Talk:Main Page

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 09:20 on 7 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, today)

Monday's FL

(June 10)

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.

General discussion

Main Page Design

It could look quite a bit more professional.--Billy (talk) 23:40, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Why should it look more professional? Only some people know that it is here. Do you mean that we sould have a coloured background? Or some other astheatic effect? Dreamy ^§ 23:44, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

more professional? what's wrong with it now? freenaulij 00:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't mean as in content or layout. Other wikipedia pages (for example portals) seem to' have jgyftcfvtfcjkyrylfy iryi'about some icons or something. Its merely a suggestion. There is nothing wrong with the main page.--Billy (talk) 00:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh... You mean the actual main page, not the discussion... Well, it should look good, it is the most viewed page... Dreamy ^§ 00:49, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Dude, I've said and read things over and over about this, you've got my support if it goes to discussion but to be honest I don't see it happening, soon someone's gonna say "if it ain't broken don't fix it" (which is my pet peeve by the way) and the conversation will go downhill from there. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 02:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Me Too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.194.134 (talk) 22:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Main Page should be more decorative and attractive by changing the backgroud and having all sorts of different news like new books and movies that have been released. --Pure-intellect (talk) 17:24, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, the average user of Wikipedia hardly sees the main page. Most people just type in "wikipedia.com" or something along those lines, and end up at the welcome page and use search, bypassing the whole main page. Besides, I think the main page is perfect the way it is. It wouldn't be my homepage if it weren't. snowball71 (talk) 17:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

If someone does decide to propose a design you might want to look at the main pages of other language Wikipedias - I particularly like the Spanish, Italian, German and French Main Pages. Whilst I'm at it, I also like the way the French Wikipedia separates indented comments on talk pages. --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 18:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

What a coincidence, I just saw an article that looked good, so I came to the main page to see if it also looked good, but nothing. So, I'll give it a go in about 15 days, after I'm done with finals (exams).

Do I need to check it first with someone? BTW I'm a graphic designer.Brodder (talk) 07:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Last time the main page was changed, there was a 'huge' discussion and several proposals and voting and suchlike. Changing the Main Page is a big deal. You might want to discuss this with people who were involved in changing it last time. btw, the French Wikipedia's style of indenting may look more interesting than the English version, but that talk page looks like a kiddie message board. We have enough trouble persuading people that talk pages are not chat rooms! 130.88.140.39 (talk) 15:07, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks about the advice, I'll try to reach the people before me and see what's the best route to go. I agree with user PureIntellect and Ferdia O., it needs to be more better! :P Brodder (talk) 19:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

While it's completely up to you, in my opinion your best bet might be to develop a main page alternative and see what people think of that. If people like it, you might have a chance of incorporating some elements into the default main page Nil Einne (talk) 11:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Totally agree Nil. Just a couple more days 'till I finish with school and begin with this :) Comments of course welcome :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brodder (talk • contribs) 00:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

more decorative and attractive by changing the backgroud and having all sorts of different news like new books and movies that have been released? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an almanach for all things good, bad and ugly. Please keep that in mind. One thing I particularly like about Wikipedia is that it doesn't have any unnecessary decorations, gimmicks, flashing, blinking, overly colourful stuff that other pages annoy you with and still call 'attractive design'. Simplistic pages. Content before form. --Ouro (blah blah) 08:58, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Is there a way to hide the donation message for all users in the main page? The donation message moves everything down far, and on my moniter, you only see the first five-six lines of the featured article and such. Can it just be hidden for this one page? Once I log in, I can hide the message, but say I didn't have an account--I'd be annoyed if I was looking. S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 00:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Problem still remains unfixed/unjustified. S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 23:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Change it for certain days like Holidays

Since Wikipedia is for English people and world citizen, we should have the British Monarch's birthday and the US independence day on 4 July as two holidays that can be changed to blue. This works because all English speaking countries are either US territories or part of the Commonwealth!!! Also, I know that Christmass is a religious holiday but in the Commonwealth and in the US it is very much a secular holiday. Or say Halloween, where the background can be changed to orange (for pumpkins) and for christmass it could be green red and white (for snow and for mistle toe). Tourskin (talk) 01:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

And st patricks day!! make it all green!! for realTourskin (talk) 01:23, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

While it would be good, the problem is holidays are not always international. Let me break it down:

• The Queen's actual birthday is nowhere as big, nor is the equivelant, of the US's Indepedence Day. Yes, there is a "Queen's Birthday" public holiday, but a) it is not actually the Queen's real birthday b) different places celebrate it at different times c) not all places in the Commonwealth do have a Queen's Birthday day. Each country usually has its own national day, so like how the US has Independance Day... Australia has Australia Day and New Zealand has Waitangi Day for example.
• Halloween is mainly an American thing, and would be very unprofessional.
• Christmas could work, even though in the Southern hemisphere Christmas is in summer (as you are suggesting wintery imagery, though the association of Christmas and Winter does exist here in Australia due to American influences).
• St Patricks Day is an American thing, really

I take serious offence to my country being labelled either a US territory or part of the Commonwealth, and St. Patrick's Day is not an American thing. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 03:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Lol sorry I forgot about Ireland having a large number of English speakers but yeah theres something for everyone in my list. There's nothing else British. And Halloween is not an American thing only. Tourskin (talk) 03:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Well Halloween did actually originate in Ireland as well, its an old Celtic feast. So if we do change the page on Holidays, Ireland will be featuring quite a bit.... if I have anything to say about it. :D Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 14:56, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Halloween did not originate in Ireland. The 'end of summer' festival on October 31, ie what we now call Halloween, has been celebrated throughout much of Europe since pre-christian times. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.205.12 (talk) 13:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC):(

Yes, it was celebrated throughout Europe... having originated in Ireland, I encourage you to read this very encyclopaedias article on the subject. I think you'll find that Halloween is the modernisation of Samhain. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 00:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Samhain is an Irish Gaelic word and it names the end of summer event in Irish (and Scottish) culture, but it doesn't follow that the marking of the event originated in Ireland. Have a look at the entry for SAMON[IOS] in the Coligny calendar article. Samonios is a Gaulish word naming the same event. Are we to believe the Gauls borrowed all this from the Irish? I think not. The end of summer was an event that appears to have been commonly observed in all the Celtic regions. Its real origins are probably associated with the beginnings of agrarian culture in Europe.

Well I'm gonna stick with the generally excepted origins and not your beliefs my friend, also, please make proper use of indentations. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 03:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Stick with what you like when you don't have anywhere else to go - you haven't refuted anything stated. And don't tell people what to do you pompous twat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.134.188 (talk) 10:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, you want to argue for the sake of arguing, on this sub-thread that has nothing to do with the topic at hand I might add, fine, All Saints Day was celebrated throughout pre-christian Europe as you rightly said, however, the date was standardised by the church to that used by Samhain, and became the fest we now know as Halloween. Secondly, indentation is a standard on Wikipedia that is adhered to by all members, if you think thats the last time someone will point out one of more then likely many gaps in you knowledge of these standards, think again. Thirdly, make a personal attack like that again, and I will happily report you, and you will be disallowed from editing. This entry is an example of how to respond to someone who disagrees with you, while still adhering to etiquette, and as you will notice, I found no need to lower myself to personal attacks (of which I can think of a many that clearly apply to you), I suggest you take note. As I can see you haven't taken note of my last statement, please make proper use of indentation. Also, did you know that you can sign your comments by adding 4 tildes to the end (~~~~), just another little Wikipedia standard you should be aware of. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 14:34, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry mate, I had known that St Patrick's Day has its roots in Ireland but I was under the impression that it was mainly celebrated in America (we don't celebrate it here in Australia, and I've only heard of it mentioned in American TV shows). Turns out I was wrong though, according to St Patrick's Day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.99.82.107 (talk) 13:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

No worrys man, I'm a fan of your idea, as I am with most new ideas that are brought to Wikipedia because I think the place is stagnating slightly, but having said that, innovation must be done right, or not at all, so the holidays must be at there historic roots as well as there more popular ones (only both could be considered encyclopaedic) if we were to decorate the main page with them. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 16:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Another way to approach it would be to consider different designs for days other than holidays, something more international in flavor anyway. I have no idea what this would entail, just a thought. 67.173.131.28 (talk) 05:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

So what, specifically, do you all want to do to the main page on these days? I agree in principle, but I would like to see reasonably subtle changes (like google) rather than complete reskins (like, say, uncyclopedia). If people don't like the idea of changing the main page, maybe there could be some kind of preference thingy to govern it (it could be either on or off by default)? Bistromathic (talk) 15:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

What about all of the Chinese people who speak English? There are almost as many English speakers in China as there are in the USA. And according to England's PM, Chinese English-speakers will outnumber all others combined in twenty years. Cigarette (talk) 21:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

MichelleMorganDawn (talk) 19:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)In Canada we celebrate St.Patricks day.

Disagree Way too cumbersome the main page would change everyday of the year and even conflict some days... Just because it is the "English" Wikipedia doesn't mean other non-"English" cultures cannot be reflected in the main page. You have all kinds of things during the year in all countries around the world and how do you rationalise a holiday's importance? E.g. Guy Fawkes Day is recognized in some English speaking countries but not others. Also India is an English speaking country and they among a few Caribbean countries celebrate Diwali/Divali and that is a *very* important time in India but it is days-- long. Also Emancipation Day in the British Empire is celebrated on different days by different countries how do you choose??? And lets not talk about British practice of a) holiday, b) bank holiday and so on... Or if a Holiday falls on a Saturday or Sunday etc... etc... CaribDigita (talk) 23:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking that it could be simple recolourings to reflect the holiday (if that holiday has specific colours associated with it), and perhaps have a related featured article if one exists (which is something we pretty much do anyway), and perhaps to use the google example above, we could change the wikipedia logo appropriatly aswell. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 23:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

You guys are still talking about this? Fine, add colors for Chinese new year. Tourskin (talk) 00:30, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Um did someone really say that Chinese-English speakers will outnumber all others in 20 years? Seems unlikely to me given that India's population may outnumber China's by then and even if it doesn't it will be very close and when you take all the non Indian, non Chinese speakers... Nil Einne (talk) 11:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Why not something sutble like a logo change such as what Google does? (See here) TheGreatZorko (talk) 11:05, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

We already recognize holidays in the "On this day..." section. That's enough for me. snowball71 (talk) 17:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Three prominent items on the Main Page are Today's featured article, In the news and On this day... When looking at these items, I think its useful for the reader to be aware of the current date. (It actually says the date in the On this day... section already.) Is there an argument for displaying the current date (and maybe the time the page was loaded) somewhere near the top of the page? Perhaps above and aligned with the right of the box containing the Welcome to Wikipedia message? I think this would be a useful addition to the user interface. Nicgarner (talk) 12:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

The date and time, though, would be UTC which is known to cause confusion to some people. For example, readers in California would be told that today is, say, Friday whilst to them it is still 6pm on Thursday. Bazza (talk) 14:22, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

True. Is that not already a problem with the date as it is displayed in the On this day... section? Can technology not do something to help with this? I'm not very technological, but I know that the time can be displayed based on the users computer time. I know that's not a good solution, because the users computer clock might not be correct. Is there some way that the location of the user can be detected when the page is requested, and display the time as appropriate? Nicgarner (talk) 23:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes we can. See geolocation for more information about this. This is something we already takes advantage of, such as in the case of geonotices. It's not 100% accurate (for a general picture-go to www.ip-adress.com, and see how accurately it determines your location, browser, and operating system) and some users express concerns about their privacy, but it works pretty well. Puchiko (Talk-email) 20:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Well, I guess if anyone cared enough to be interested, there would have been more comment. I think it would be a useful addition to the Main Page interface, but looks like no one else does. Or is there somewhere better I should be raising this? Nicgarner (talk) 00:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

No, no,this is the place for it, I've already given my (supporting) views on this above. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 22:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

No. Changing the main page up for certain holidays will prompt some to ask that some minor far flung event be given a theme. And then, at the end of it, the Main Page looks different almost every day. If you want to celebrate something, change your signature. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{ho ho ho • under the tree}} 16:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but that's what we use criteria for, we could have that it must be respected in at least 6 country's across or something of that nature. Follow your logic and we shouldn't have anything on my main page at all. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 22:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

That what I meant when I said "no". Pacific Coast Highway ^{{ho ho ho • under the tree}} 18:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Disagree Leave one day out and get hate mail. Or observe one day in the wrong way (e.g. Memorial Day in the US) and commit a NPOV violation. Also, which holidays will be considered in the first place? The English-language Wikipedia encompasses quite a large number of the world's many cultures. HiramShadraski 17:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I support this idea. Marlith ^T/C 01:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

In addition to the points anon has already raised, note that many member's of the commonwealth do not consider the Queen their head of state. Some have their own monarchs for example others are republics. She may be the head of the commonwealth but she's most definitely not an important figure in national terms for many commonwealth countries some with significant English speaking (native or secondary) populations including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, South Africa, Malaysia... Nil Einne (talk) 11:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow, people seem to have forgotten WP:NPOV here. Gizza^{Discuss ©} 11:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that was a response to me but in case there was confusion about my post, my point was it's quite clear simply highlighting the Queen's birthday would not somehow appease all commonwealth countries (as tourskin suggested) because it's a fairly irrelevant thing for many commonwealth countries including many of the ones with large English speaking populations (in addition to the point anon raised about the fact the actual Queen's birthday is meaningless since each country which does celebrate it have their own date). I'm not saying the idea was ever going to work, it wasn't but I do think it's important to consider it's flawed to assume the Queen's birthday is a meaningful event to all commonwealth countries. Nil Einne (talk) 15:35, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Well one point to note, is that the four examples given above are just that, examples, there not proposals by any means, we havent even discussed what will qualify a holiday for inclusion yet, its just been a process of finding out where people stand on the idea so far. Ive made a few suggestions so far but no one seems interested in the topic of what will qualify a holida, or even what we might do to recogise it. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 01:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes examples. The Queens birthday is all i can think of - england is too lame to celebrate anything properly, except 5 nov. I know this having lived in england for 14 years.Tourskin (talk) 01:59, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

News picture

File:Newstoday 1.png

So he shot a lot of people and himself, and then waved cheerfully to the crowd?

Is there anyway to have the picture in the news section related to the first item in the box? As it is, an initial glance looks as though Hugo Chávez was the gunman that killed nine people in Omaha. --Bob (talk) 19:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The usual goal is to have an image for the first item with an available free picture. It usually works out relatively decently, but every once in a while we end up with a long-ish run of stories with none, such as now. Nothing really to be done about it.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Barring someone who knew Hawkins personally and has a photograph that they're willing to release under a free licence, the only real alternative would be for someone living in Omaha, Nebraska to head down to Westroads Mall and take a picture of the site (the one we have currently is *very* dodgy, copyright-wise). GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 00:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

If we just want a new image, a photo of the PM of Togo would be good Nil Einne (talk) 09:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Could the Chávez story be placed top? Or are there other criteria for story order? 81.174.226.229 (talk) 09:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Stories are always placed in chronological order Nil Einne (talk) 09:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

This "policy" does need to change. It makes us look quite stupid on people's very first visit to Wikipedia. The photo usually does not match the first news item, and the problem is fixable. Make the story with the photo first. Tempshill (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

There have been several suggestions for change previously, so far none of them have gotten much support IIRC. In any case, I'm not sure if everyone is convinced it's a problem. Nil Einne (talk) 17:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

An image of the flag of Omaha or an image of an AK47 (the weapon believed to be used) could both be used, or something like this - just be creative, but make it look better, please. --Bob (talk) 17:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Several admins are against the use of flags since it's argued they don't add much. Maps have similar problems to flags (it's been argued they don't mean much if you don't already know the geography of the area and if you do, you don't really need a map). As for the gun, I don't think you'd find much support for that for numerous reasons. For example I suspect you'll have similar opposition as with a flag or map (it's a generic image which doesn't tell you much about the specific story). As well as the fact it may be seen as either POV pushing or perhaps morbid. Finally it AFAIK remains unconfirmed that the gun was an AK-47 with some conflicting info (Plus AK-47s can vary quite a lot in how they look). Nil Einne (talk) 17:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

And a generic old image of Chavez is better because... --Bob (talk) 17:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

IIRC, the feeling is that as the item is about Chavez it's specific to the item and shows something which is meaningful (not everyone knows what Chavez looks like but many might be interested in seeing him and for those that do, it will tell them the item has something to do with Chavez, some people may recognise Chavez but may not know his name). On the other hand with a flag, most people don't know or care what the flag of Omaha looks like. And if you do, you'd probably recognise the word Omaha just as much as you will the flag, and it doesn't really tell you anything about the item which only losely has to do with Omaha (it occured in Omaha but it has nothing to do with Omaha). Similarly with a map, if you already know what Omaha looks like then showing it probably doesn't provide more info or is more easily recognisable then saying Omaha especially at the size we're talking about I don't think many people will recognise the flag or the map but will not recognise Omaha. And if you don't recognise the map, you probably don't really care to learn where Omaha is and again as with the flag, the story doesn't really have anything to do with Omaha. In this case, the Chavez connection is perhaps a bit loose as well since it was a constitutional referedum supported by Chavez not an election which Chavez won but it's arguably still a lot stronger then Omaha to the story. Or to put it simply, the flag or map are more decorative then functional whereas the picture of Chavez is more functional. Nil Einne (talk) 18:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

even though it is out of date and badly positioned? I gave examples of some things to use, I also said be creative, as it currently looks shockingly bad and amateurish. Your arguments against using a map are also applicable to that precise image of Chavez. Also, please drop the geek-speak, not everyone understands computer initialisms (I certainly don't) --[[User:Grcampbel

You could use Wikipedia to look them up. LOL. Really, though, Nil Einne is right that the photo of Chavez is more relevant to the Chavez news item than a gun or map would be relevant to the mall shooting news item. It sounds like "relevance to some item in the news section" is Nil Einne's criterion for what picture should be in the news section. I'm not sure if that's the best approach, but let's say it is. We at a minimum need to have the story associated with the picture right at the top. No news website in the world puts a lead next to a photo that does not match. And, yes, "Wikipedia is not a news website", but this area of the main page is a news website. Tempshill (talk) 19:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

The same ITN template looks great at Portal: Current events. --74.14.19.109 (talk) 04:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, I don't see how there is any problem with this template on Portal: Current events. This illustrates one of the problems which a lot of people fail to realise. The template works fine in many cases and changing it simply for one version of the main page is not considered good practice or acceptable (there are versions of the main page when it's not a problem as well e.g. Wikipedia:Main Page alternative (PDA version)) Nil Einne (talk) 06:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually ITN is implicitly NOT a news website. This is a common misconception and is one reason why people have suggested it be renamed. Also, I'm somewhat doubtful the suggestion for changing placement of the story will get much support. We already get sufficient complaints when a image stays for too long. Yet if we were to effectively selective highlight one story at the top of a page for a long time because we don't have any new images, we're liable to get many more complaints. Even worse, since very often we only have images for US items, you can just hear the screams of US bias that will result when we selectively highlight US stories. Nil Einne (talk) 06:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

IIRC is hardly geek speak... Whatever the case, you say to be creative. But so far, no one has come up with a suitable suggestion for an image which is sufficiently relevant to a more recent story in the eyes of admins (hint, this is NOT me). Until and unless someone does, things are not going to change. Telling people to be creative is somewhat pointless since obviously the people involved are not 'creative' enough or the problem would be resolved. If you're so sure it can be done, why don't you come up with something that is sufficiently relevant to a more recent story? Remember wikipedia is made by unpaid editors which can include you, not by a paid workforce. There's little point telling people to 'fix' something if you don't have an acceptable solution and one is not obvious to the people doing the 'fixing'. Nil Einne (talk) 06:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Can I just butt in and say here that it's probably the first (and last) time that I show off the addition I made on Wikipedia:Main Page FAQ back in April?[1] Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:43, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

So the photo should not match the lead in that box because it screws up formatting on another page. This is a lazy and half-assed reason to make Wikipedia look stupid on the main page. Tempshill (talk) 23:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL... People are complaining because they think the picture of Chavez makes it look like he killed nine people in Ohama and then waved to the crowd? Never would have crossed my mind. And no, Tempshill, it's because we don't have a good free image about the shooting, and anything we did have about it (a picture of the mall, for instance) wouldn't fit the item very well. Chavez is just fine where he is. Grandmasterka 23:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Let me try again without being Mr. Inflammatory. This is the main page of Wikipedia. When people look at the ITN box, and they see a photo that is mismatched with the lead, they say, "Haw, haw, Wikipedia is stupid," the same way that occasionally occurs with the algorithmically generated photo matching on Google News. We need to make the main page of Wikipedia look good. A mismatched photo looks like amateurville. Any reason given to justify a mismatched photo is misplaced, IMO, because it needs to look good, and a mismatched photo looks terrible. Fears about increased complaints because the Chavez story would be the highest story for longer - then move the photo down to sit next to that bullet point. Tempshill (talk) 23:28, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

This is pretty simple, and Fyre2387, Tempshill, and others are right. The ITN picture should match the lead ITN blurb. If the the lead has no picture, fine - no picture. This is pretty elementary. --Elliskev 23:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Agree DmitryChestnykh

I wrote a proposal for this at Template talk:In the news#ITN photo proposal if people would care to weigh in, support, or denounce it. Tempshill (talk) 17:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Um did you bother to read the FAQ answer at all? It didn't occur to me to link to it so it was good for Zyxx to point it out. It specifically address why we cannot move the photo down. Nil Einne (talk) 20:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to thank Tempshill, Elliskev and DmitryChestnykh for demonstrating that this concern stems entirely from the mistaken belief that ITN contains a "lead" item. Obviously, this confusion is something that should be addressed, probably by removing "news" from the name (as had been discussed on several occasions). —David Levy 18:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Lead, lede, first story, whatever. Semantics. The first item in the list. Sheesh. The point still stands. --Elliskev 00:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not nitpicking. Your expectation that the image will pertain to the first item listed appears to stem from the mistaken impression that ITN operates (or could reasonably be expected to operate) like a newspaper or news website (placing the story designated the most important at the top). —David Levy 18:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

No... My expectation that the image will pertain to the first item listed is based on two things - how people read (top to bottom) and the proximity of the picture to the bulleted item at the top. I don't really care how ITN operates. I care about the layout being less than ideal. --Elliskev 20:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

And your idea of an "ideal" layout has nothing to do with what you're accustomed to seeing in newspapers and on news websites?

We label the relevant item with the word "pictured." For people capable of reading English text, I don't see what's so difficult to understand about that. Yes, the image might appear incongruous at first glance, but people are supposed to actually read the section. —David Levy 21:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, we're not going to agree. You're assuming a lot about my sense of "ideal". This is a disagreement about style. I think the style we have now sucks. Categorize my opinion all you want. It won't change my mind. --Elliskev 21:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Elliskev is right and David Levy is wrong. People read top to bottom, and expect the tightest possible proximity between a picture and the associated text. That's because, as David Levy haughtily puts it, those of us who can read English text have been raised to expect this in roughly 100% of the printed material we read. People have not, on the other hand, spent their lives carefully reading through many bullets of information in order to figure out what a nearby picture is about. Tempshill (talk) 22:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

My opinion is wrong? Okay then. Thank you for saving me the time that I would have wasted by attempting to discuss this with you. —David Levy 22:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not trying to change your mind. I'm simply disagreeing with you. —David Levy 22:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Just to point something out to a few of you, David Levy is providing a valid service in this discussion. If we implemented every change that was suggested here on the Main Page without these kinds of discussions the thing would more then likely be totally illegible at this point. David (as a user who seems to be fairly anti-main-page-change) provides a counter point to whatever the suggestion is (normally), and if you can prove his points wrong, youre usually well on the way to getting your suggestion implemented. I myself made a suggestion about page balance a while back (not to do with the pictures, but instead to do with the layout in general), and the whole discussion was pretty much me and him arguing about it. I still don't agree with the points he was making at the time, and I still don't like his style of debate, but the service he provides here on the main page is one that has to exist... he shows that there is another side to the argument. Just my two cents. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 02:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Why not just line the picture up with its appropriate news item? 87.244.93.97 (talk) 22:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/5746/lineupvf5.jpg Like so! Easy enough to change, and makes a damn sight more sense than the current setup. 87.244.93.97 (talk) 23:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Will the template layout still work on Portal: Current events or Wikipedia:Main Page alternative (PDA version) with a picture that goes with the 4th or 5th bulleted item? You might get quite a bit of unsightly blank space there. --199.71.174.100 (talk) 01:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I actually didn't know that guy was Hugo Chavez so I assumed he was the gunman. I agree that it's a bit weird when the first picture doesn't line up. It's nothing to do with news stories and everything to do with how people read. 81.153.124.23 (talk) 13:20, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

So go read the word "pictured" further down. --74.13.128.88 (talk) 15:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe so, but it contradicts the expected format and readers will naturally assume that the first picture is the relevant one. There's nothing wrong with that, it's an almost universal thing unless you're used to Wikipedia's silly quirks. I do agree that it makes the main page look amateur. But then most of the photos used here do, as they're usually low quality and of limited relevance. 81.153.124.23 (talk) 01:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

John Lennon and (UTC)

Since the attack occurred at 10:50pm EST, wouldn't that make the death December 9, UTC? It always feels like I'm a bit into tomorrow when I log in during the evening, so I want to be sure that local time is the protocol for the event. What if an event occurs over several time zones? MMetro (talk) 07:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I do believe local time zones are used. As for events occurring over multiple time zones, I can't really think of any. Can you? ~Sasha Callahan _(Talk) 07:59, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes local time is used. When there is no local time, such as events occuring over multiple timezones without one being the clear cut centre, then we may use UTC but otherwise it's always UTClocal time. John Lennon died on December 8th just as he was born on 9th October Nil Einne (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 09:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Virtually anything that happens accross Russia happens across at least 4 time zones.GowsiPowsi (talk) 11:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm mistaken but I would presume most events in Russia are localised to one area. For example a demonstration in Moscow will be in Moscow. A terrorist attack in Beslan is in Beslan. A murder in St Petersburg... An earthquake with its epicentre in Vladisvostok... Of course there will be some events without a clear centre but I guess even when it comes to Russia or the United States, most events occur only in one timezone. In any case, provided the events aren't close to midnight, it's unlikely to affect what day we choose although it may make it difficult to decide what time to choose Nil Einne (talk) 15:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

An example of an event happening on multiple time zones: The Hong Kong handover ceremony, the internationally televised event of the transfer of the sovereignty of Hong Kong, occurred at 16:00 UTC, so it was posted on the June 30 template. Of course, iirc, one day later there was someone here posting why it was not on the July 1 template... And it does not help when the Transfer of the sovereignty of Hong Kong article predominately says "July 1" while the Hong Kong handover ceremony article predominately says "June 30"... Zzyzx11 (Talk) 07:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

But the basic rule of thumb, like any other thing on these templates, is that if the UTC date and time is specified and verified in the article, that day is where it will be posted. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 07:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries Nil Einne (talk) 10:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

For even more fun — an event that occurs in no time zone — Apollo 11 landing. Evil Monkey - Hello 20:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking of that but if I'm not mistaken most astronaut related events are treated as coming from the timezone either of where they launch from or their mission control. However it occured to me that a good example is an eclipse or an asteroid hitting the moon (large enough that it's visible from the earth). Such events clearly have no time zone either direct or derived Nil Einne (talk) 06:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Still got quite the discussion, I see. For an example, what about a 2004 tsunami timeline? The shock wave eminates and hits at various local times, maybe hitting a farther place at an earlier local time than the original event. Yet, local time is also very important. Did the tourists arrive at the beach yet? Were the fishermen out to sea? Were the kids in school, so that they couldn't have been picking up fish from the exposed seabed? If it happened in the dead of night? MMetro (talk) 18:58, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Interwikilinks

These can be found at the end of the page we don't need them at the top as well.Geni 19:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Where are you seeing them at the top of the page? Do you mean the portals? The Portals arent other wiki's, there just samples of the 57 catagorys in Wikipedia. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 22:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

try useing the classic skin for a moment.Geni 23:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah ok, now I understand, my apologies for the confusion, to be honest, I would say either Wikipedia:Monobook or Wikipedia Village Pump (Technical) (because you might not get a response over at Monobook) would be a better place to field this query, as its more to do with the skin than the Main Page itself. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 01:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki links on the classic skin are located in the top and bottom for all pages, so I'm not sure what can be done about that for the Main Page. Unless your question is about why there's double interwikis in any pages, in which case, that's something for VPT to discuss. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 04:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm objecting to the double set of interwiki links yes.Geni 18:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Well our friends over at WP:VPT will be more than happy to discuss it Geni :) If you would like me to raise the issue on your behalf just let me know. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 02:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Featured Article

Yasser freakin' Arafat. Oh, this ought to be good. HiramShadraski (talk) 05:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I could see it easily competing with Islam and Down syndrome.-Wafulz (talk) 05:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Let's not forget stuff like 0.999... Nil Einne (talk) 11:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Lol, I remember when that article was Featured, my head was spinning when I read though it. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 02:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia languages

Ukrainian Wiki already has more, than 80 000 articles. This info should be edited on Main page... --Yarko (talk) 08:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Updated. Thanks, BanyanTree 10:01, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

U r welcome =) --Yarko (talk) 11:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Hungarian WP passed the 80 000 article milestone. Please updete the Main Page. --85.90.172.149 (talk) 13:23, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Next Update template

Not sure where to put this, but at the top of the page the Time till next update template is currently a harsh almost headache inducing red, which clashes with the rest of the pages light pastel colours. It also makes the black text rather hard to read on monitors running at non-naitive resolutions (as many do) and even on normal monitors, due to the colours not contrasting enough. Why is it like this? It is incredably jaring and doesn't suit the rest of the site at all. TheGreatZorko (talk) 10:20, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

This has been brought up before at Template talk:DYK-Refresh#uglyness. The short answer is that the template, which is normally a soothing pastel, turns red when its time for an update as a means of annoying admins into action. Please centralize any further discussion at the talk page for Template:DYK-Refresh. Thanks, BanyanTree 11:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Colombia-Nicaragua maritime boundary dispute

Colombia-Nicaragua relations dispute finally solved by the International Court of Justice--Zer0~Gravity ^{(Roger - Out)} 11:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

So? Looking for WP:ITN/C? --74.14.19.114 (talk) 14:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

yep--Zer0~Gravity ^{(Roger - Out)} 15:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

"kill dozens of people"

Isn't that a bit like talking about eggs? Though I've no idea if it's considered ok in certain local dialects. --Leladax (talk) 23:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I've never heard anything to suggest "dozens" is inappropriate or insensitive when talking about people -Elmer Clark (talk) 03:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Tune into the news more often and you'll here of dozens all the time. I do . Tourskin (talk) 05:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The thing is, "tens of people" is never really used in English.--Pharos (talk) 06:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The thing is, eggs are hardly ever sold by the dozen nowadays (at least where I live). Packs of six (half a dozen though), ten or thirty are usual, and packs of dozens are a rarity. --Ouro (blah blah) 07:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

1/2 a dozen (6), a dozen (12), 18 (1 1/2 dozen) and 30 (2 1/2 dozen) are fairly common here with a dozen and 30 probably being the most common so it definitely isn't universal that eggs aren't sold by the dozen. But I've never heard it being offensive to talk about people in dozens either and it seems resonable common from a quick Google search Nil Einne (talk) 10:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The BBC frequently uses "dozens killed" ([2], [3]) and "dozens injured" ([4] [5]); for some reason, English doesn't like pluralising the word "ten" except in the context of "tens of thousands", so dozens seems to be the defacto alternative. Laïka 14:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's common most places English is spoken. News.Google shows many (dozens!) of uses. I can only find one use of "tens" to enumerate people in a headline. I suppose the poster thinks that "dozens" is too imprecise and would like something that implies more accuracy like "more than XX" or "as many as YY". But, since the death toll is still unknown, that would imply more accuracy than it should. 72.10.110.107 (talk) 14:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

pointless sentence

Discussion moved to where it should be --Ouro (blah blah) 07:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Tangentially related to today's TFA article

Has Wikimedia ever been threatened with legal action by the church of Scientology? 81.174.226.229 (talk) 10:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you try WP:VPM or something instead. As the very big text at the top says, this is for discussing the main page only Nil Einne (talk) 16:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Dayton Agreement

Moved to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. Thanks!

Same featured picture?

Why has the main page had the same Hitler picture for several days now? It seems to go away for one day and be replaced with a new one, and then come back the next day. Why? Knowitall (talk) 20:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, this one was originally scheduled about a week ago, but was removed from the main page after a few minutes/hours due to copyright issues and/or the start of Hanukkah. I guess it's been re-scheduled for today. --- RockMFR 20:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

It was originally here Template:POTD/2007-12-06 and was removed after about 45 minutes. The original reason by the removing admin was because of concerns of insensitivity but this in itself was controversial and was reverted. However concerns about licensing meant this was reverted back after about an hour. While most people were sympathetic to the sensitivity concerns, at least 3 people felt it was insufficent ground for emergency removal of a PoTD already on the main page (such issues should be brought up when an item is scheduled). However copyright concerns definetely are. Nil Einne (talk) 09:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Mitchell Report

This story isn't significant enough to be a main news article. Why not keep things in perspective and only add major news items or items of global importance. Wikipedia isn't just for America? The Mitchell Report item is too specialised a subject and aimed at a niche market. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.208.27 (talk) 11:08, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates#December 13 where the consensus seems to be for keeping the blurb. Puchiko (Talk-email) 12:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually this has been reported in several news media outside the U.S. so it's notable enough for ITN. --Howard the Duck 14:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S.: ITN is about articles of global importance but of international importance. --Howard the Duck 14:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, international importance, meaning all nations, not just one or two. According to the Major League Baseball page on wikipedia: "Major League Baseball (MLB) is the highest level of play in North American professional baseball. More specifically, Major League Baseball refers to the organization that operates North American professional baseball's two major leagues, the National League and the American League..." The article then goes on to describe in depth the extent to which this sport is completely American. The only indication of the international element of Major League Baseball is the involvement of Canada, and the sometimes involvement of Japanese teams in exhibition games with their American counterparts. This article is definately not of enough INTERNATIONAL interest to be included in ITN. Really, is one country's sport drugs scandal as important as bombings in Algiers, a state of disaster in South Korea or an International Security Assistance Force military campaign in Afghanistan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonzero2 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

International does mean "of or having to do with more than one nation. (ergo, more than 1)" Also, several other nationalities participate in Major League Baseball so to say MLB is not international is wrong, not to mention the MLB teams are the strongest club teams in all of baseball. --Howard the Duck 15:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

So if you turned to the world news section of one of your national dailies and saw a mention of this, you'd be surprised? I must say, I wouldn't be! And in fact a very quick search shows that the online editions of the Guardian, the International Herald Tribune and that bastion of all things baseball, the Telegraph, all have stories (actually multiple stories each) on this. 86.42.83.73 (talk) 15:25, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm normally sceptical of baseball stories and was especially sceptical of the Barry Bonds charged with perjurty story but this one definitely qualifies for ITN. Whatever baseball may or may not be it's clearly involves enough countries to some degree that at least some stories should make it to ITN. And however important the MLB may or may not be, what is clear is that this is a rather major story in the field of baseball because it affects quite a large number of key players and suggests drugs use is a major problem. Even though the MLB may be a North American league, the US are clearly a major 'player' when it comes to baseball despite their relative poor performance in the international arena. Therefore a major drug scandal affecting many of the top players in the top league in the US is significant enough for ITN ignoring completely the arguments of the involvement of non-American & Canadian players. (My personal point of view is that this just further proves baseball is a shitty sport with serious internal issues and most of the world is smart to ignore it but that's neither here nor there) BTW, it's true that this story is less important then probably all of the stories currently on ITN (although the ICA remains a bit uncertain in my eyes) but there are always going to be some stories more important then others. Nil Einne (talk) 17:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Bali?

There's been a major UN climate conference going on in Bali. It just ended with some important results. You wouldn't know it by looking at wp main page. Instead, you get Mitchell Report for the last three days. --24.85.68.231 (talk) 23:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Did you consider, perhaps, improving the relevant article and/or adding this to the suggestions page? Complaining is easier, I'll admit, but not really as effective.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:11, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

This is a churlish response to a serious point. Unfortunately, this kind of attitude is all too common here. It doesn't matter what 24.85.68.231 considered. The point being made is that the conference in Bali, which has been concerned with the very future of the planet, hasn't been featured on the main page, whereas the Mitchell Report, which is really only of interest to Americans, has been covered. Is this yet another example of American parochialism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.115.163 (talk) 09:28, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Please suggest this item in WP:ITN/C. Currently there is a pseudo-suggestion but it wasn't done properly. Talk:Main Page isn't the place to suggest ITN items. ---Howard the Duck 10:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is run by volunteer editors. Generally speaking, none of us are paid to edit. Ergo, the only way things can happen on wikipedia is when volunteer editors like you, me and the other people who have responded make it happen. For an article to get on ITN at least 2 main things need to happen. Firstly, someone needs to write an article of an appropriate quality that it gives a reader an understanding of what the item is about. Secondly, someone needs to propose that this item is featured on ITN. In this case, neither of these have happened yet. Currently we have a very short article 2007 United Nations Climate Change Conference permanent link which gives a reader very little information about what the conference was about or what actually happened. Also, no one proposed this item to ITN (not that people should propose it when the article is in such a sorry state). The only way that this item is going to be on ITN if people like you and the person who made the original complaint for example get to working on the article. If you are willing to pay me US$20/hour, I would be willing to work on this article for you and you would then be fully entitled to complain (to my talk page) if I fail to get this item into a state where it's ready for ITN and to propose it to ITN. However randomly complaining to volunteer editors that you are not pleased with the situation without attempting to improve it yourself is not particularly helpful in most cases. BTW, bear in mind ITN despite the rather poor choice of name is not a news service. I suggets you try Wikinews:Main Page if you are looking for such a service Nil Einne (talk) 11:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't bite the newcomers, hes just an unregistered ip address. Tourskin (talk) 01:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Lets just say the Main Page Toolbox at the top of this page is your friend. --Howard the Duck 03:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Question

Why that page protected? I think, allege that page no protected, because haven't a vandalisms. Sharon boyfriend talk to me? 08:36, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Which page are you referring to? If you mean the Main page, it isn't vandalised because it is protected. Page protection is especially that - in order for pages not to get vandalised by trolls and other such nasties, so that only users with a good edit history will dabble in them. See more here. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 08:43, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Could you please unprotect the Main Page Sharon boyfriend talk to me? 09:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Why unprotect the main page? If you want to suggest changes, please do. --Ouro (blah blah) 10:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

End of talk ok? Sharon boyfriend talk to me? 10:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)