Talk:Main Page

Main Page Error Reports

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 15:01 on 8 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 "Did you know ..."

Current DYK

The DYK on Fang Yi'ai states "his wife Princess Gaoyang was forced to commit suicide after their failed rebellion". However, there is no mention of suicide in the linked article on Princess Gaoyang, which states: "They stormed the palace but were stopped and captured. Gaoyang and her husband were executed by hanging shortly after." The only mention of a suicide on her page is the category: "Forced suicides of Chinese people". Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Confirmed. Secretlondon (talk) 14:19, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

It wasn't even approved like that. Someone made up another hook as it looked hookier! Secretlondon (talk) 14:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(June 14)

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.

Tomorrow's POTD

• 9 June - in blurb at "This E. penia buttefly perching on a flower", pls tweak typo in "buttefly". JennyOz (talk) 13:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

•  Done, thank you. Black Kite (talk) 13:06, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

General discussion

Amazing

I had no idea, until I looked at In the News Feb. 25, that Emporer Hadrian wore glasses! Sca (talk) 16:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't the mistake be to think it is Antoninus Pius not Emperor Hadrian? Anyway: Wikipedia:Main Page FAQ#Why are the images on "In the news" and "On this day" not aligned next to each relevant entry? 128.227.195.114 (talk) 16:59, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Either way, it's pretty stupid. Anyone with an IQ less than that required to look down to see (pictured) shouldn't be on Wikipedia. It's damn obvious that the woman pictured isn't either of the above. 79.71.95.209 (talk) 17:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Why am I not surprised the above comment is not from a registered user? Sca (talk) 20:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Because you are biased against anons? I hope not. But I must say I suspect some users would log off before posting comments less polite than what they usually post. Maybe I am biased too. --74.13.130.165 (talk) 04:59, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

In my view, anonymity reflects irresponsibility, or perhaps shame. Newspapers do not print anonymous letters. If you have a view, fine, say so, but have the courage to take responsibility for it — and for the manner in which you express it.

In this case, although my comment was sardonic, the issue is a serious one, and one that has been raised by various Wikipedians over the past few years. By posting a humorous comment, I sought to reiterate in a light-hearted way that faulty juxtapositioning of a photo and text looks silly. I've made this point in straightforward terms before, and in a humorous comment before.

All my comments on Wikipedia are signed with my user name, and my email address is available on my user page. I stand by what I write.

Sca (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I stand by what I write as well, but who I am in the real world is not really of any importance. --74.13.130.165 (talk) 03:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I see your point, Sca, but having an account doesn't necessarily mean the person is somehow more responsible, does it? You can create a bogus account anytime. On the other hand, those who do not have accounts expose their IP addresses (well, usually). --BorgQueen (talk) 04:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily -- anyone can be irresponsible. But at least if you have a user page there's a place for others to dialogue with you, and to know a little about your background. I enjoy reading about the lives of other Wikipedians -- it's interesting.

Sca (talk) 16:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

You believe everything you read in the internet? --74.13.128.166 (talk) 23:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Why am I not surprised the above comment is not from a registered user? Sca (talk) 14:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Why am I not surprised the above comment comes from a registered user? Seriously, leave anonymous users alone. People can tell us as much or as little as they like. I'll tell you all you want to know about myself, but it's your choice as to whether you believe it. At least the anonymous users aren't lying. J Milburn (talk) 17:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

What's the diff? Would Sca answer the question "You believe everything you read in the internet?" if I create an account just to pose this question? I doubt it. --74.13.128.21 (talk) 03:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

My point is, it was a snide comment. I see there's a discussion of civility on your talk page. I am objecting to lack of civility.Sca (talk) 19:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

First video on Main Page?

I wonder - is the video of the Gold-whiskered Barbet (today in DYK) the first one we've ever featured on the Main Page (outside the featured media section)?--Eloquence* 02:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm almost certain that it's not. I'm sure the DYK regulars know, though, and I think you'd have better luck at WT:DYK. 68.76.159.202 (talk) 21:04, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

We had a video of a bird a few days ago. And, as you said, we've had videos in the TFP section. I'll see if I can find a link... J Milburn (talk) 21:07, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I see we are talking about the same video. I'm not personally aware of any others, but there may well have been. J Milburn (talk) 21:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I haven't found other videos by prefix-searching .ogg in Wikipedia:Recent additions, [1] (just three songs). Though searches through page history, for other MP sections or other file types may give more results. Cenarium (talk) 11:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

.ogg is the only video/sound filetype that can be uploaded, unless you count .gifs. J Milburn (talk) 15:25, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

There was a video of a flight of warplanes some months ago. And I think we've had the video of the Spruce Goose as well. Modest Genius ^talk 19:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

(←) Nope. We also have .ogv §hep^Talk 23:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

.ogg and .ogv are the same format just different extentsions. Oh and for previous videos see Template:POTD protected/2008-03-07.Geni 03:55, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

More pictures

Put more pictures on the first page please. -Jeremy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.60.144.167 (talk) 20:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

How many would you like to see? --Candlewicke _S^T _# :) 11:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

15 isn't enough? §hep^Talk 20:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

We're thinking of a tabloid version. Nshuks7 (talk) 08:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Would you like a Page Three as well? —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 11:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, please, thank you. Give me something to compensate for my ADHD. 168.9.120.8 (talk) 17:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Why is Simple English on the Top?

Why, on main page's language list, the Simple English Wikipedia is on the top? --Fixman^{Praise me} 00:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

See Template talk:MainPageInterwikis#Why is Simple English first? - BanyanTree 01:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

My guess would be, "for simplicity."173.49.91.134 (talk) 22:18, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I feel ashamed I found that so funny. J Milburn (talk) 22:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Picture of the day

The picture of the day is stunning, but the article itself has in no way been developed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.192.200 (talk) 09:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

That is true. The picture of the day was chosen because it was stunning. The article(s) in which the PotD appears do not influence that choice. 168.9.120.8 (talk) 13:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair point, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.192.200 (talk) 10:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

"more" link for FA links to DAB page not article

{{editprotected}}

Per headline; "more..." at the bottom of the FA should link to Hurricane Linda (1997) not Hurricane Linda.

substitute:

'''[[Hurricane Linda (1997)|Hurricane Linda]]''' was the strongest [[Pacific hurricane]] on record. Forming from a [[tropical wave]] on September 9, 1997, Linda steadily intensified and reached hurricane status within 36 hours of developing. Subsequently, it [[rapid deepening|rapidly intensified]], reaching winds of 185 [[miles per hour|mph]] (295 [[kilometres per hour|km/h]]) and an estimated central pressure of 902 [[bar (unit)|millibars]] (26.65 [[Inch of mercury|inches of mercury]]). The hurricane was briefly forecast to move toward southern California, but instead, it turned out to sea and dissipated on September 17. It was the fifteenth [[tropical cyclone]], thirteenth named storm, seventh hurricane, and fifth [[tropical cyclone scales|major hurricane]] of the [[1997 Pacific hurricane season]]. While near peak intensity, Hurricane Linda passed near [[Socorro Island]], where it damaged meteorological instruments. The hurricane produced high waves along the southwestern Mexican coastline, forcing the closure of five ports. When Linda was predicted to make [[landfall (meteorology)|landfall]] on California, it would have been the first to do so since a [[1939 California tropical storm|storm in 1939]]. Although it did not hit the state, the hurricane produced light to moderate rainfall across the region, causing mudslides and flooding in the [[San Gorgonio Wilderness]]; two houses were destroyed and 77 others were damaged, and damage totaled $3.2 million (1997 [[United States Dollar|USD]], $4.3 million 2008 USD). Despite the intensity, the name was not [[list of retired Pacific hurricane names|retired]]. ('''[[Hurricane Linda|more...]]''')

with

'''[[Hurricane Linda (1997)|Hurricane Linda]]''' was the strongest [[Pacific hurricane]] on record. Forming from a [[tropical wave]] on September 9, 1997, Linda steadily intensified and reached hurricane status within 36 hours of developing. Subsequently, it [[rapid deepening|rapidly intensified]], reaching winds of 185 [[miles per hour|mph]] (295 [[kilometres per hour|km/h]]) and an estimated central pressure of 902 [[bar (unit)|millibars]] (26.65 [[Inch of mercury|inches of mercury]]). The hurricane was briefly forecast to move toward southern California, but instead, it turned out to sea and dissipated on September 17. It was the fifteenth [[tropical cyclone]], thirteenth named storm, seventh hurricane, and fifth [[tropical cyclone scales|major hurricane]] of the [[1997 Pacific hurricane season]]. While near peak intensity, Hurricane Linda passed near [[Socorro Island]], where it damaged meteorological instruments. The hurricane produced high waves along the southwestern Mexican coastline, forcing the closure of five ports. When Linda was predicted to make [[landfall (meteorology)|landfall]] on California, it would have been the first to do so since a [[1939 California tropical storm|storm in 1939]]. Although it did not hit the state, the hurricane produced light to moderate rainfall across the region, causing mudslides and flooding in the [[San Gorgonio Wilderness]]; two houses were destroyed and 77 others were damaged, and damage totaled $3.2 million (1997 [[United States Dollar|USD]], $4.3 million 2008 USD). Despite the intensity, the name was not [[list of retired Pacific hurricane names|retired]]. ('''[[Hurricane Linda (1997)|more...]]''')

--Rogerb67 (talk) 11:57, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Well spotted. Martin^msgj 13:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Next time, pls use WP:ERRORS. Thx. --74.13.128.21 (talk) 02:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Deposit Pricing

Suppose a bank expects to raise ￥250 million in new deposits by offering it depositors an interest rate of 7% (including demand deposits from firms total 75%, and demand deposits from individuals total 25%, and the following estimates have the same proportions). Management estimates that if the bank offers a 7.5% interest rate, it can raise ￥500 million in new deposit money. At 8%, ￥750 million is expected to flow in, while a posted deposit rate of 8.5 percent will bring in a projected ￥1 billion. Finally, if the bank promises an estimated 9%, management projects that ￥1.25 billion in new funds will appear. Meanwhile, assume that new deposit money will bring a yield of 10%. Suppose that interest and non-interest costs spent to attract the demand deposits from firms total 5% of the amount of these deposits, while demand deposits from individuals cost the bank 10% of funds raised in interest and non-interest expenses. Suppose reserve requirements and uncollected balances reduce the amount of money actually available to the bank for investing in interest-bearing assets by 30% for demand deposits from firms, 20% for demand deposit from individuals. Given these facts, what deposit interest rate should the bank offer its customers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.166.50.40 (talk) 14:21, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! If you'd like us to do your homework for you, please visit our reference desks, where you can ask your question in a more appropriate forum. Although they'll tell you that they don't do homework for you, they may be kind and point you to resources that will help you work out the answer for yourself. --Dweller (talk) 14:33, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Omar al-Bashir

Props to whoever chose and thumbnailed the photo of Omar al-Bashir in the ITN section. The tiny thumbnail makes him look like he has glowing devil eyes. This made my day! 168.9.120.8 (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

...Er, thanks? Spencer^T♦C 22:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Video on Main Page

DUCK AND COVER - I'm sure it's a great movie, but I will not get to see it. Wikipedia is intended to be an encyclopedia, with knowledge which can be accessed by all who wish to have it. The vast majority of people can't access this movie, without downloading something first. I thought it was just me, but from talking to my colleagues it's clear that none of us can run these movies on Wikipedia - although we use Wikipedia every day. Most of us access Wikipedia from work, where we are barred from downloading new applications onto our PCs. You are only annoying us by including video pieces that we can't run.Michael of Lucan (talk) 10:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC) comments moved from Errors page --Dweller (talk) 10:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Dweller - to avoid timewasting dispute, I will accept your edit in moving my comment down here. However, with respect, I was drawing attention to a fundamental error in the mode of production of the picture, not commenting on its content. In effect, you have applied subjective judgment to what I said by denying that it is an error.Michael of Lucan (talk) 11:07, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

The issues you raise are worthy of more general discussion, not just pertaining to that particular video. So this is the more appropriate venue. Furthermore, it's not a correctable "error", making placing it there less relevant as well. I accept I made a judgement call, but I stand by it. Meanwhile, let's see what people think of the issues you raise. --Dweller (talk) 11:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Michael of Lucan, Wikipedia never makes the guarantee that all people will be able to access all of its knowledge and resources from all Internet-capable devices. For example, for containing information about China that may be seen as detrimental to that nation's reputation, most users in China cannot access certain portions of the encyclopedia.

Wikipedia does make the guarantee that its knowledge and resources will, where possible, remain free to use for any purpose by anyone who can access it. The non-proprietary file format being used for our videos helps to preserve that guarantee. A universally-accessible encyclopedia is a fine ideal, but Wikipedia has placed its priorities on near-universal utility.

Now for a useful answer... try YouTube, it has the video in its entirety (and it can easily be resized to full-screen, which is nice). Aylad ['ɑɪlæd] 13:35, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I understand your points, but let me give you an analogy. Suppose I create an article in the English language part of Wikipedia, but I write a large chunk of it in Russian, without translation. Suppose that I refer to the Russian part frequently, and the information in it is key to understanding the article. In theory, that information is freely available to any English language speaker who wants it - by getting a translation. In reality, the article becomes frustrating and loses value for most readers. It would be promptly edited to remove the Russian text, and make its information available in some other way.

That is parallel with the video format used by Wikipedia. It would be better not to use these items on the Main page, and no article should assume the video is seen by the reader. I believe it's not seen by most readers.Michael of Lucan (talk) 14:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

If I could download a Firefox plugin that would allow me to read Russian flawlessly, then your analogy would work. (That would be a pretty cool plug-in.) However, I don't think that anyone is arguing that the current solution is ideal.

Since embedded off-site links are obviously unacceptable, perhaps you could find us, or help the developers to create, a free way of embedding OGM files that is more universal?

Then you would have a proposal for change that could be acted on instead of just a complaint. APL (talk) 15:09, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

The comparison doesn't hold up. You are unable to unable to view the video format due to the technical restrictions of the machine you are using... not because you lack the education or cultural background to understand it.

Any format chosen would present software compatibility issues. QuickTime? Can't view it without software support. Windows Media? Can't view it without software support. FLV? Your browser must support Flash video. (Insert file format here)? You still need software support.

To quote from WP:Creation and usage of media files, "Wikipedia uses Ogg Theora for video because it is open and royalty-free." Most of the formats supported by your machine probably do not offer these advantages. Aylad ['ɑɪlæd] 15:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Get your IT department to install a codec on your machines that supports playing OGGs. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 17:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

For my part, I enjoyed seeing Duck and Cover, I remember those drills in grade school, at 1 p.m. on the first Wednesday of every month, when the air-raied sirens would wail.

Years later I heard a different version of the instructions: "...go to the basement, kneel against an outside wall, place your head between your knees, and kiss your ass goodbye." Sca (talk) 18:40, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I think Michael of Lucan's point isn't that everybody should be able to see the video, but rather that it shouldn't be showcased on the main page because many can not see it. I think the solution is to get your own computer that you can configure how you choose. People with slow connections sometimes set their browser to not show images, but they wouldn't complain to everybody to stuff refering to images in the articles.

173.49.91.134 (talk) 21:28, 6 March 2009 (UTC)