Jump to content

Talk:Main Page: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
S3000 (talk | contribs)
Reverted 1 edit by 58.169.226.82; Refactoring talk page comments. using TW
No edit summary
Line 10: Line 10:
}}
}}
{{skiptotoctalk}}
{{skiptotoctalk}}
i like guys
{{Talk:Main Page/Archives}}

<div style="right:10px;" class="metadata topicon">'''{{Currentdate}}'''</div>
<div style="right:10px;" class="metadata topicon">'''{{Currentdate}}'''</div>
{{Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors}}
{{Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors}}

Revision as of 14:48, 13 May 2008

i like guys

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 14:07 on 13 November 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 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 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)[reply]

Errors with "In the news"

Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, has announced his resignation but does not appear to have actually resigned yet. The BBC reports 'It was not immediately clear when the archbishop would leave his post but the process of finding a replacement is likely to take at least six months.' It may be best to remove the ITN segment until this is clarified. A.D.Hope (talk) 00:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Two things here. The Gitmo playlist isn't actually a playlist, according to the article. Secondly, and more importantly, the hook makes the subject seem quite callous when the article it comes from explains that he found it ludicrous. [1] Secretlondon (talk) 19:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article title is currently subject to a move discussion, which does not preclude inclusion on DYK. As for the phrasing... the full quote certainly seems to indicate that he felt the concept of music torture was ludicrous: "It seemed so ludicrous that something totally innocuous for children could threaten the mental state of an adult," he says. "I would rate the annoyance factor to be about equal with hearing my neighbour's leaf blower. It can set my teeth on edge, but it won't break me down and make me confess to crimes against humanity". It downplays that these songs were played on repeat, at high volumes, for captive listeners.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:47, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will comment as the original writer of the hook that I was slightly more comfortable with the previous phrasing of the hook that didn't mention torture, but it does seem to be the consensus (Clive Stafford Smith included) that the music was used in torture. I don't think it violates any Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons guidelines, but I am open to changes to the hook. Based5290 :3 (talk) 22:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the OP that the wording is misleading in making the subject seem callous towards torture. This seems like a serious violation of our BLP principles. We could replace "laughed" to "considered it ludicrous". JMCHutchinson (talk) 10:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In what sense was Bob Singleton "the creator" of the theme song? According to Barney & Friends the tune was an old, public domain, song This Old Man, and the words were by "homemaker Lee Bernstein for a children's book titled "Piggyback Songs"". DuncanHill (talk) 23:03, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's the problem, we don't know how to describe him. Arranger maybe? He's not the composer if it's an old old tune. The "Piggyback Songs" book was made up of new words to old tunes, so it seems Bernstein brought the old tune and her new words together. Singleton is not mentioned in this report of the law suit. DuncanHill (talk) 00:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replaced with "... that the music producer of Barney & Friends laughed when he found out that its theme song was used in torture at Guantanamo Bay?" — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. DuncanHill (talk) 01:41, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • More Gitmo The WP article currently reads:

    Other music allegedly used included songs from AC/DC, Marilyn Manson, Rage Against the Machine, Britney Spears, the Bee Gees, Barney & Friends, and Sesame Street.

    But the hook doesn't convey that Barney was "allegedly" used. Not sure if it's the hook or the article that needs fixing.—Bagumba (talk) 11:28, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... that John Hawks was the first professionally trained architect to stay in the Thirteen Colonies?" Why him (1731-1790, stayed in the Colonies from 1764 on) and not e.g. Peter Harrison (architect) (1716-1775, professionally trained 1743-1745, stayed in the Colonies from 1745 on)[2]? There's also someone like William Buckland (architect), perhaps others. Fram (talk) 11:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why "Kingdom of Bicycles" and not "自行车王国", but "məθkʷəy̓" and not "Muthkwey"? Americanist phonetic notation is not written in English or the Latin alphabet, although some parts resemble it, and is unintelligible for probably more people here than Mandarin (or Cantonese or whichever is used). We don't use "Цэцэйхэн" for Checheyigen either, even though that one as well has some recognisable characters. Fram (talk) 11:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Errors in "On this day"

  • 1969 – Apollo 12 (pictured) launches from the Kennedy Space Center, becoming the second crewed flight to land on the moon.
Pls change "launches" to past tense 'launched'. (And maybe change "becoming" to 'and became'?) JennyOz (talk) 03:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pls add cap to "moon" per MOS:CELESTIALBODIES. JennyOz (talk) 03:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Already  Done per WP:OTDTENSE by A.N.Other. Voice of Clam (talk) 09:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(November 15)
(November 18)

General discussion

Experimenting

I've been experimenting with a shadowing template I created and decided to test it in my Main Page sandbox. Please check it out and give me feedback. ~RayLast «Talk!» 23:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. It doesn't work for Firefox. Darn I hate these differences. ~RayLast «Talk!» 23:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It works fine in my Firefox, having said that I'm using Firefox 3b5. I took a look, its an interesting effect, might steal it for my userpage if you don't mind. Time to see if the masses like it now :). Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 12:07, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't work for Firefox 2. So people won't like it. I'll try and fix it later some time and let you guys know. ~RayLast «Talk!» 14:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What was supposed to happen anyway? I saw little gray boxes at the corners. FF 2.0 user. --Howard the Duck 16:16, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll screenshot it in a few minutes, thanks for the intel on my talk page btw Mistman123. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 16:23, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, it appears my work PC is being as useful as ever, so I'm going to have to extend that "in a few minutes" to in a few hours :( Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 17:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I made a screenshot for those who have Firefox 2. I'll be trying to fix this later. Maybe after taxes. ~RayLast «Talk!» 18:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well once they roll out FF3.0 there'll be no real need, FF like to make sure everyone is using the correct version. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 19:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is actually a significant number of people who use the older versions- see the lower table here. J Milburn (talk) 19:48, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted your opinions on how it looked. I don't think it should be implemented anytime soon anyway. I'm thinking of adding some image buttons and test some other stuff to make it look nice, although I really like the current, simple, nice colored main page. I don't envy any other Wikipedia main pages in other languages. Simple is nice. ~RayLast «Talk!» 20:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... that's actually really nice. I don't think it's completely appropriate for the main page but it's an interesting bit of code, that you can actually get it to do that. Well done. I might nick it for my userpage too, when FF3.0 rolls out, and sod the people who deliberately click 'no' at the upgrade prompt. Just looking at the source... doesn't it add a hell of a lot of code to the page it's transcluded on though? Just for a few images/headers? Any way you could shrink that down a bit? —Vanderdeckenξφ 09:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks great. I'd agree with this being on the Main Page once a stable version of Firefox 3 is released. The people using the older versions won't be hurt in any way, the only difference for them will be the little grey squares. Puchiko (Talk-email) 16:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't look correct in Konqueror 3.5.8 either -62.172.143.205 (talk) 19:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yuck... I don't think it looks too good from the screenshot. Makes everything look too deep and complicated. -Tarthen Blazerken (talk) 08:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it looks a bit Windows 95-ish, if you get me. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:45, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well anyone interested in helping me fix it for other browsers, you can get/copy the code from {{User:Mistman123/Templates/Shadow}}. I don't have enough time to go through the code and test changes in all these different browsers, so any help is certainly welcome. When you get something working please let me know or post your code's link somewhere so I can check it out and possibly copy it back . ~RayLast «Talk!» 20:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Safari 3.1 doesn't display this alternate page at all nicely, inserting a small two-tone grey square on the bottom right of the box but no further. Bobo. 02:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. The template's page has the Safari caveat too. You can help fix it though. ~RayLast «Talk!» 03:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since Firefox 3.0 doesn't run on Linux using wine, I would say ":("--Jahilia (talk) 15:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think it shall once Firefox 3.0 will be released. Right now, it's not Firefox 3.0 it's Firefox 3 Beta 5. Puchiko (Talk-email) 17:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Netscape I find gray boxes at the corners. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.232.148.109 (talk) 15:20, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The boxes are shifted in Opera (9.27) down and to the right. Regardless, I took a look at FF3b5. While I do find it kind of distracting, if I had to have some form of it instituted, I'd go without the shadows on the images. The images are unbordered right now and should stay that way. Having borders/shadows is distracting.The freddinator (talk) 02:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May i suggest a colour scheme change? the other language wikis look so much brighter, because the colours are more bold! I liked the example in Mistman123's sandbox, so here is my attempt: User:Kennedygr/sandbox - i like to brighter colours, (at least the left.) havent thought of the right side, and the images on the title bars help too? ← κεηηε∂γ (talk) (secret) 14:26, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I get the tiny boxes to the lower right.(firefox 1.5.1.12, Adblock+, flashblock, imagezoom, low memory requirements...) The Sreenshot looks very good. Perhaps you can find a site that it works at or poke around at browser watch. 71.193.2.115 (talk) 06:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys! I think I fixed it!! Please check it out and let me know if it works for all your browsers. If you like it we can put it on the Main Page! Regards. ~RayLast «Talk!» 01:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me in FF2. Personally I reckon the shading is a little too heavy though. I mean sure it looks good now, but shadows can be the sort of look that gets old quickly. Incidentally, I did something sort of similar with round shadows with a header I made for the top of my talk page a while back (only round in Firefox I think). • Anakin (talk) 19:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ick, it's ugly. Sorry. I don't think I could stand looking at that everytime I visited Wikipedia; doesn't really suit the Vista age. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with WBOSITG...sorry. --LaPianista! 00:45, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, not bad. I suggest making the shadows a gradient fill rather than 3 superposed rectangles and making them a bit smaller, then you might be on to a winner Modest Genius talk 19:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find it works on my version of firefox. (Anonymous) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.190.21.159 (talk) 23:53, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good in Safari. Lunakeet 21:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I now added the "simple=true" parameter that only displays one shadow shade for my experiment on the Main Page sandbox. Visit the Shadowing Template for details on the template parameters. ~RayLast «Talk!» 15:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I preferred the previous version tbh, looked more like an actual shadow and less like a box behind it. The corners really need to have diagonals or it just looks wrong. So you know what I mean:

currently

|______
  |____

my suggestion

|______
 `------
Modest Genius talk 20:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando Lugo Picture

okay, that picture has been there forever, somebody please change it, it's drivin' me crazy! (Well, not literally of course, but you get the point) [LukeTheSpook] | [t c r] 04:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sick of it too. Any alternatives? J Milburn (talk) 16:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yup.
Ditto. Please, make him go away. BobAmnertiopsis (talk) 19:00, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maoists win a plurality of seats in the Nepalese Constituent Assembly election, the first election in Nepal in nine years (pictured, Maoist-controlled area, Nepal, 2005).

86.44.28.186 (talk) 17:11, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That picture has some sourcing issues, and isn't directly related to the story. I don't feel comfortable adding that, but maybe someone else will. I thought I was onto a winner with Image:Cpnm-electionsymbol2064.PNG, but it's fair use, and the free-use alternative, Image:South Asian Communist Banner.png, is not specifically tied to that party. J Milburn (talk) 17:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing as they haven't had elections in nine years, I think it's pretty related. Also Lugo is driving everyone batshit. 86.44.28.186 (talk) 17:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How much longer is Fernando Lugo going to be the picture. How long?--208.102.189.190 (talk) 17:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about Image:Danica Patrick by David Shankbone.jpg? Corvus cornixtalk 20:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like that. Any opposition? J Milburn (talk) 20:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
much better on the eyes.... [LukeTheSpook] | [t c r] 05:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't exactly object, but it's less than ideal, since that is an older story, and one which was illustrated by Image:Danica-r.JPG for several days prior to Lugo. 86.44.28.186 (talk) 08:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Jesus, put that picture up, anything but LLLLUUUGGGGOOOO--UhOhFeeling (talk) 16:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that that somewhat crappy picture has been up for like a week is making wikipedi look bush league.--UhOhFeeling (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Morgan Tsvangirai
Morgan Tsvangirai

Even my love of all things lug-related is being tested. Lugnuts (talk) 19:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please post your suggestions for new ITN pics at WP:ITN/C. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 20:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An admin specifically asked for suggestions here at a point when ITN/C had nothing. Thanks. 86.44.28.186 (talk) 21:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the request for suggestions was posted here. That's fine. I'm asking for responses to that request to be posted at ITN/C, which is on the watchlist of admins monitoring ITN. I guess you don't have one, 86.44.28.186. Please get an account, and you'll get a watchlist, too. --PFHLai (talk) 00:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note that such a suggestion has already been made on my talk page (the correct place for such a suggestion) and that further entreaties have the effect (to me, at least) of a rather hostile sort of badgering. 86.44.28.186 (talk) 10:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"a rather hostile sort of badgering"? Take it as a compliment. Most anon editors in WP get yelled at and their contributions are blindly reverted quite often. --74.13.130.63 (talk) 13:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Much better now.[LukeTheSpook] | [t c r] 04:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problems reading in Black Wikipedia skin

Someone needs to change the Main Page section backgrounds to clear. It's extremely tough to read in Black Wikipedia as Black Wikipedia automatically changes all text to light green. --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 18:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure this isn't a flaw in the black wikipedia skin? Nil Einne (talk) 19:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Most skins have flaws. I tried one skin and I wasn't notified on new messages. --Howard the Duck 03:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure. It does that so text on most pages doesn't blend in with the background. --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 17:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In my experience the default skin is the only one that works properly. People just don't take the other skins into account when making stylistic changes. (1 == 2)Until 17:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know. As I said above, it could easily be fixed by changing it from "white" to "clear". --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 17:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Racists. Cigarette (talk) 20:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lol (if that was a joke) :). Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 01:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But seriously. Switch Black WP on and you'll see what I mean. --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 10:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Where is this skin anyway? It doesn't seem to be one of the default skins and your myskin doesn't seem to have anything Nil Einne (talk) 09:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(undent) It's accessible in Special:Preferences under Gadgets, User interface gadgets - "Use a black background with green text on the Monobook skin". Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 04:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I found it but I admit I'm not sure what Gp75 is referring to. The black background thing does look ugly, on the main page and other places. But this is mostly related to the fact we have a number of coloured background which remain the same and they tend to contrast with the black. I don't see any green text on white background either. Has it already been fixed somewhere that I'm missing? Nil Einne (talk) 11:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, yeah, it's been fixed. :) --Gp75motorsports REV LIMITER 19:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why there is a thin white line running under the globe in the logo? Vinni3 (talk) 20:38, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's something that has been noted before—I don't recall what the issue is that it cannot be corrected, as on [3] et al.

Damn, the one you've linked to looks so much better, not just saying that or anything, somehow looks more toned. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 23:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Some rather bad cropping, I believe. That's how it looks to me anyway. Also, please don't swear. Look at WP:TALK. Lunakeet 14:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Have you even read the guideline you cited? The closest it has are comments regarding our civility guidelines, but as Wikipedia is not censored, that swearing wasn't directed at anyone and that is perhaps the least offensive 'swearing' out there, I can't see any problem with it. J Milburn (talk) 15:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I'm going to need a citation on what stops me from saying damn. I'm very familiar with Wikipedia policys and guidelines, including the one you put forward, and I see none that stop me from doing the following: Fuck, shit, bolloxs. Ferdia O'Brien(T)/(C) 17:41, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
are these allowed also? bugger, democrat, liberal? 98.208.33.94 (talk) 01:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry 98.208.33.94, you're under arrest for crimes against humanity. ;) CompuHacker (talk) 02:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
98: They wouldn't be too much of a problem unless they are used to discredit a specific editor or editors. Per WP:NPA, someone's personal affiliations and beliefs should not be used to discredit or attack them or their comments and are generally of no relevance to any discussion. On the other hand, if you are simply innocently asking another editor who you have a friendship with of their political affiliations that would usually be okay although the other editor is obviously free not to answer. Asking Democracts to bugger off may not necessarily be a violation of WP:NPA but would likely be a violation of WP:Civility Nil Einne (talk) 11:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, sorry. Lunakeet 21:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also the cropping in the logo seems fine to me, the logo is identicle in size to the one without the white outline, and the greyscale looks far more vivid too. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 17:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
just from looking at the images i'd say it's poor anti-aliasing or poor matting - selecting to anti alias an image against a white background and using it on a gray background causes fringes. 10:05, 6 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.100.114.76 (talk)
At this late date I'm gonna throw in that this has nothing to do with the Main Page :). Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 15:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Wikipedia logo improvement for a related just-started discussion in a slightly more appropriate place. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Four white men and a bird...

...are featured on the Wikipedia Main Page. Sigh. Our systemic bias really shines through sometimes. Kaldari (talk) 16:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention it's all written in English. Our Anglo-centrism is pretty glaring.-Wafulz (talk) 17:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Last I checked there were English-speaking women as well. And how come we never have turtles? Kaldari (talk) 18:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, one of the men is a bit on the grey side. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it makes you feel better, the next featured pic on DYK is a black woman.--Bedford 19:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yay for racial equality at DYK! =P weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uh... so based on one afternoon's collection of pictures you're saying what? That the internet is biased against women of color and non-avian species of animals? I'm sure there are appropriate political message boards where you can listen to yourself vent. (Pardon me for the use of English, I don't mean to be biased against the Dutch/Cantonese/Pulaar/Hindi speaking communities.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.72.30.67 (talk) 23:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are more ant species than humans, why isnt this reflected in news and DYK sections? This is an outrage. -Anon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.17.34 (talk) 04:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{sofixit}} ;) 68.101.123.219 (talk) 02:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fundraising message

How have the fundraising ads been chosen? Where can I find discussions and more details about the 2008 fundraising program? Thank. 131.111.247.194 (talk) 20:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See meta:Fundraising and the current fundraising landing pad. —Vanderdeckenξφ 09:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but I don't see any information about the 2008 fundraising. Only the past fundraisers... 131.111.247.194 (talk) 09:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Choice

I find it interesting yet appalling that the flag of Germany was selected as the feature article one day after Israel was selected on its independence day. --165.124.138.191 (talk) 03:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had similar thoughts as well.--Bedford 04:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Two days. --Howard the Duck 05:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See also: apophenia Raul654 (talk) 07:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Germany and Israel have friendly relations as they are both committed to the ideals of democracy. -anon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.17.34 (talk) 04:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you instantly associate Germany with Nazism, I think the problem is at your end. J Milburn (talk) 07:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh that's what it is? lmao I spent quite a while trying to make sense of that comment without any success. 86.137.221.99 (talk) 13:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be updated

Latin Wikipedia now has over 20,000 articles. Harris Morgan 13:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC).[reply]

I think there's a bot that takes care of that. Daniel Case (talk) 20:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There isn't, we need an admin to do it. I would, but I do not want to edit the main page right now. J Milburn (talk) 21:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like its been done.-Wafulz (talk) 22:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By CapitalR, if anyone cares. J Milburn (talk) 22:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why is the blurb for todays article so crap?

merh. 86.137.221.99 (talk) 00:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

and yes yes i know, fix it myself, except that i cant edit this page 86.137.221.99 (talk) 00:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to edit today's featured article by clicking on a link to it. 99.230.152.143 (talk) 00:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
yes but that doesnt help me change the crap blurb on the main page. 86.137.221.99 (talk) 01:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Post a draft at WP:ERRORS and get help from WP:ANI if needed. --74.13.124.4 (talk) 03:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it does. The blurb is nearly always taken from the article lead. Until and unless the article lead is 'improved' it's doubtful the main page blurb will be changed since as the comment on WP:ERRORS states, the main page always defers to articles and problems that occur in articles should be fixed first there before making a complaint Nil Einne (talk) 06:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just doubt that either of you need to edit it. :P crassic![talk] 03:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
oh please, it reads like an advertisement for a film more than it does an encyclopedic article. "in cinemas next week: minnesota, the story of a town ..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.221.99 (talk) 03:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like you're complaining that it makes too strong an effort to grab the readers attention or what? In what way is it "crap"? It reads nothing like a cinema advert. Tourskin (talk) 07:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the awkward first sentence ("The history of Minnesota is the story of a U.S. state...") is the biggest problem. Is there a rule that says we must include the title of the article in the first sentence? It always looks silly in those "history of..." articles. Zagalejo^^^ 08:04, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe something like "The history of Minnesota began in...." or similar? weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 10:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That would be fine, except it makes the assumption that our readers already know that Minnesota is a U.S. state. The problem is, it's hard to keep both "history of Minnesota" (the title of the article) and a description of what Minnesota is (a U.S. state) in the first sentence without it coming across as awkward. Without mentioning what Minnesota is in the opening sentence, it's slightly confusing, and would be akin to "The Third of May 1808 was completed..." Pretty much the least-horrible-sounding thing I can think of is "The history of Minnesota, a U.S. state..." Dreaded Walrus t c 12:15, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As I remarked above, since the same issue occurs in the FA, it is best if this discussion is held there where it can be considered by the editors of the article who may be able to offer alternative suggestions or point out any problems with any suggestions, and where it is probably not going to be archived in 3 days, rather then here where it is of little interest to the majority of editors here, and doesn't really concern the main page directly anyway. If this is a wiki-wide problem concerning all 'history of...' articles, then somewhere like WP:VPM would probably be better Nil Einne (talk) 14:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This was really easy fix, people. "The [[History of Minnesota|history of the U.S. state of Minnesota]]..." howcheng {chat} 20:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is another reason why it's usually advisable to discuss/carry out changes in articles first. Now the improved version is on the main page, but not in the article Nil Einne (talk) 20:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

Please bypass the redirect for worst films ever made in TFA. Thanks 117.193.34.227 (talk) 13:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please post this in Wikipedia: Errors above. Thanks. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 13:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Won't be fixed per WP:R2D. ffm 00:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Death announced. Please could we put her in the 'In the news' section? Yours hopefully, --Major Bonkers (talk) 20:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please post this at Wikipedia:In The News/Candidates. Thanks. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 20:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Will do, thank you. (No great hope of success, but just maybe...).--Major Bonkers (talk) 21:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Error

Moved to WP:ERRORS ffm 00:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]