Jump to content

Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Errors in In the news: remove nascent argument, not an error, OP was directed to ITN/C
Line 10: Line 10:
== Errors in the [[Template:Did you know|current]] ''Did you know...''==
== Errors in the [[Template:Did you know|current]] ''Did you know...''==
<!-- Please edit after this line, thanks -->
<!-- Please edit after this line, thanks -->
In today's final hook, "parts" has been tweaked to "portions", but "sections" might be better. [[User:Edwardx|Edwardx]] ([[User talk:Edwardx|talk]]) 12:21, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
:I agree, that's what I had corrected it to. But {{U|EEng}} changed it to portions, then {{U|Gatoclass}} changed it to "portions". It's most commonplace (certainly from where I come) to talk about "sections" of track, not "bits", "parts" or "portions". I tried, but of course if I change it now, I'll be "editing through protection" to impose my "personal preference", and doubtless be accused of wheel warring, so I'll leave it to someone else. Sorry. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 12:55, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
:: It was originally "bits" then got changed to "sections" and then "parts". I thought "bits" was more appropriate as it was more in keeping with the informal tone of "get out and push railroad", but then changed it to "portions" instead because I had second thoughts. I'm still not keen on "sections" because, as I said, I don't think it fits so well with the informal name, but others may differ. [[User:Gatoclass|Gatoclass]] ([[User talk:Gatoclass|talk]]) 13:23, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
:::It has nothing to do with the name of the railroad. It's about the right nomenclature, and that, in my variant of English, is "sections" of track. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 13:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
:::: As I said, one is entitled to differ. I thought "bits" was more in keeping with the informal tone of the hook set by the name of the railroad, but then changed my mind at the last moment and decided to try "portions" as "parts" didn't seem quite appropriate either. [[User:Gatoclass|Gatoclass]] ([[User talk:Gatoclass|talk]]) 13:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
::::: Well perhaps now you'd be good enough to put it back to sections which seems to have at least two people in favour of. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 13:33, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
:::::: I think I still prefer "bits" to "sections", which arguably makes it two-all, but as I don't feel that strongly about it, I have done as you requested. [[User:Gatoclass|Gatoclass]] ([[User talk:Gatoclass|talk]]) 13:40, 3 October 2016 (UTC)


== Errors in [[Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}|today's]] or [[Wikipedia:On this day/Tomorrow|tomorrow's]] ''On this day'' ==
== Errors in [[Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}|today's]] or [[Wikipedia:On this day/Tomorrow|tomorrow's]] ''On this day'' ==

Revision as of 15:04, 3 October 2016

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 12:05 on 31 July 2024) and is not adjusted to your local time zone.
  • Can you resolve the problem yourself? If the error lies primarily in the content of an article linked from the Main Page, fix the problem there before reporting it here. Text on the Main Page generally defers to the articles with bolded links. Upcoming content on the Main Page is usually only protected from editing beginning 24 hours before its scheduled appearance. Before that period, you can be bold and fix any issues yourself.
  • Do not use {{edit fully-protected}} on this page, which will not get a faster response. It is unnecessary, because this page is not protected, and causes display problems because this is not a talk page. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
  • No chit-chat. Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere, such as the talk page of the relevant article or project.
  • Respect other editors. Another user wrote the text you want changed, or reported an issue they see in something you wrote. Everyone's goal should be producing the best Main Page possible. The compressed time frame of the Main Page means sometimes action must be taken before there has been time for everyone to comment. Be civil to fellow users.
  • Reports are removed when resolved. Once an error has been addressed or determined not to be an error, or the item has been rotated off the Main Page, the report will be removed from this page. Check the revision history for a record of any discussion or action taken; no archives are kept.

Errors in the summary of today's or tomorrow's featured article

Errors in In the news

Errors in the current Did you know...

Errors in today's or tomorrow's On this day

'bottom of the ninth inning to win the National League pennant after being down 14 games' will be completely opaque to anyone unfamiliar with baseball jargon (most of our readers). I suggest simplifying to 'final inning of a game, winning his team the National League' and leaving it at that. Modest Genius talk 12:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be okay to link to Wiktionary's bottom of the ninth definition? The Rambling Man (talk) 13:00, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That would certainly help, but would still leave the problems of 'pennant' (here meaning championship, not a flag) and 'down 14 games' (a technical comment on an interim league table position, not the number of games lost). Modest Genius talk 13:14, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
How about:
The Rambling Man (talk) 13:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That works for me. Modest Genius talk 13:38, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:45, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What does "win the National League" mean? It sounds as if you are saying that the Giants became owners of the entire league, which is not the case. --Khajidha (talk) 14:07, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Would it make it easier for you to understand if we added "championship" after National League? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I actually understand it, but many others might not. --Khajidha (talk) 14:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"win the league" is certainly common English where I'm from. But if others find it impossible to understand, we can change it. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:22, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I could see someone saying "win the league", but not "win the National League". Especially with it linked to National League and not National League Championship Series. Note that the Bulldogs are not said to have "won the AFL" further up the page.--Khajidha (talk) 14:47, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well the version changed included "win the ... pennant" which is equally unintelligible to me. And your parallel is invalid because they won the Grand Final which is a specific match, not a league. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:50, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, the National Foundation Day is linked to the List of public holidays in South Korea. It should be linked to Gaecheonjeol instead. See Islamic New Year and German Unity Day for the proof.--Adûnâi (talk) 12:52, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Gaecheonjeol article has a maintenance tag at the top which typically invalidates its inclusion on the main page. So we either stick with what we have, or remove it altogether. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:58, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How does something like There are 159 entries of paintings among the National Treasures of Japan end up on the main page? EEng 05:28, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd care to Offer a correction if possible., that would be great. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:00, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There are 159 paintings among the National Treasures of Japan? EEng 06:34, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that the wording currently reads strangely but the item explains that some paintings are listed in groups, which complicates the matter. I suggest

    The paintings listed as National Treasures of Japan are from the 8th-century Classical Nara period to the early modern 19th-century Edo period. The term "National Treasure" has been used in Japan to denote cultural properties since 1897. The definition and the criteria have changed since the inception of the term. These paintings adhere to the current definition, and were designated national treasures when the Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties was implemented on June 9, 1951. As such, they are restricted in transfer and may not be exported. Owners are required to announce any changes to the National Treasures such as damage or loss and need to obtain a permit for changes in location, transfer of ownership or intended repairs. In some cases, groups of related paintings are combined to form a single entry and there are 159 entries. The paintings listed show Buddhist themes, landscapes, portraits and court scenes. Some of the paintings were imported directly from China.

Andrew D. (talk) 11:33, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think that looks much better. I have also made a small change in the article itself which, I hope, does not affect the meaning. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:39, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:57, 3 October 2016 (UTC) Please report any such problems or suggestions for improvement at the General discussion section of Talk:Main Page.[reply]