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 124.168.215.205 (talk) at 05:43, 20 March 2008 (!nosign!). 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

Shortcut

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 17:45 on July 16, 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, and should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere.

References are helpful, especially when reporting an obscure factual or grammatical error, and a suggested rewording is helpful with a stylistic complaint. The main page usually defers to supporting pages when there is disagreement, so it is best to achieve consensus and make any necessary changes there first.

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

These tables need sorting out, they make the article look amateurish, and given that this is on the Main Page, it makes the project as a whole look amateurish too --Hadseys ChatContribs 17:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the error is not on the Main Page, but in the article itself, please either discuss the problem on *the article's talk page* or fix it yourself. After you have done so, you should bring it here if the error also occurs in the summary on the Main Page. Thank you. -- 74.14.19.230 (talk) 17:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Today's featured article has no tables, so he can't fix them there. He must mean "The Main Page Toolbox" above. If so, the bottom of this page (if you're at Talk:Main Page) is the place to discuss it. Art LaPella (talk) 20:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can see three tables in the Nutrition Assistance for Puerto Rico article: 'Food and Nutrition Program Federal Expenditures (2003)', 'Income-based eligibility' and 'Average nutrition assistance benefits in the U.S.' These tables look fine to me -- except for the vandalism, which I've just reverted. --199.71.174.100 (talk) 22:35, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Errors in In the news

Error: Protected edit requests can only be made on the talk page. Where are all the admins? --74.13.124.183 (talk) 04:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tibet blurb

Can someone link Tibet to [[Tibet Autonomous Region|Tibet]]? Thanks! SpencerT♦C 00:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A permanent coalition government ?

Missing Story

Governor Paterson is certainly not a "small time" politician. — AMK1211talk! 01:24, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt anyone outside North America (and not majoring in political science) has ever heard of him, while Arthur C. Clarke is one of the most (probably top 5) important Sci-Fi authors of all times. If the main page was open for edit (and I understand why it isn't and shouldn't be) I would have added it in a second. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.115.22.33 (talk) 01:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please debate this at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates#Arthur C. Clarke. Art LaPella (talk) 03:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

David Paterson

Yeah but there's already been 3 black governors before him. So who cares if he's the first of a particular state? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.62.186.233 (talk) 17:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. It should be mentioned hes the first blind person.--Always Ahead (talk) 19:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
New York is no ordinary state. It was the last northeastern state to eliminate slavery. It's the third largest state in population. People care, sadly, that he is black. Bearian (talk) 00:37, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The blind part is far more interesting. Im like he's black so fucking what, theres lots of black poloticions nothing special anymore. Now the fact he is blind, thats like WTF sweet. БοņёŠɓɤĭĠ₳₯є 01:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that being the first blind governor of any US state is definitely worth mentioning. --Tombomp (talk) 09:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Except that he is not the first blind governor (Bob C. Riley is). See also this discussion. -- lucasbfr talk 13:17, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, you learn something confusing every day. Still, it's worth mentioning that's he's blind if being black is mentioned in my opinion. --Tombomp (talk) 15:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article says he is an "first African American governor", why use the word "Black" and that too on the main page of Wikipedia?Mugunth(ping me!!!,contribs) 05:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, we have established that he is neither the first black governor, nor the first blind governor. However, we could say "David Patterson is sworn in as the first blind black Governor of New York", couldn't we? :-D Waltham, The Duke of 14:24, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HMAS Sydney & HSK Kormoran

Camptown (talk) 12:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The wreckages of HMAS Sydney and the HSK Kormoran are located off the coast of Western Australia 66 years after their mutual destruction in battle."

Shouldn't there be a comma after "Western Australia" and "a" inserted before the word "battle"? (Example: "...are located off the coast of Western Australia, 66 years after their mutual destruction in a battle." --Always Ahead (talk) 19:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need the a, but the comma'd be nice. DarkestMoonlight (talk) 19:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree (with Darkestmoonlight). Lewis512 (talk) 20:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about the indefinite article ("in battle" is a legitimate expression), and I am split on the comma issue. However, I do know that "HSK" must be de-italicised. Waltham, The Duke of 22:35, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you guys serious?? Do you genuinely not have better things to do than this? An 'a' before battle? That would look ridiculous. And, in the UK, i.e. the birthplace of English, that sentence would require a comma. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.221.192 (talk) 11:21, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is a blurb about an Australian topic. So according to WP:ENGVAR, we should use Australian English. I don't have a clue about Australian English, so I don't know whether the comma should be there or not. --Puchiko (Talk-email) 13:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks we're stumped here... Shall I set up a poll? (evil grin) Waltham, The Duke of 15:04, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Should be "wreckage" not "wreckages", should be a comma after Western Australia, and should be "in battle". DuncanHill (talk) 15:13, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think now I agree w/DuncanHill. DarkestMoonlight (talk) 16:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it should be "wreckage".--Always Ahead (talk) 19:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've just noticed this "appendix" of the thread. I am 65% in favour of the comma now, and, seeing that there is agreement on this, I think it should be changed. "In battle" ought to stay as it is, I agree. Waltham, The Duke of 20:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A wreck is wreckage. So either one, but not wreckages.
From what I know, there is no letter limit here; the longer versions are just fine, and in my opinion even better than the shorter ones. In any case, this whole thread seems to be going nowhere. Surely its persistence here is desirable? The page has started growing too much. Waltham, The Duke of 20:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really think you guys should get a life and stop endlessly deliberating over the most absurd and petty minutiae, such as em-dashes, hyphens, spaces, commas and the like. As long as a sentence makes sense, that is all that matters. Have you really got nothing better to do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.242.42 (talk) 22:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course we have better things to do. Go to school, go to work, worry about money... Live our jolly lives. Why on Earth would we want to speak about minutiae? Waltham, The Duke of 01:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention, despite all the debate, nothing has been fixed anyway. That really does make it pointless.

Mar Paulos Faraj Rahho

Surely he has been "found dead," not "found murdered," not least because there is considerable speculation that he died of natural causes, if in unnatural circumstances. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 19:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. The cause of Paulos Faraj Rahho's death has not yet been determined. It cannot be ascertained whether he was killed or died as a result of some other reason, e.g. the severe physical discomfort of being held as prisoner. -The Gnome (talk) 06:56, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. He was found in a shallow grave... and, well, does anybody seriously believe that Rahho's death wasn't caused by his abduction? --Camptown (talk) 13:30, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I happen to share that opinion as well, i.e. that he was murdered. But that's just my opinion, and it is not supported by facts. On the contrary, the authorities in Iraq have not pronounced this as a homicide yet. (They have no problem confirming the many assassinations committed daily there.) No bullet wounds have been found on the body, according to the Iraqi authorities. The case is pending. We are not here to pre-empt the investigation nor to promote our opinions. -The Gnome (talk) 13:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When I originally nominated this item, I suggested that his "body" was "found in a shallow grave", but the admin who put it up changed it to murder... --Camptown (talk) 16:13, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(EC) Whether the death of someone as a result of an abuduction is murder under Iraqi law is not clear to me, is there any reliable source that says it is? If not, it doesn't matter whether he died as a result of the abuduction it would still be wrong to call it murder unless he was actually physically killed by his captors (which I'm pretty sure would be murder) which according to the above discussion is uncertain Nil Einne (talk) 16:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Errors in Selected anniversaries/On this day

Errors in Picture of the Day/Today's featured picture

Errors in Did you know?

2024-07-16T00:00:00Z


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.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors&oldid=199533913"