Talk:Main Page

Main Page error report

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 20:30 on 8 August 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.

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

Capital Bicycle Club

• ... that residents reported the first cycling club in Washington, D.C. (uniform pictured), to the police over concerns that bicycles posed a danger to pedestrians?

The article does not say or claim that this was "the first cycling club in Washington", just that it was "early".

Also, the source doesn't seem to mention pedestrians specifically – just of the "dangerous potential for accidents". Perhaps a concern was the risk of collisions with horses and/or people and property in general?

Note that the hook wasn't checked in the nomination even though it included a first. It was just waved through as AGF.

Andrew🐉(talk) 06:27, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I added the "first" claim to the article, citing the same source. Pinging Generalissima and BeanieFan11 to consider the other issues. Beanie, we strongly suggest additional scrutiny for "first" hooks. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:34, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I have to take some of the blame here, since I promoted the queue. It's especially embarrassing since ranting about "first" hooks is one of the top ways I make myself annoying at WT:DYK. The unfortunate truth is that when I'm processing queues, I don't have time to read every article in full. I generally just read the hook and then search for keywords in the text to verify the facts. Looking back at the article, I suspect I found "the first such club in the country" and didn't notice this was immediately preceded by "Boston Bicycle Club".

I know this has been said before, but Andrew, you have a keen eye for detail and critical reading. These are valuable skills and in great demand at DYK, so thank you for the much-needed quality control. But it would be even more useful if it was done on the #Next DYK and #Next-but-one DYK sections, so we could catch these problems before they hit the main page. RoySmith (talk) 15:02, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• Different point: the comma after the "(uniform pictured)" should instead come before. So, " ... Washington, D.C., (uniform pictured) to the police". JMCHutchinson (talk) 13:42, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Emmanuella Atora

• ... that Olympic taekwondo practitioner Emmanuella Atora described her career as "I hit people for a living"?

According to the source, what she actually said was "Je tape les gens pour vivre". This was not translated by the source and it's not clear what she meant by it as Taekwondo is not usually a professional sport while she appears to have a career as an aspiring professional model. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:27, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• Also, the line was a meme already, having been used by MMA fighter Francis Ngannou a year earlier [1]. Black Kite (talk) 07:23, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

  Well spotted. Francis Ngannou is a successful professional fighter and so the boast works better for him. There's merchandise too... Andrew🐉(talk) 08:51, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

In the fourth hook, there doesn't seem to be any reason for "The" in "The Proms" to be capitalized. Primergrey (talk) 19:53, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Errors in "On this day"

Today's OTD

Albert Stanley is also today's FA. Should he be replaced? Mjroots (talk) 05:15, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

 Fixed I've swapped him for someone else. Schwede66 05:25, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(August 9, tomorrow)

Monday's FL

(August 12)

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.

General discussion

Request for comments on the Main Page

The 2013 main page redesign proposal is a holding a Request for comments on the Main Page, in order to design an alternative main page based on what the community asks for. Please leave feedback regarding any aspects of the Main Page you like or dislike, and discuss the Main Page's purposes and aims.

Evad37 (talk) (on behalf of the 2013 main page redesign proposal team) 00:31, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

TAFI's entry

Requesting that TAFI's section be restored on Main page. The queue page has been updated (see Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/2013/21), and it should post correctly at this time. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:39, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

As discussed before TAFI was placed on the main page, this was a trial (the failure of which would result in TAFI's removal, with a new consensus required to restore it). I'm biased in favor of TAFI's inclusion, but even I must acknowledge that the attempt was unsuccessful.

Users weren't editing the articles to a significant extent. The implementation likely played a major role in this, but a different one would require a new consensus anyway. It simply isn't feasible to fit a more elaborate presentation into the space allotted. I wish that I'd noticed the original discussion before the decision to use the column was made, as this jumped out at me as a big problem.

But the missing week 21 queue was an even bigger problem. As you noted, remaining up to date is key. We knew this from the beginning. (NickPenguin was quite right in stating that "once this goes on the main page, there best be content set up and ready to go.") We can't rely on last-minute scrambling (or, in this case, after-the-fact scrambling that wouldn't even have been possible if the protection were still in effect). We need to ensure that measures are in place to prevent something like this from occurring again before we can even consider another main page trial. —David Levy 04:21, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• As a functional comparison, it would be useful to view statistics for how many articles listed on Did you know... at Main page received improvements during this time period, and to what degree. This would provide an objective comparison regarding actual success versus failure of TAFI's presence on Main page during the short time it was there, compared to other content that had similar exposure. As of this post, my proposal at TAFI talk to use a bot to automatically update the queue has received unanimous support, which would solve the above-stated queue problems in entirety. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:49, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposal at TAFI talk

A discussion is occurring at Wikiproject TAFI's talk page regarding this matter at: Proposal: use Theo's Little Bot to automate the schedule and queue. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:04, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

TAFI summaries

• See: Wikipedia talk:Today's articles for improvement – Articles were being improved! Northamerica1000^(talk) 21:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Tripura

I think this counts as the very first time that random requests on the Main Page Talk have speedily been granted. (Two anons in the last week or so demanding content on India.) Huh. 108.180.204.90 (talk) 07:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Eh? I selected the article for TFA because it was one of a batch recently promoted, not because of any complaints here. Tripura is the second India-related article within three weeks, in fact, after Mother India on 3rd May. Bencherlite^Talk 10:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree that it is excellent that India is getting more coverage on this website.

Avoid unlinked obscure terms on the main page.

The DYK for Caldey Abbey quotes someone as saying "simply the best lavender soliflore on earth". There's no explanation of "soliflore" in the linked article, no article on "soliflore" in Wikipedia, and no entry for "soliflore" on Wiktionary. I think it's a little inappropriate to have a DYK entry which hinges on a term that is left completely undefined. Even having it in the article unexplained is a little on the edge, but picking it to be featured when the likely majority of the audience has no clue what it means and has no easy way of finding out is not very good. -- 71.35.111.68 (talk) 16:48, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Defined here. I suspect whoever wrote the article didn't know what it meant, as if you look at the source it's actually a review of the book not the book itself so they probably just cut-and-pasted it without knowing what it means.

I feel like the DYK reviewing process is not functioning well lately. We've seen one cheesy-joke hook after another, and regular errors like this lately. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:54, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Initial reviewers generally focus on the quantifiable aspects of the article, like its length, history, originality, copyright status of the image (if one is submitted), and of course whether the reference checks out. Because of course that's what we've prioritized. And It's easier. Very infrequently do I see people focusing on the textual aspects of the hook, which of course is just as important. Daniel Case (talk) 15:02, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

How dare you show US tornado but not London attack

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I am disgusted that the United States is once again given special status on this website and the rest of the world is ignored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.82.250 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 23 May 2013‎

As a Londoner, I must have missed the bit where dozens of us were killed. The Tornado in Oklahoma is a highly significant event; the London murder is arguably less so. However, if you want to put your case, the ITN candidates board is thataway. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:33, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It is only one example of a reoccurring problem. Tornadoes happen all the time, they kill people, it isn't news. It doesn't deserve this attention.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.82.250 (talk • contribs) 18:35, 23 May 2013‎

Please sign your comments. And seriously; things get posted on ITN because we discuss them and reach a consensus. There's no 'how dare you' about it; there is no 'us' the editors in contrast to 'you' the readers. If you want something included, get over to the discussion page, read the guidelines, and make your case. For what it's worth, top-category tornadoes with multiple fatalities in built-up areas happen a lot less frequently than single murders in the UK. But I'm not an admin, and I don't represent any kind of consensus. If there's a consensus to post the Woolwich story, it'll get posted. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I think it necessary to note that 2013 Woolwich attack has been marked [Ready] at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates. It will probably be up soon. These things take time. hajatvrc @ 22:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It's certainly ready as to article quality; it's debatable whether there's a consensus to post. Perhaps an uninvolved admin will be along shortly to decide. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It is certainly a more significant event worldwide that some common natural occurrence in the middle of nowhere USA. The nature of the attack will probably result in problems with Muslim/non-muslim relationships around the western world, and may incite more violence. It is an importance sociopolitical event. What is the long-term importance of a tornado in the middle of the US? None. But USA editors here certainly think it must be important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.82.250 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 23 May 2013‎

How often do I need to repeat that I am a Londoner, and I disagree with you? AlexTiefling (talk) 23:15, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

How dare you restart the same unproductive rant for at least the seventh time ([2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]), without doing your share to produce the quality non-USA content you so desire to see? After all, every time you beat this old horse, you're eventually given the same ultimatum. It's time to drop the stick and do something productive; put up or shut up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.211.99 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 23 May 2013‎

I thought this crybaby routine was familiar. Resolute 23:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It is impossible for one individual to fight injustice, but it is possible for one individual to find fellow travelers through the act of protest. I protest for the creation of discontent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.82.250 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 23 May 2013‎

So, then, that's basically a fancy way of saying you'll keep complaning, but won't bother actually doing anything productive? Have fun with that.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:19, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Many significant articles are uneditable, it is not by my design that I cannot edit them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.82.250 (talk • contribs) 19:21, 23 May 2013‎

Many more are. It is by your choice that you add nothing of value. Resolute 23:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

If you would have created an account a year ago when you were complaining you could edit almost every article by now. GB fan 23:27, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not going to put my information into a server located in Florida where the CIA & FBI have their Patriot act. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.82.250 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 23 May 2013‎

You already are every time you edit. The only difference is that with a username people wouldn't see your IP address. GB fan 23:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Speaking as a Canadian, I am sad to see that this troll is posting from my country. Given the obviously silly nature of a post arguing that "the US is given special status" at a time when 80% of the ITN entries are European or Asian themed, I think it's high time we simply start applying WP:DENY. Resolute 23:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

The 'I can't edit' defence fails completely here as the Woolwich article was never protected. And I'm fairly sure ITN/C is not protected either although if you post long rants you may eventually find your contribs reverted. BTW echoing Resolute's earlier comment, since you were also demanding India related articles, the TFA a few days ago on Tripura also appears to have never been protected except for the brief move protection while it was TFA. It has a number of IP edits, but none of them appear to be you unless you were editing under a different IP. Nil Einne (talk) 05:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Every article on this site, whether about the US or some other place, was started by a single individual. Seems that even if some articles are locked for editing, there are still innumerable articles you could be working on or creating to remedy this bias. Or even just take part in the discussion as to which items get posted to the front page. Complaining about the darkness doesn't get the light bulb changed you know. Do something or go away. --Khajidha (talk) 02:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd also like to apologize for this clown. This is the IP for a Community College's computer lab, which I also use to browse this site, and I've been noticing this idiot's periodic rants through the edit history. I hope I can say that s/he does not represent this institution. 72.28.82.250 (talk) 00:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd also like to state for the record that it was here on Wikipedia/ITN that this American learned about the 2013 Stockholm riots, currently the lede item. They haven't gotten any coverage in the American media (although I haven't been able to dig into The New York Times lately, which I see has only run a wire story). The people at ITN/C must be doing at least that much right. Daniel Case (talk) 00:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Who let this grammatical atrocity onto the main page?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

"Layout scheme of a Sukhoi Su-25 (details), a jet aircraft designed to provide close air support for the Soviet Ground Forces and used by various countries since. Since production began in 1978, [...]"

?!? Who let this through?

• "used by various countries since." - Since what? since the Soviets designed it? since it was designed for close air support? since it was for the Soviet ground forces? since it was produced? since the Soviets stopped using it? (and please don't tell me "this is specifically designed to make people question it" so they read the article)

• "[...] since. Since production began [...]!" - well, that is just self evident. Either this was written by two or three people and no-one oversaw it, or it is by someone who does not speak/write English very well - either way, someone needs to fix it. Chaosdruid (talk) 04:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Really? This is the solution you came up with?

"fixing this. Please don't tell him, because his rant makes him look silly if no one tells him it was fixed." [8]

And you are a sysop? Nice!

You should be ashamed and instantly de-mopped.

Next time, try admitting you cocked up and don't attack someone trying to help. Idiot. Chaosdruid (talk) 12:49, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain Jayron32 is not normally involved in POTD but the joke was funny. Meanwhile the wording has been there since 7 May [9] so if you want to talk about people who 'cocked up' by letting this 'atrocity' through, should be 'ashamed' and 'attack' volunteers.... Nil Einne (talk) 13:07, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

And after your edit to reword that (ec):

And how did I cock up? Because I didn't say to myself:

"I just found this, but it has been like this for a while, so I should leave it and not say anything."?

More importantly, if it has been like that for months, the people who cocked up were those involved with POTD - not me.

And you should have not tried to make out it is in any way my fault, it is not. Chaosdruid (talk) 13:13, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

• Well, Chaosdruid, I'm here, so what do you want to say to me? Because right now this thread seems to prove my thesis about a new rule for the internet: in the case of a mistake by an unidentified person, the amount of forum/talk page drama is inversely proportionate to the size of the mistake being discussed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

And so you are adding to it? I said what I had to say: I pointed out the mistakes; asked who had let it through; explained why I thought it was wrong; and suggested someone fix it.

End of (or so it should have been)

I am turning off email notifications for the next few hours ... I have RL stuff to do. Chaosdruid (talk) 13:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

• "Who let this through?" - Ask and you shall be answered. If you have nothing more, so be it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Unsigned Posts

I see some unsigned posts on this talk page. Is this talk page set up for the bot to sign unsigned posts? If not, I suggest that it should be. If it is so set up, then maybe the bot was malfunctioning and is working again. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

SineBot was turned off a couple of months ago (after this discussion), to make it easier to undo spam. DoctorKubla (talk) 20:27, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

London attack is not notable for lising in "In the news".

Of course it's notable in the UK news because the homocide rate is only 1.2 per 100,000 people (compared to 4.8 in the US) and most murders end up in the news here because of that, with this case being rarer again haven been a soldier on home ground. But is this really notable for world news? Off duty soldiers get targeted and killed somewhere in the world every day and I've never seen them listed on here before. 82.42.161.70 (talk) 20:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I'd argue this is a case of US centrism. Only Americans would be this incensed over "Islamic terrorism"68.101.71.187 (talk) 20:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Then I'd agree with you and state that the rest of the world is A-OK with terrorism. =P 205.122.217.233 (talk) 23:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

• If you'd like to solve this problem, the way to do it is to improve Wikipedia by contributing content to articles from places of the world other than the UK and US and to nominate them at WP:ITNC. Complaining after the fact will not produce the results you appear to seek. If your goal is to fix the problem, that is how you accomplish it. If your goal is simply to publicly express your outrage after the fact, merely to make yourself appear morally superior, but not to actually make any difference in solving the problem, then congrats, you've been successful! --Jayron

32 23:27, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

While I agree that this isn't going to get removed after-the-fact, let's assume good faith on the part of 82.42.161.70 and not bite the user. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 03:15, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

There is a massive case of US-centrism in ITN anyway. I have no idea how "gay basketball player" was less controversial than "most influential manager in history retires". Sceptre ^(talk) 03:30, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I forgot London was in the U.S. Or do people feel a need to piss and moan about the U.S. every time ITN is mentioned now? Hot Stop 03:32, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

People need their excuse to be pissed off about trivial things. The US is convenient and widely disliked. Although it takes impressive mental gymnastics to believe that giving attention to London is US-centricism. 75.156.70.207 (talk) 16:23, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

This conversation is too US-centric, can we bash some other countries? I don't like Uraguay, for no real reason. Ban Uraguay from the main page!!!!! Beeblebrox (talk) 18:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

!NO! Ban Sardinia! They've invaded the page, it's Gibraltar MKII! (No seriously, when was the last time anybody saw anything Sardinia related...?) --85.210.99.191 (talk) 21:02, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

There's an Argentine entry under TFA and OTD! WTF! First they get the pope now this! Hot Stop 21:06, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

This page is incredible human-centric! As a Swordfish, I am extremely offended by this selfish behaviour! Shame! Shame! 75.156.70.207 (talk) 23:35, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion

As 'excess of items relating to topic X'/'bias towards theme Y' are regular topics of discussion on this talk page perhaps there could be a text at the top suggesting that 'people actively engage in rectifying the situation.' Jackiespeel (talk) 10:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry. I tried. I was burnt. May not bother again. HiLo48 (talk) 10:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Also add a giant picture of a bald eagle draped in the American flag. You know, just to irritate people. 75.156.70.207 (talk) 23:37, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Featured pix

Is anyone else getting a bit tired of pictures of Asian birds? The photos are fine technically, but enough is enough, at least for a while. Sca (talk) 14:38, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

There are no more bird pictures scheduled until June 8, and those are a pair of Australian ducks (And, by "Asian birds", are you also including the Girls' Generation pic from yesterday :-)? Daniel Case (talk) 15:42, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

• Birds or boids? ;). Yeah, there's a good stretch of avian-free time coming ahead. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:05, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
• As a side note, the Korean boids got almost 31k hits yesterday. I think we need more boids, or maybe some cool cats. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Speaking as a mother and a fireman, I like the birds. MORE BIRDS NOW!!!! Beeblebrox (talk) 18:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

• You could solve this problem by uploading more high-quality pictures of non-birds. --Jayron32 18:58, 25 May 2013 (UTC)