Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Main Page/Errors

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

Is there an archive of these discussions?

[edit]

I know I have my own opinion, but it's worthwhile to preserve the current discussion about the pigache/pulley shoe hook for DYK at Talk:Pigache for future reference. Is there any place where these discussions are kept? do we literally need to link into the page edit record? or is that eventually purged too and the only way to preserve the discussion is to copy/paste everything to the talk page? — LlywelynII 15:04, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LlywelynII: No archives of WP:ERRORS are currently kept, so the only way to look at past discussions is by trawling through the page history – you can always create permanent links to specific revisions, which are always preserved, and/or move them to a talk page with {{Moved discussion from}}. I think an archiving system for ERRORS has been floated at various times in the past, but it might prove rather tricky to implement since discussions are primarily organised by day/template rather than topic, and will get moved about as content gets rotated from tomorrow's Main Page to today's, etc. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 00:13, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that some discussions are worth preserving for future reference and so I keep a personal archive. Note that some topics will tend to recur such as the recent discussion about Good Friday. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:16, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scope of WP:ERRORS

[edit]

I remember recently we had a discussion around ERRORS about a specific topic where the error wasn't on the mainpage itself per se, but it was in the article. I bring this up as I recently had a second one of these, with this and this being brought up today. I'm thus asking what the scope of ERRORS should be, given this doesn't seem to be going anywhere. The wiki mods seem to be in disagreement over this, specifically @Schwede66: from what I remember opposes putting anything on ERRORS that isn't specifically on the mainpage but the other wiki mod @Amakuru: thinks this is OK. I'm starting a discussion here, is this OK to put errors on ERRORS? Therapyisgood (talk) 01:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify my response to the two links mentioned (as I think my response might have invited this thread), I think that errors in articles are absolutely the purview of WP:ERRORS – the last bullet in the header ("Can you resolve the problem yourself?") would make no sense otherwise. However, article adherence to the Manual of Style is not in the DYK criteria (although parts of it are incorporated into WP:DYKMOS), and therefore falls outside of what ERRORS should be able to require. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:43, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My view is that article problems that would disqualify the article from whatever main page section it's in are worth bringing up at ERRORS. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:27, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the answer to Can you resolve the problem yourself? is no, especially if it’s impacting eligibility, then it’s worthwhile discussing it at Errors. My preference is a "fix it yourself" approach, but some editors lack the confidence to make bold edits. Schwede66 15:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ERRORS are for changes to the Main Page, which is fully protected, and can only be edited by admins. If a change is to a page that is not protected, fix the page directly, or make a request at its respective talk page. If the change then requires a corresponding fix on the Main Page, then make a request here.—Bagumba (talk) 12:21, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, in full agreement with Bagumba here. The only reason ERRORS exists is because only admins have the ability to edit fully protected pages; if it something that doesn't need that ability to fix, why post at ERRORS? Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Just a pointer to an ongoing discussion. - Dank (push to talk) 14:50, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Independent sources

[edit]

Are articles and player pages in the publications of the PGA, NFL, NBA, and Major League Baseball "independent sources", for a Wikipedia article about a player?

An editor has taken the position that such a source is connected to players in the sport. And therefore is not an "independent source" for a Wikipedia article about such an athlete.

Which he says in turn requires that the article not appear on the Main Page. Because WP:RS requires that articles be based on independent sources.

Thoughts?

2603:7000:2101:AA00:F804:C954:1D4C:5D11 (talk) 22:11, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is true that the NFL, NBA, etc. websites are not 'independent' for articles about a player, but that does not mean, as far as I'm aware, that the article is prohibited from being on the main page just for having a source that is 'non-independent' (now, if it is the only source in the article, that could be an issue, but if its one of e.g. 15 references and all the others are independent, it should not be an issue). What is the specific case you are referring to? BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:02, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. Among the issues this raised in my mind, was the difference in the independence of the relationship of an athlete with his/her team (which is his/her employer), vs. the NFL/NBA/PGA etc. I don't quite see the "independence" of the league as being as questionable as that of the team.
Secondly, in articles such as this one, keeping the presumed purpose of the independence rule in mind, the PGA-supported text was blandly factual and not at all questionable; it wasn't subjective or COI or questionable text. It was often simply reflecting statistics and placement in tournaments - the sort of thing that RSs look to (e.g., ESPN) for their reporting of facts. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:F804:C954:1D4C:5D11 (talk) 00:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Main_Page/Errors&oldid=1244554174"