Jump to content

Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Reywas92 (talk | contribs) at 00:22, 2 July 2007 (→‎Main page error reports: add). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Error reports
Please only post error reports regarding what is currently on the main page or on Main Page/Tomorrow here.
For general main page discussions, go to Talk:Main Page.

Main page error reports

To report an error you have noticed on the current main page or tomorrow's main page please add it to the appropriate section below. You can do this by pressing the [edit] button to the right of the appropriate section's heading. Also, please sign your post using four tildes (~~~~)


Note that the current date and time are in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), which may not coincide with your local time zone. The next day's featured article of the day, picture of the day, and anniversaries update at midnight (00:00) according to UTC. The current time is 19:09 on August 12, 2024 (UTC). (Update)

Once an error has been fixed, the error report will be removed from this page; please check the page's history to verify that the error has been rectified and for any other comments the administrator may have made. Lengthy discussions should not take place here.


Errors in the Main Page summary of Today's featured article

Please remove the first two pairs of quotation marks in the section. They are incorrect, especially the second. Thanks! Reywas92Talk 00:22, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Errors in In the news

Errors in Selected anniversaries/On this day

Errors in Did you know?

  • The DYK item for Alexander Campbell (businessman) contains a paranormal claim, presented as unquestioned fact. Looking at the article, the only sources for this claim are a couple of apparently self-published websites, one of which solicits ghost stories from readers. A local TV news story cited elsewhere in the article quotes an expert debunking the claim, but this debunking is not mentioned in Wikipedia's article. Please remove this wildly non-neutral item. —Celithemis 19:28, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have attempted to make it more neutral- what do people think of the new wording? J Milburn 19:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really convinced. The question isn't whether the print hails from Campbell, but whether it exists at all. And I agree with Celithemis, we have a fact on the main page that is not referenced to a reliable source. I'm going to replace the fact for now until we can get this all cleared up.--Carabinieri 19:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is this not a reliable source? It certainly seems to be, to me. J Milburn 19:43, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've just edited the original article. If the DYK item were to clearly present it as folklore ("legend has it...") I wouldn't have a problem with that, since, yes, the news story does support the idea that something hand-print-like actually exists in the cell. —Celithemis 19:44, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It has been removed, but I think it would be a shame to lose such an interesting fact- perhaps we could put it on the next update? J Milburn 19:47, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How about: ...that legend has it that Alexander Campbell slapped a muddy handprint onto his prison cell wall in 1877 which has never been removed, despite extensive efforts?--Carabinieri 19:50, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. J Milburn 19:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's not really a big deal, but the repetition of the word "that" is slightly awkward; "...that according to legend, Alexander Campbell..." would sound better. —Celithemis 20:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(outdent) It's good that the article is more reasonable, put the Main page is still making the statement as an unquestioned fact. It may be a moot point, since rotation is about to occur, but I would feel better if this particular bullet point could be retired early. Gosgood 22:24, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(refresh lag) Ah. I see that the 'legend has it' language is in place. Gosgood 22:27, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The text adjoining the animated image of Canada currently reads, "... the dates when each province and territory were created." Shouldn't it be "the dates when each province and territory was created"? And perhaps even "each province or territory"? Thanks.—Muffuletta 17:45, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up and old items

This holding area is for items that require further follow-up (for example, a general point that needs to be raised elsewhere), or for items that haven't been dealt with but where the topic under discussion is no longer on the Main Page. The items listed here should eventually be moved to a suitable location elsewhere, such as:

Any other problems

Please report other problems on Talk:Main Page.