Jump to content

Talk:Main Page

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 79.71.113.135 (talk) at 22:23, 8 September 2009 (WP:AVOID violated: comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives: Sections of this page older than three days are automatically relocated to the newest archive.

001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019 020 021 022 023 024 025 026 027 028 029 030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 059 060 061 062 063 064 065 066 067 068 069 070 071 072 073 074 075 076 077 078 079 080 081 082 083 084 085 086 087 088 089 090 091 092 093 094 095 096 097 098 099 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207

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 13:02 on 2 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"

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Ugly hook, and where is the quote from? Secretlondon (talk) 23:50, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Secretlondon: The quote is from the fifth sentence of the third paragraph of "Initial announcement and reactions", while its source is in the sentence. How would you word the hook?--Launchballer 01:00, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are three bolded highlights in this hook. What is the article(s) that users are supposed to be focusing on: All three, or just one? Why is this specific quote included at all? Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 02:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a multi-hook, which I suppose is like casting a wide net to catch all possible fish. All three bolded articles in this one hook are the target articles. Bremps... 03:06, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Errors in "On this day"

(November 8)
(November 4)

In the description of the featured picture for Diwali, we should wikilink the mythical city Ayodhya (Ramayana) instead of the actual city Ayodhya. The reason is explained in the second paragraph of the article Ayodhya (Ramayana):

Also see the section Ayodhya_(Ramayana)#Historicity. --Lekhak93 (talk) 09:03, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General discussion


Please see and comment here on this proposal. Thanks, Cenarium (talk) 23:04, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ricardo Montalban

Not ideal for a Khan article, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ricardo_Montalban_in_Fiesta_trailer.jpg is public domain. I hate to see a pictureless FA. --Nricardo (talk) 00:11, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although it is public domain, the major objection is that it is a screenshot from the trailer of an entirely different film. That would be more confusing and cause more problems and complaints. At least with a pictureless FA, we do have a consistent standard reason. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Someone would have to do some pretty fancy photoshopping to make that image appropriate for use with this article. I believe this image might work. Rreagan007 (talk) 03:46, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, the Star Trek logo is not nearly illustrative enough (of the subject in question) to be of encyclopedic value in this instance. —David Levy 04:32, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I personally support the addition of the ST logo- it's better than nothing, and it's strongly related to the character. I'm amazed the logo isn't already used in the article, in a navbox or the like. J Milburn (talk) 08:40, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How would the logo be anything other than decorative? In no way would it illustrate or otherwise provide any information about the character. To me, that doesn't seem better than nothing. —David Levy 19:19, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN! @harej 08:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hope he's on the X Factor tomorrow night... he Khan Singh... (snigger)  GARDEN  19:40, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Picture

Why is the FA picture not showing up? Is this just my computer? 165.91.166.231 (talk) 18:49, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It works fine for me, but it is 13 MB. Is it possible that it is just not loaded yet? J.delanoygabsadds 18:54, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the IP is referring to the Khan Noonien Singh blurb. If that's correct, the answer is that we don't have an image for this article, because any such image would be copyrighted and we don't use copyrighted images on te Main Page. That means we sometimes run a featured article with no image, as we're doing today. It's not an error. Gavia immer (talk) 19:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a minor correction, we do use copyrighted images on the main page, provided that they're available under suitable free licenses. We don't use non-free images (apart from those owned by the Wikimedia Foundation) on the main page. —David Levy 19:24, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are, of course, correct. Gavia immer (talk) 04:05, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AVOID violated

One item in "On this day" Sept 5 violates this policy. Admins please check.--yousaf465' 03:48, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you be more specific please? --candlewicke 04:30, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The 1972 event I'm refering to.--yousaf465' 04:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly is the problem? Nohomers48 (talk) 05:16, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It has be reloved now.--yousaf465' 07:48, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I presume that was a misspelling of removed? And I think (s)he was referring to the inverted commas around "Black September". 79.71.113.135 (talk) 08:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's all about the brill

if i may say s myself this is a brill site :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.127.113 (talk) 22:38, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think we cover a few more topics than just brill. howcheng {chat} 21:54, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(groan!)--Willski72 (talk) 12:40, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, he was talking about the use of the word 'terrorist'. -- tariqabjotu 17:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aw yes, lets not call those people terrorists. Lets not call them what they are. Thats just cruel. Lets call them widdy-wadders. --Matt57 (talkcontribs) 21:29, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard many names for terrorists in my time but never have i heard one as good as "widdy-wadders". If thats not going to put you off being one i dont know what is!--Willski72 (talk) 10:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's go the whole PC-hog and call them "trepidation promoters" or "encouragers for alarm". 79.71.113.135 (talk) 17:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The life removal squad. --candlewicke 19:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's almost a chess move: "Autopilot landing, the Qaeda variant". But I would support seeing "Life-removal Squad" somewhere on the main page. April fools' day, maybe? 79.71.113.135 (talk) 22:23, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article for september 7th

shouldn't The Homebrew Channel be featured tomorrow ? Chickenator (talk) 03:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given that it isn't a WP:Featured article, definitely no. Nil Einne (talk) 04:38, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You can certainly work to get it to that stage, though. (Won't happen by tomorrow, but definitely can happen by a year from tomorrow, if not sooner.) Check out WP:Article development, WP:Featured article criteria, and the pages linked therein. P.S. Today's Featured Article is usually scheduled from a few days to a month ahead of time - see WP:Today's_featured_article and links on that page (like WP:Today's_featured_article/September_2009) to see what they will be. -- 128.104.112.179 (talk) 14:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On This Day: Nixon Pardoned

Just a suggestion, but I think the blurb about Ford's pardon of Nixon should be tweaked so that Pardon gets the bold, as the pardon was the important event of the day, and it should be directed to Presidency_of_Gerald_Ford#Nixon_pardon instead of the generic Pardon article. That way people looking for info on the pardon (as I was - I wanted to read the text of the pardon) have but to click the bolded Pardon. Just my 2 cents. ArakunemTalk 14:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. BencherliteTalk 14:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Been here nearly 3 years, and still not WP:BOLD enough to mess with the front page. :) ArakunemTalk 16:15, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Samoa flag next to Norwegian topic

The top item is Norwegian, with the Samoa flag pictured next to it. Then, in the second topic, Samoa is mentioned including a reference to the pictured flag. To me as a first impression this is counter-feeling. But it might be acceptable in internet-publishing? -DePiep (talk) 21:35, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a FAQ Wikipedia:Main Page FAQ#Why are the images on "In the news" and "On this day" not aligned next to each relevant entry?. Basically it's a technical issue, and you're supposed to look for the (pictured) label. Not ideal, but *shrug*. -- 128.104.112.179 (talk) 21:46, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]