA & TFP are going to change Nil Einne 11:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

If you want the time to show up, there's code here for your monobook.js that will display the clock somewhere in the bar with your username and the log out option. timrem 03:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

What does UTC even stand for, and what part of the world does it contain? Powerfulmind ^please_talk^to_me! ^look_at^all_of^my_edits! 18:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow, you have a huge sig! It stands for Coordinated Universal Time. ffm ✎talk 18:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment. Powerfulmind ^please_talk^to_me! ^look_at^all_of^my_edits! 20:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that was so much a compliment... perhaps read Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing_your_signature PseudoEdit ^(yak) _(track) 21:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about you, but it struck me as a compliment. Powerfulmind ^please_talk^to_me! ^look_at^all_of^my_edits! 22:42, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

We all want nice signatures but that thing measures the odd 9 lines. Particularly I would refer to this, which places the general guideline at about 2 or 3 lines. Long signatures can make all sorts of problems. I would consider trimming it down some. DoomsDay349 22:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Random Articles

Why do I see stub like articles most of the times when I open a 'Random article'? It's impossible to get a featured article!! 198.62.10.11 08:19, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, less than one in a thousand articles are featured. ShadowHalo 09:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

If you want a random featured article, go to Wikipedia:Featured content - it selects one of each type of featured content automatically. Laïka 12:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Why? We are hoping someone like you may help expand the stubs. Keep clicking. You'll find something you can edit soon. --74.14.17.161 13:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

If you want featured articles, edit them!Tourskin 19:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia should have a link that says "Random featured article". Powerfulmind ^please_talk^to_me! ^look_at^all_of^my_edits! 18:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

File a feature request. ffm ✎talk 18:39, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Are you talking to me or someone else? Powerfulmind ^please_talk^to_me! ^look_at^all_of^my_edits! 20:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Ask and ye shall recieve -> Random featured article Raul654 20:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

He also put that on my talk page. :) Powerfulmind ^please_talk^to_me! ^look_at^all_of^my_edits! 20:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Too many close-ups?

I notice that sometimes we've been cropping things a little close on the MainPage thumbnails. Especially if someone isn't terribly recognizable or having a remarkable expression on their face, I think we would be better served by medium shots which can show some character in the position of the body, and especially for historical figures, in the clothing.--Pharos 04:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Dunno about historical figures but isn't the point of pictures especially for ITN to show what someone looks like? So that people who've seen them before would recognise them and people who haven't may get an idea of what they look like and may recognise them in the future. A picture which doesn't show what someone looks like strikes me as a filler which I know at least one editor is strongly opposed to. Given our requirements, it's not uncommon that the photos aren't particularly good when showing a closeup of the face but still, I think it's better then nothing most of the time.Also, I would wonder whether you can really say someone isn't recognisable. Most people are probably recognisable if you've seen them enough. Even identical twins can often be differentiated by people who've seen them enough. Nil Einne 17:25, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

My point is that, especially for images of historical personages, a close-up doesn't do them justice, not in the context of the MainPage anyway. A close-up of the face of an obscure 18th century Swedish general will not look very interesting, but a medium shot that shows part of his uniform will give more of a flavor to his historical context. In short, I think that that facial recognizability as individuals (especially for fairly obscure persons, who very few people could recognize at a glance anyway), should be balanced against recognizability as 'types', which has more visual flair.--Pharos 20:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

For historical figures perhaps. But for modern people, I find the idea of deciding recognisability highly questionable and also dispute that it is fair to put them into 'types'. I mean I know we've had comments here from people who think an African in somewhat traditional costume looks like an Afghani but I don't think it's something we should be encouraging. Nil Einne 13:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

ITN Pics

Sorry to start this again, but I am really fed up of seeing Bertie Ahern on the ITN section for last 3-4 days. Can't we change the ITN pictures more often? Can't we have pictures related to each of the news item every day? 59.178.67.134 13:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Again, please help us and suggest a new picture that has a suitable licence (i.e. a free content licence) to replace it with. If such a picture could be found, it would have been changed already. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Time to flip the Bertie Ahern pic?

The Irish Election article is the last item on the In the News list, so might it not be time to flip it out and replace it with something else? Possibly the Alan Johnston photo? Cheers, Thewinchester ^(talk) 17:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

The image on Alan Johnston is used under fair use, so that's not an option. Frankly, at this point I'd just start hoping the next item added has a free image available.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:12, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

He's just pulling a Nancy Pelosi. The Placebo Effect 18:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Huh? ffm ✎talk 18:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm assuming the comment was in reference to the period of time a little while back when the ITN image remained a shot of Nancy Pelosi for quite a while and elicited many complaints.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:30, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint you Placebo and ors, but your mention is the first i've heard of any issues regarding Pelosi so a little AGF wouldn't be out of the question on my original comments. Heck, it's first time ever i've seen fit to comment on main page talk. Thewinchester ^(talk) 18:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Err...I'm pretty sure he meant Bertie Ahern was "pulling a Nancy Pelosi" by remaining on the page for ages, not that you were.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please 'flip' Bertie Bswee 19:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

See Talk:Main_Page/Archive_88#Nancy_Pelosi_Pic\This The Placebo Effect 22:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps a cropped picture of the May 2007 RCTV protests? --199.71.174.100 21:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Pls put in a caption, as done on TFA now, to explain what is shown in the ITN pic. --74.13.124.137 04:42, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

The caption has been removed from TFA. [2] Pity. I thought that was a good idea and should be implemented to the other pics on the main page. --74.13.129.170 19:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Words

Does anyone think there should be a word of the day? If there was one i can't remember it being there. Or maybe someones come up with this idea before. Just an idea..Wiki.user 18:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

This being an encyclopedia, not a dictionary, it would be somewhat out of place. Perhaps you were thinking of here? – Gurch 18:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

JFK planned bombing

I was going to but the page hasn't been edited at all today. Just wanted to make sure, instead of putting it there, and having someone respond when it's already not in the news anymore. --R ^ParlateContribs_@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 19:40, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Before you waste time posting on WP:ITN/C right now, just so you know, there has not been a seperate, well-written article here on Wikipedia that I am aware of about this incident, and John F. Kennedy International Airport only has one sentence about it. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 19:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps someone should start 2007 John F. Kennedy International Airport attack plot, a seperate, well-written article here on Wikipedia about this incident, as done with 2007 Fort Dix attack plot last month. --74.13.124.137 04:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Crash?

No new articles between 11.37 and 12.52 (UTC) today. Server problems? Camptown 13:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

see here--Melburnian 13:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Loss of session data

Is it my computer or is something making edits to an article that much more of a pain?Tourskin 15:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Please file a bug report. ffm ✎talk 18:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Select "Remember me" when you log in, and make sure your browser has cookies enabled – Gurch 12:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

DYK's

9 DYK's is a bit too much. Sometimes theres barely more than 5. Why not "save them" and say put about 6 or why not put up a moving average number of DYK's? Tourskin 01:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC) Per day, I mean.

DYKs are chosen to balance the two sides of the Main Page. More are added when there's a short FA blurb. So long as there are others to choose for the next update, it doesn't really matter. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 02:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, both ITN & OTD are one over their respective limit to counterbalance the two sides of the Main Page while DYK is excessively long. This is pushing POTD too far down. Please stick to the limits. --74.13.126.61 04:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps there should be the same size limit on all four main page boxes? So that no matter what resolution people view it in, they always balance. Since this main page balance thing is a chimera depending on end users' setups. Something like this guide on the project page to help editors check for size?:

Entire section should fit inside red box

Royal Game of Ur board, c. 2500 BCE

• ... that scholars disagree on whether the earliest-known game boards (example pictured) date to the Neolithic or the Early Bronze Age?
• ... that the Estado Novo deprived Aurora Rodrigues of sleep for more than two weeks to induce hallucinations?
• ... that the Hogmanay special Live into 85 was so shambolic it ended a 32-year tradition?
• ... that Casey Washington made the game-winning score that ended a record nine-overtime college football game?
• ... that the distinctive coloration of the giant panda appears to serve as camouflage in both winter and summer?
• ... that Saparinah Sadli defended one of her former students when Indonesia's State Intelligence Agency challenged her gendered exploration of the New Order regime?
• ... that the 18th-century hymn "Alas! and Did My Saviour Bleed" has been criticised because its lyrics have singers call themselves a "worm"?
• ... that Elizabeth Yeampierre has called Puerto Rico the "poster child for climate injustice" due to the devastation caused by Hurricane Maria?
• ... that Boston's World's Museum was a theatre, an aquarium, a menagerie, and a freak show?

With all the technicalities worked out properly of course. --Monotonehell 09:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the problem. I have tried viewing the Main Page using three different browsers on three different computers - and every way the page looks very balanced today. --Ghirla^-трёп- 14:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Main Page looks very balanced today because other sections compensated by being longer than what's prescribed in their respective guidelines. DYK is getting longer and longer, forcing ITN & OTD to be longer and longer to maintain balance. It's worse when TFA happens to be long that day, too. POTD gets shoved further down. Please stay within the limits. --74.14.19.102 16:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Now if you'll replace the ever-lengthening ITN, DYK and OTD with a featured list, it'll give visitors more bang for their buck. --Howard the Duck 03:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Front page libelous!

"1968 - Sirhan Sirhan mortally shot U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy inside the kitchen pantry of The Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles."

There is zero proof that it was Sirhan or Sirhan was alone. All independent (non-US-or-state-govt conducted) investigations conducted so far uniformly found that RFK's personal bodyguard was the only person who had the means and position to conduct the assasination, considering the type of handgun and angle of the shots. The bodyguard owned an exact same type and caliber weapon, which he later claimed to have lost or sold, but did not provide any proof, slip or lead. The famous door panel with bullet holes did disappear, etc. Very fishy indeed!

All in all, Wikipedia is the US gov't slave dog if it says on front page that Sirhan Sirhan killed Bobby Kennedy. In fairness the phrase "accused of" or controversially convicted" should be included in the text.

But of course since Sirhan is an arab, he is a lower being and cannot expect fair treatment from Wikipedia's overwhelming WASP posse! 82.131.210.162 09:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

This is the truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --Howard the Duck 11:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Does Britannica have to put up with this? [3] Freshacconci 12:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

If Britannica articles had wiki-style "Talk" pages or blog-style "Comments" sections, they certainly would. (Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if they'd already considered such a "comment on this article" feature and rejected it for that reason) – Gurch 12:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

"Overwhelmingly WASP posse"? Well, at least the phrasing of these comments stays fresh.

On a more serious note, to the topic starter: I think you'll find you get better results with a calm listing of objections, rather than hysterical ranting and accusations, which are usually just ignored.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

The current frontpage entry reads: "1968 - Sirhan Sirhan mortally shot U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy inside the kitchen pantry of The Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles."

I propose the entry should be rephrased as such: "1968 - U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated inside the kitchen pantry of Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles. Sirhan Sirhan was later convicted for the murder."

This way everybody could be happy and NPOV, as all info would still be mentioned, but the presentation would not carry the implied statement of Sirhan actually murdering RFK, just that he was convicted. As you know, many people are still convicted every year for capital crimes they did not commit and some guilty as sin do get away with most heinous murders, e.g. O. J. Simpson.

Oh and by the way it is a matter of fact that most Wikipedia contributors are white anglosaxons from USA and Britain, so no arabs can hope to get equal treatment here, because the arrogantly so-called "rest of the world" has fewer english speaking netizens than USA and UK. 82.131.210.162 14:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

BTW, the front page also mentions that on this day in 47, George Marshall gave a speech that became the basis of the Marshall Plan to rebuild Germany and Japan following WWII. This should be re-written as "Following WWII, Germany and Japan were rebuilt. In 1947, George Marshall gave a speech suggesting that this was a good idea, and coincidentally, some of the rebuilding money was called "the Marshall plan" but it may or may not have been related to George Marshall". That should satisfy the NPOV needs of the "I didn't go to high school" crowd, ensuring equality for all wikipedia users, not just the ones with educations. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:30, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

How much you wanna bet Raul is going to give you the Brick of Common Sense for that brilliant reply? Oh, wait! He has :) Well said, and congrats for earning the brick. — Deckiller 21:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

How do you know that most Wikipedia contributors are white anglosaxons from USA and Britain? And even if that's the case, it's not surprising because this is just the English language Wikipedia, not the Wikipedia as you seem to think. I expect if you go to tr:, fa:, ar:, he:, etc you'll find different general views and ways of putting things to those you seem not to like here. Bazza 15:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions to tweak the text on the main page should be posted at #Main page error reports above. --74.14.19.102 16:30, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

So the fact that Sirhan Sirhan was holding the gun and had to have his finger broken to get it out of his grasp didn't mean anything? Corvus cornix 22:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Here you can look at the photo of the official memorial plaque affixed to the Texas Scoolbook Warehouse. You will note the word "allegedly shot" in front of Oswald's name. Therefore even autorities feel the need to present a balanced view even on a memorial plaque. Both Kennedy assassinations are very mysterious and thus deserve caution. Why do you think Wikipedia is smarter than government. Here is the photo, well visible: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5c/IMG_1450.JPG.jpg

It should also be noted that Sirhan's revolver did not have as many chambers as the number of shots recorded. Therefore he was either not alone or he was merely firing blanks to divert attention and somebody else did the actual killing. The Discovery Channel investigated and found RFK's personal bodyguard killed the attorney general from behind.

Thirdly, en.wikipedia.org is not the anglosaxon wikipedia. It is the GLOBAL english language wikipedia, because english is one of the seven recognized world languages and therefore en.wikipedia.org should not carry WASP-leaning views, just because there are more atlantic people here than "rest-of-the-world". The british-american wikipedia is logically at en-us.wikipedia.org, contribute white man's burden influenced views there. The en.wikipedia.org should present all races with equal opportunity, this is where treatment of Sirhan Sirhan, an arab, on the front page is clearly a violation - since he was not given the benefit of "allegedly" or "controversially" where Oswald, a white caucasian was, as evidenced by the above photo'ed official plaque. 82.131.210.162 11:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I tried the link you gave - [4] - but it doesn't work. I don't much care for your racist attitude; nor your assumption that I or any of the other contributors above are white, American or British, or have an Anglosaxon heritage. Bazza 12:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

news

Is the Irish general election, 2007 more important than the destruction of Eurasia's only Geyser Valley? It may well be doubted. Give us some air! Never-ending news about elections are inherently boring. --Ghirla^-трёп- 14:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

It's just taken a while to fall off the bottom of the news items. At this stage it's also rather out of date as we've moved on to govt. formation, with only a week and a half left for parties and individuals to agree. zoney ♣ talk 14:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

As for the new item you mentioned: relax. It was only propsoed a few hours ago, and ITN isn't updated magically. Patience, grasshopper.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

My gripe is with the proliferation of political trivia in ITN, rather than with hot springs. For most people there can be nothing more boring than elections in tiny prosperous democratic countries such as Latvia and Ireland. Imho we should give more coverage to news from other fields of knowledge. --Ghirla^-трёп- 14:54, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Ghirla, then your comments on the issues, concerns, and problems raised on Loosen up the rules would be appreciated. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Ghirla, while I agree that more science based items would be beneficial to ITN. I must say that insulting "tiny prosperous democratic countries" isn't going to help the cause. Election news is limited to only National election results, not "political trivia", we don't get into subjective calls on which country is more important than others. What we need rather than name calling, is people getting candidates up to encyclopaedic standard, and then suggesting them on the candidates' page. --Monotonehell 17:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I fail to see how "tiny prosperous democratic country" qualifies as "name-calling" or "insult". That the news about elections in such countries are boring is a stern fact of life. I checked the page recommended by Zzyzx11 and found that some folks over there are seriously deluded about the purpose of the Main Page, leaving the ITN section to languish in its current sorry state. I had to leave this page in disgust, so as to let them to "highlight encyclopaedia" as they term it by posting thrilling "international" headlines about elections in Lesoto and Sierra Leone ad infinitum. Case closed. --Ghirla^-трёп- 17:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually I must apologise to you, I misread your "prosperous" as "preposterous". But the rest of what I said is still valid. A lot of people don't know of the consensus that has developed behind ITN, and the history, events and reasons for the consensus. Every guideline and practise that is upheld has a good reason for its existence. You're appearing very hot-headed and irrational about this by the way. --Monotonehell 18:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I discovered that there are no guidelines along the lines I was expected to follow. Not every practice "upheld" in the project is beneficial. For instance, I was told with an air of utmost authority that ITN is here to "highlight" the quality of encyclopaedia. No it's not. Its purpose is to link our readers to essential pages about ongoing events, however stubby these may be, so that they could be expanded by dint of collaborative effort. It's about collective work rather than about pleasing a group of formalistic, adminitis-infected people who don't give a hoot about what's happening in mainspace. My favorite guideline in Wikipedia states that our encyclopaedia is not consistent, and that's its not really a defect. Consequently, let's stop building Potemkin villages on Main Page. --Ghirla^-трёп- 19:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Why do you need extra guidelines to remind you that you need references in encyclopedia articles? --74.14.20.186 13:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that admins in charge of ITN think they should give "mainspace people" enough time to expand a news article, to provide at least dozen references, and to make sure that enough people commented on the nomination, so that it would not be perceived as "controversial". A week may pass before the entry is "promoted"; by that time it is hopelessly stale. In other words, they replicate the DYK model, without understanding the fundamental difference between these templates. --Ghirla^-трёп- 06:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Hang on, I'm not following you. DYK is to highlight new or newly unstubed articles. TFA is to showcase articles that are our best work. OTD is to highlight articles that have date specific events in them. So what does ITN do? --Monotonehell 09:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Traditionally ITN is not specifically new news headlines, but rather highlighting updated articles that pertain to subjects in the news. Hence the section is current, but not necessarily up to date. It's all rather ad-hoc at present, but then, so are most other areas of Wikipedia; given the "rules/guidelines/random mutterings" are ad-hoc. zoney ♣ talk 12:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Ad-hoc or no ad-hoc, the incident highlights the absence of ITN guidelines because the people responsible for this project are content to follow their own preconceptions and whims on the subject (claimed to represent "unwritten consensus" or something alone these lines). Of course it's easy to replicate the structure and rules of DYK without bothering to frame guidelines and to refer newbies to "unwritten guidelines" or "consensus" when inspiration strikes. I expect something more productive than constant appellations to "ad hoc", however. --Ghirla^-трёп- 12:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Why would it take a week to write a short paragraph and add references? DYK asks for more. --74.14.20.186 13:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Geyser Valley is more than a short paragraph, yet it is deemed inappropriately short and unreferenced on account of "unwritten guidelines" advocated by Monotonehell and others. --Ghirla^-трёп- 13:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

"unwritten guidelines" is harsh words and that really alludes to the fact that the article is not in good shape and needs to be improved before it is showcased on the frontpage. Instead of complaining here, the efforts should be put in improving the article. Geyser Valley might have reached ITN by now if you've properly directed your energy. --74.14.20.186 14:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Victoria train crash

Surely the train crash today should make the in the news, im all the other side of the world in Ireland so perhaps some-one a bit closer could write it up.plokt 16:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

See WP:ITN/C & Wikinews. --74.14.19.102 16:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

cheersplokt 21:12, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Real Wiki Library

Wiki has a lot of very general and brief entries on subjects. However, it would be SO much better if people can start putting in BOOKS instead of mere paragraphs on a subject. Of course it would be books that can be distributed without violations.

To prove my point, the subject of philosophy has no where near the amount of information that would be needed to understand the subject. Nothing short of giving a comprehensive guide and host of all the BASIC books would make it helpful to understand the subject.

Please allow the automatic upload of PDF and/or text files to wiki —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Twinscythe (talk • contribs) 21:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

You may be interested in our sister project, Wikibooks. Corvus cornix 21:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a database of books. But as Corvus cornix just mentionned there's wikibooks, but I beleive that's for community-written textbooks. However if you want to upload public domain books, you'd want to go to wikisource. --Dandin1 21:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I wonder why User:Twinscythe didn't know about Wikibooks and Wikisource. It's probably because TFA & DYK are excessively long, forcing ITN & OTD to be also long just to balance the two sides on the main page, then forcing POTD down, and then shoving the section on the sister projects so far down that he/she misses them.

Please stick to the limits. --74.13.129.83 04:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

While sticking to the limits may be wise I question your claims. Wikinews is linked to in ITN and it's usually visible with scrolling but we still get lots of people who don't know about wikinews and think ITN is wikinews. The fact is that most people only give the main page a cursory glance and therefore miss things even if they are fairly prominent and this holds true even when people decide to come here to complain about something Nil Einne 05:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the link to Wikinews is at the bottom of ITN, just above OTD. --74.14.20.186 13:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

National Slayer Day

That's tomorrow, June 6th. Will wikipedia mention it on its main page? 70.59.74.162 22:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Nope. To American-centric, Not a recongnized holiday, Run by fans, and not in the Slayer article. And, where would it go? WP:OTD? ffm ✎talk 00:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I was going to ask WTF National Slayer Day is but from the sound of things I'm glad not to know. Anyway Slayer is a FA which has not yet been TFA and a request was put in to feature it today but it was not featured for whatever reason (perhaps we've had too many pop culture stuff of late). You could wait until next year and ask for it again. In any case, we still won't mention National Slayer Day because it doesn't appear to be prominent enough that it should be mentioned in the Slayer summary Nil Einne 05:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Featured Portal

Would it be possible to put a featured portal of the month on the main page? It wouldn't have to contain any text from the portal...just a link in the upper right where the main portals are listed would suffice. I think the formatting could work, and it would be pretty unobtrusive, yet simultaneously a good motivator for bringing portals up to featured status. 67.86.86.217 04:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

See Talk:Main Page/Archive 98#Portals on the mainpage. --74.13.129.83 04:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

DYK & ITN

ITN has too much old news and needs pruning. DYK has too many new items and wants more space. Let's put them both on the right side. ITN can stay short and leave lots of space for DYK. This way, we'll have less problem balancing the two sides on the main page. OTD used to be beneath TFA, anyways. --74.13.129.83 04:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)