Jump to content

Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Main Page

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 71.175.88.163 (talk) at 13:40, 13 October 2021 (→‎Today's POTD: Fixed). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcuts

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 22:58 on 16 September 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.
Administrators: Clear all reports

Errors in the summary of the featured article

Today's FA

Tomorrow's FA

Day-after-tomorrow's FA

  • "Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji (1892–1988) was an English composer, music critic, pianist and writer whose musical output spanned seven decades" - article says "whose musical output spanned eight decades". Looking at the linked whose musical output we see compositions from the 1910s to the 1980s, which does indeed span eight decades. DuncanHill (talk) 02:00, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's a recent edit to the blurb. Does the hidden comment help? There's a question of course of what it means to "span x decades" (but I don't think that something that lasted from 2019 to now would "span two decades" simply because it includes years in two decades). Pinging Dying. - Dank (push to talk) 02:11, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • The hidden comment does not change either of the facts 1) his works span eight decades, as conventionally counted in English, and 2) the blurb directly contradicts the article in the very first sentence, which makes Wikipedia look like it was written by a bunch of amateurs. DuncanHill (talk) 02:14, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • "which makes Wikipedia look like it was written by a bunch of amateurs" - well, for the most part it is. Hog Farm Talk 02:18, 13 October 2021 (UTC) [reply]
          • It is, but it shouldn't look like it is. DuncanHill (talk)
            • I went with this temporary fix: "who composed works from the 1910s to the 1980s". Thoughts (on anything)? - Dank (push to talk) 02:24, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
              • Dank and Dying: with all due respect, I have restored the earlier version of the blurb. Having "composer", "composed" and "composers" in the first two sentences alone does not help, and mentioning concrete decades makes the blurb heavy and unnecessarily technical. The introduction is there to summarize the lead and get readers interested in learning more about the subject, and its previous (now current) version was just fine in that respect. Also, this is a classical music article, and while popular music fans, articles, etc. tend to approach musicians' works in terms of specific decades, this is rather uncommon in the domain of classical music. Thank you. Toccata quarta (talk) 02:33, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
                • Sure ... I didn't think much of my edit either, I just wanted to demonstrate that, if we can't agree on whether the meaning of "spanned x decades" is the same for all readers, that's not a stopper ... if we disagree, then it's possible to pick a different way to say it that's unambiguous. But I agree that my wording feels too "heavy" (and I like that word here). - Dank (push to talk) 02:37, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • DuncanHill and Toccata quarta, i agree with Dank. i had realized that "decades" could refer to "calendar decades", but, at least in my experience, when such an interpretation is meant, there is generally some context establishing this. for example, if i love the '90s stated that friends originally aired over two decades, i think that is a reasonable statement, even though friends originally aired over a period of 10 years. i do not believe this blurb has established similar context.
    however, there are instances where such context does not have to be established. for example, one could state that "the influenza and coronavirus pandemics have each spanned two decades". although unnecessarily sensationalistic, most of us would be able to resolve "decades" to the meaning of "calendar decades", but only because we have prior knowledge of these events. in contrast, the statement "charles i's rule over norway spanned two decades" appears troublesome, since charles i only ruled over norway for about half a year, and most of us had not known that, and still have no idea which two calendar decades these were.[a] i am currently assuming that most of our readers similarly have little prior knowledge of sorabji's music career.
    to make sure that "seven decades" was more appropriate to use than "eight decades", i had run google searches for both "seven decades" and "eight decades", as used in conjunction with sorabji. discounting instances where text was simply copied from wikipedia, sources appeared to tend to use the phrase "seven decades", including the three i mentioned in my edit: here, here, and here. note that the first instance is from the sorabji archive, and was authored by alistair hinton, a good friend and sole heir of sorabji, so if use of the phrase "eight decades" was warranted, i believe hinton would have used it. on the other hand, all the sources i found that used "eight decades" appeared to have copied their text from wikipedia.
    i think Dank's original edit clarified what "decades" meant, but also think it feels a bit "heavy". in any case, i had only changed "eight" to "seven" to preserve the original wording as much as possible, and i do not think there is good reason to focus on the concept of decades, calendar or otherwise. would the phrasing "who composed works from 1915 to 1984" work?[b] this has the added benefit of being a few characters shorter, and avoids the use of the word "output", which Gerda Arendt was "no friend of" during the blurb's nomination.[c]
    by the way, if the issue is that the blurb does not match the article, the article can easily be edited to match the blurb; i believe the article is only protected against moves. dying (talk) 07:33, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pinged. The article will not even be protected on Main date unless attracting vandalism more than usually. I think seven decades is quite impressive enough, and would use it in both blurb and article. My 2ct, and I'm not used to be listened to ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:41, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

  1. ^ they were the 1440s and the 1450s.
  2. ^ note that sorabji's 1914 musical output appears to consist only of a piano transcription, so i am currently assuming that it would not be considered a work composed by sorabji. in addition, the sorabji archive states that "[a]round 1915, while planning a book on Ravel, he seemed almost to stumble accidentally on the idea of composing his own music", implying that the sorabji archive also does not consider any output in 1914 to be sorabji's own composition.
  3. ^ admittedly, i had not initially noticed the repetitive use of "compose", perhaps because i subconsciously felt that such repetitive use was warranted in a blurb on a composer. would "who wrote music" address this point?

Errors with "In the news"

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Current DYK

Next DYK

Can (pictured) be added? It looks like it will continue to be added, like it should, based on the DYK talk page and the prep areas. SL93 (talk) 23:55, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As it's not the entire city pictured and more than one building, I added (street pictured); others might have better suggestions.—Bagumba (talk) 01:33, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Moi aussi. – Sca (talk) 12:02, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Next-but-one DYK

Errors in "On this day"

Today's OTD

Tomorrow's OTD

Day-after-tomorrow's OTD

Friday's FL

(September 20)

Monday's FL

(September 16, today)
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.

Today's POTD

  • Curious formatting on mobile (iOS 15, Safari). In mobile view, each Wikilinked item is centered on a new line, in portrait or landscape orientation. Desktop view is OK. Template version as I write this is also normal. 71.175.88.163 (talk) 07:03, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Same with me. Thriley (talk) 07:10, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's very broken in Safari mobile. Looks fine on my desktop running Firefox. I can't see any reason why new lines are being generated for every link, nor why the MP is broken but Template:POTD protected/2021-10-13 looks fine. It must be something in the custom CSS for the MP. Modest Genius talk 11:57, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Main Page/styles.css does have some custom code for centring links in #mp-tfp . Is that related? Modest Genius talk 12:14, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good now. 71.175.88.163 (talk) 13:40, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tomorrow's POTD

Any other Main Page errors

Please report any such problems or suggestions for improvement at the General discussion section of Talk:Main Page.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors&oldid=1049725260"