Jump to content

Talk:Main Page

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RandomGuy666 (talk | contribs) at 15:44, 1 April 2020. 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 15:54 on 8 September 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]
  • "The Jersey Act was a 1913 regulation by the British Jockey Club..." but the article says "Nor was it promulgated by the Jockey Club, which had no authority over registration". DuncanHill (talk) 15:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, the JC did the "passing" but the owners of the GSB actually put it in their book and rules... so ... welcome to the murky world of horse-racing! Technically the British JC couldn't impose a registration rule but because the GSB actually put it in ... it happened. The whole episode was pretty toothless, and in the end, it ended up backfiring and hurting British racing more than American racing. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:37, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • The blurb says it was a regulation by the Jockey Club, the article says it wasn't. Should a blurb directly contradict the article it is promoting? DuncanHill (talk) 18:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • The blurb says "The Jersey Act was a 1913 regulation by the British Jockey Club and the owners of the General Stud Book"
          The lead says "the Jockey Club and the owners of the General Stud Book passed a regulation".
          The body says "At a meeting of the Jockey Club ... proposed a resolution ... It passed unanimously in May,[13] and a new regulation was placed in the General Stud Book". I'm not seeing the contradiction here, but maybe I'm missing something. - SchroCat (talk) 18:17, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • It wasn't a Jockey Club regulation. A resolution is not a regulation. It was a Stud Book regulation. The Jockey Club had no authority over registration, and did not promulgate the Jersey Act. The regulation was by the owners of the Stud Book. The Jockey Club might have agreed with it, but it was not a Jockey Club regulation. It was not a regulation by the Jockey Club. DuncanHill (talk) 19:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Errors with "In the news"

Errors in "Did you know ..."

  • ... that Mary Jo West compared working in network TV news to learning that Santa Claus is human? we're really going to ruin Santa Claus for children in for the sake of a DYK? Obnoxious and disgusting. Therapyisgood (talk) 15:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We did exactly that last month for Dead Pony and no-one whinged. Wikipedia is not censored.--Launchballer 15:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Errors in "On this day"

(September 13)
(September 9, tomorrow)

General discussion

Idea for a addition to the main page

I think they should add a quotes section that would focus on notable quotes by famous, or not so famous people - one each day. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 13:51, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know… section

I noticed that most of the facts in today's Did you know… section seem to rely on intentionally misleading names in order to be surprising, which I think is a bad idea. This is a significant deviation from Did you know… sections of past days. Was this an agreed-upon change?

And I realized that it's already April Fools Day in most of the world just before I was about to submit this. Never mind about what's above. Congratulations on fooling me. Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 00:50, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Glad you enjoyed it. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 11:30, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Was a little disappointed that the whole main page wasn't all tongue in cheek like preceding years.  :( -dashiellx (talk) 12:27, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's misleading, despite the holiday, and damages trust in what people see here. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 14:28, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 April 2020

Main PageMain page – In general, Wikipedia pages (even the ones in the Wikipedia: namespace) should be in the sentence case. I'm not sure if the Main page should be exempt from this rule, but I think it should follow it. Even the left pane has it sentence case. Interstellarity (talk) 11:52, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose, as this would lower-case the words 'main page' when used in the middle of a sentence, as in the opening banner above. So even your nom is incorrect as you've capitalized 'Main'. This title is used "mainly" on pages such as this, and not in article text, so leaving it as is does not violate site guidelines. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:17, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Randy Kryn: You probably know this already, but Wikipedia automatically capitalizes the first letter of every page and this page is no exception so it would be technically impossible to title it main page. It would either have to be Main Page or Main page. Interstellarity (talk) 13:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I meant in mid-sentence, where sentence case takes over in titled links. So in your nom the sentence would read "...if the main page should" and not as you've instinctively cased it. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I assumed this was an April Fool  :) but oppose, per Randy Kryn; Main Page, in its internal-WP usage is effectively a proper noun (i.e., it is used as a proper noun, not that it actually is). ——SN54129 13:25, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Portal:Main (maybe Portal:Welcome) - as the original "portal" and inspiration for that namespace. -- Netoholic @ 13:28, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (assuming it's not an April Fool ). The main page isn't a typical article, and doesn't have to conform to the same rules and naming conventions as anything else. Changing the name would cause technical work and headaches, for no real benefit.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Amakuru: Most moves require some work, and some require a lot of work, so argument from inertia is rarely a valid response. What we gain is WP:CONSISTENT application of namespace scope and article titling guidelines. This benefits repackagers of Wikipedia content who don't need to manually strip out this page. If we follow my recommendation of moving it to Portal: space, could revitalize usage of that namespace by showing a strong, working example. I hope other benefits can be identified in this process, and that we recognize that the sooner we shrug the remnants of old Wikipedia software limitations, the easier it will be overall. -- Netoholic @ 14:05, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    No, the point stands. Changing the most viewed page on the entire project is a waste of time and effort, and crucially it has no benefit, only downsides. This is not an article, and in particular it is not a discussion of main pages in general, it is a specific landing page. Others may have different views, but mine is firmly that this should be rejected.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:14, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This nomination is a serious nom and has nothing to do with April Fool's. Interstellarity (talk) 13:41, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I too assumed this was an April Fools joke, but as it's not... This is the Main Page, not an article about a specific main page or home pages in general. It's a proper noun. If anything, we should adjust the sidebar to match, not move the page. The idea of moving the page to Portal: namespace has been discussed and rejected on numerous occasions, see this FAQ. Modest Genius talk 14:25, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not a very good April Fools joke. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 14:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think this was a joke, and I think it was made in good faith, but (a) I won't go digging thru the archives but I have a vague memory of this being a perennial proposal, which died off maybe 10(?) years ago (b) the benefit/cost ratio on this change is very, very, very close to zero. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request to remove profanity from the "Did you know section"

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.


The April Fools jokes were pretty clever in this section, but it is a little bit unsettling seeing "fuck off" in the main page of the site. Seeing how the main page is usually a safe for work site, is it possible to remove this fact or at least be able to censor the vulgarity itself? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomGuy666 (talkcontribs) 15:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NOTCENSORED. Thank you. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 15:06, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Thank you for referring me to this section, it was a great resource for examining Wikipedia's policy on censorship and I will retract my statement about censoring the vulgarity itself. However, after reading the policy itself as well as WP:PROFANE I believe that having this statement on the main page violates the principle of least astonishment. If readers were to examine the 17 Million Fuck Offs page itself, the censorship policy would not apply as it is assumed they would have a general expectation to see profanity in the article itself. However, Wikipedia's main page itself rarely (albeit almost never) contains profanity so it cannot be anticipated for a user to have this expectation when viewing the main page. It is not necessary to include "fuck off," in the "did you know" because there are other facts that can be used to achieve comedic value. I apologize for the earlier formatting issues and I look forward to hearing back. --RandomGuy666 (talk) 15:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]