Talk:Main Page

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Main Page error reports[edit]

To report an error on today's or tomorrow's Main Page, please add it to the appropriate section below.

  • Where is the error? An exact quote of all or part of the text in question will help.
  • Offer a correction if possible.
  • References are helpful, especially when reporting an obscure factual or grammatical error.
  • Time zones: The current date and time is displayed in Coordinated Universal Time (12:40 on 19 January 2019), not adjusted to your local time zone.
  • Do not use {{edit fully-protected}}, which will not give you a faster response, and in fact causes problems if used here. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
  • Done? Once an error has been fixed, or has rotated off the Main Page, or has been acknowledged as not an error, the error report will be removed from this page; please check the page's history for discussion and action taken.
  • No chit-chat: Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere.
  • Can you fix the issue yourself? If the error is with the content of an article linked from the main page, consider attempting to fix the problem rather than reporting it here.

Errors in the summary of the featured article[edit]

Today's TFA[edit]

  • Found only in the Cordillera Oriental mountain range of Ecuador (map shown), it lives in forests and grasslands at 3,380 to 3,720 meters (11,090 to 12,200 ft) above sea level.
The article reports that at one particular location, specimens were collected within that range; it does not report that the entire species lives within that rather narrow band. The lead to the article mis-summarises its own content (which frankly should have been picked up at FA stage, so please don't use that as a reason for discarding this report). Kevin McE (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
I've given this a tweak, because the range is known from an extremely small number of samples. It should be noted, though, that species range, or size, or whatever, is always based on taking the range, or mean, of a finite number of samples; it is never completely known. For that reason, using a small number of samples to talk about size is generally okay. If there's a different error in the summary you haven't specifically mentioned, please do so. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:46, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
But these were all taken in the same area, so the range of altitudes is determined by that area, not necessarily indicative of the entire range. As to the edited version, it is not only known from Pacallacta (where these altitudes are taken) but also from at least Tablón, the altitude of which we do not know. While collection of specimens is of course necessary for determining details such as weight, range is determined by observation, and we have no declaration that the collection area is the only area in which they were observed. Kevin McE (talk) 20:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  • It is listed as a Vulnerable species
No need for capital: 'vulnerable'. Kevin McE (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Fixed. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:46, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  • "First collected in 1903 and formally described in 2003, "
Again, the lead has simplified the contanet of the article to the point of changing its meaning: we have no information about whether there were earlier formal descriptions, it was description as a distinct species that was novel in 2003. Kevin McE (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
The lead isn't incorrect; it was indeed "formally described as a new species in 2003". The blurb glosses that over, and so I've tweaked that. If one of the @TFA coordinators: wishes to make a further tweak, I won't stand in the way. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:50, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
The lead isn't incorrect now, but it was before I edited it to conform with the detail in the body text. Kevin McE (talk) 20:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Tomorrow's TFA[edit]

Errors with In the news[edit]

Errors in On this day[edit]

Today's OTD[edit]

  • San Agustin Church (pictured) in Manila, the oldest extant church in the Philippines, was completed.
Nothing in the article claiming it is the oldest church in the country. Kevin McE (talk) 17:50, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
It is now. howcheng {chat} 08:39, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
  • The French newspaper L'Aurore revealed that the Nazi SS officer Klaus Barbie
By 1972, he was a former Nazi officer. Kevin McE (talk) 17:50, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  • A tank barge and a tug grounded on a beach in South Kingstown, Rhode Island, U.S., spilling an estimated 828,000 US gallons
Inconsistency in punctuation of US: suggest both are without full stops, to avoid unsightly ., juxtaposition. Kevin McE (talk) 17:50, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Done. howcheng {chat} 08:39, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
  • A four-man team, using only skis and kites, completed a 1,093-mile (1,759 km) trek to reach the Southern Pole of Inaccessibility for the first time since 1967, and for the first time ever without mechanical assistance.
Those 4 men were not born in 1967, so their 2007 expedition cannot have been their first since 1967. Surely kites are mechanical assistance: they enable the harnessing of an external force to move the men and their equipment. The cited reference in the article does not claim it as without mechanical assistance. "A four-man team, using only skis and kites, completed a 1,093-mile (1,759 km) trek to reach the Southern Pole of Inaccessibility, the first people to get there since 1967, and the first to do so on foot." Kevin McE (talk) 17:50, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Done. howcheng {chat} 08:39, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Tomorrow's OTD[edit]

  • on the ice of the lake Köyliönjärvi in Köyliö, Finland.
Reads like something that has been translated by someone not used to speaking English, suggest 'the ice of Lake Köyliönjärvi', 'the ice of Lake Köyliö' (per the article Köyliönjärvi) or 'the ice of Köyliönjärvi, a lake in Köyliö, Finland'. Kevin McE (talk) 00:35, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Errors in Did you know...[edit]

Current DYK[edit]

The guy met his FUTURE wife, not his wife. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.69.174.194 (talk) 04:49, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

  • that Sir Harry Luke called ...
WP:HONORIFICS, drop the 'Sir' Kevin McE (talk) 18:05, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
No Sir! The Royal C (talk) 19:07, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
So dropped. Given that the article is at Harry Luke, I find it difficult to justify the "Sir". Vanamonde (Talk) 19:12, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
You misread WP:HONORIFICS. Sir is part of an exception: The honorific titles Sir, Dame, Lord and Lady are included in the initial reference and infobox heading for the subject of a biographical article, but are optional after that. So we should leave it as written. The fact that the article title doesn't say Sir is not relevant. Titles and prose are governed by different rules. Thanks.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:17, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
@Amakuru: That's not quite right; that portion refers to biographical articles, not to any and all prose about people. The hook was written specifically for the main page. No previous consensus exists specifically with respect to this hook, and in the absence of consensus, the more general guidance at WP:HONORIFIC should apply. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:30, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  • that Sir Harry Luke called the Turkish Military Cemetery and the adjacent Jewish Cemetery in Marsa, Malta, "the only place in the world where Arabs and Jews lie peacefully together"?
All this demonstrates is the ignorance (and probably racist generalisations) of Luke: Turkish people are not on the whole Arabs (about 5% of the population is); by repeating it on the Main Page without recognising the error of it (and especially while glorifying Luke with his knighthood, something our MoS by no means compels us to do), do we not lay ourselves open to the appearance of sharing that ignorance? Kevin McE (talk) 12:39, 19 January 2019 (UTC)



  • ... that when HMS Safari attacked small ships anchored in Ras Ali,
Any good reason for not telling the reader that they were barges, as the article does? Obscuring information os not the purpose of an encyclopaedia. Kevin McE (talk) 18:05, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 Done Mjroots (talk) 18:36, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Just noting that in the HMS Safari blurb, I've unlinked Ras Ali. The article states that it was a port in Libya, while the linked article is an inland village in Israel. The former doesn't seem to have an article. ansh666 00:31, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Next DYK[edit]

  • .. that at the Battle of Blanchetaque, English longbowmen stood in a tidal river to engage French mercenary crossbowmen?
Surely the thing about mercenaries is that they are not necessarily of the country whose cause they are fighting: they were mercenaries under French command. Kevin McE (talk) 00:45, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Next-but-one DYK[edit]

Errors in the featured picture[edit]

Today's POTD[edit]

  • A virtual time capsule from over 100 years ago...
Suggest drop this introductory clause. The second part of it is a redundant journalistic gloss, tautologous as the previous sentence dates the film as being from 1906; the first part seems quite meaningless. What is a "virtual time capsule"? How is physical film "virtual", and in what way is this a "time capsule"? If this can be so described, then surely every single piece of film, every photograph, every audio recording, is a "virtual time capsule". The phrase is not sourced to any authority. Kevin McE (talk) 20:48, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  • It was produced by the four Miles Brothers: Harry, Herbert, Earle and Joe. Harry J. Miles cranked the Bell & Howell camera during the filming.
It seems oddly inconsistent to render Harry's name in two ways in successive sentences. However, the source does not detail what camera was used: it talks of a hand cranked Bell and Howell as the means of recording another piece of film (Triumph Over Disaster) by a different cinematographer, L Sprague Anderson. Suggest delete second of these sentences. Kevin McE (talk) 20:48, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Tomorrow's POTD[edit]

Errors in the summary of the featured list[edit]

Friday's FL[edit]

Monday's FL[edit]

General discussion[edit]

Misuse of wikipedia[edit]

Not relevant to main page. O Still Small Voice of Clam (formerly Optimist on the run) 15:59, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
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.

Wikipedia is widely read in India and is therefore becoming a battleground for the upcoming elections of May 2019. Just read the article “Amethi” (Rahul Gandhi’s constituency). It has North Korean style superlatives about Rahul and his family. Just like the Kim’s they make it sound much better than reality and paint a picture that the public should be grateful to them. Blackdog1304 (talk) 03:53, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

This talk page is for discussing the main page, it is not a general forum for content disputes. I see you've already started a discussion on the article's talk page, which is a good thing. You should wait for other editors to weigh in and see what they think. Cheers! Isa (talk) 04:34, 9 January 2019 (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.

Dog photograph (DYK for 13 January)[edit]

No longer on main page. Discussion should take place on the relevant talk page. O Still Small Voice of Clam (formerly Optimist on the run) 15:59, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
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.

Uncropped Cropped

I cropped this image shortly before its appearance on the main page. Another editor objected, so I've self-reverted and inserted the talk page exchange below to solicit additional comments (potentially applicable to other animal photographs in the future). Pinging its participants, Yoninah and EEng. —David Levy 02:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

Moved from User talk:David Levy: David Levy 02:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, in photography class I learned that it's okay to show part of a human body (like a head-and-shoulders shot), but you always have to show the whole body of an animal, because otherwise it looks weird. Sorry to say, but this crop looks weird. Yoninah (talk) 00:01, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Looks OK to me. EEng 00:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Yoninah: I took some photography courses and wasn't taught such a principle, so perhaps there are varying schools of thought.
Per your comment, I've self-reverted and initiated a thread on the main page's talk page.
David Levy 02:42, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Personally I don't mind either but I do slightly prefer the original as it just seems more natural to show the whole animal. The Royal C (talk) 08:39, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
I would prefer the cropped picture, TBH. It's an individual animal in a personal and emotional context, so showing legs and the like seems like a waste of limited space to me. Kranix (talk | contribs) 19:00, 13 January 2019 (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.