Talk:Main Page

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 22:05 on 10 July 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 the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(July 12)

Monday's FL

(July 15)

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

Main Page needs a MAJOR revamp!

On March 19, 2006, The Main Page received a small revamp. Here we are, 8 years later, still the same Main Page. Can someone just completely rebuild the Main Page? The current design is old. Not interesting anymore. Newmainpage (talk) 10:14, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

The problem with efforts to revise the design of the Main Page is that while many commentators are supportive of the idea of a new design, there is little to no consensus as to what characteristics a new design should posses. As a result, redesign efforts have traditionally fallen prey to Parkinson's law of triviality with competing factions lobbying against each other for their preferred version and no one gaining enough traction to implement a change. --Allen3 ^talk 10:27, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

On what basis to you conclude that it needs a major revamp? It's working quite well as it is, and clearly attracts large numbers of readers. Personally I think it could have a few minor improvements e.g. more images (not bigger ones, just more of them), but that there's no need for a major change. Not broken, don't fix. Modest Genius ^talk 10:58, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

This is already in hand. See preliminary work at http://unicorn.wmflabs.org/winter/ (I'm surprised this wasn't announced here.) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:23, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

That is the new (Vector based) Winter skin; it has no relation to the main page. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 15:07, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Monobook is still much better than Vector ;) Modest Genius ^talk 15:30, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I already did. But as Allen3 points out, it has become virtually impossible to agree on a new design; everyone knows how to complain about details, but none of them come up with better ideas. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 17:13, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

There are too many people dead set against any sort of change to make progress. It's difficult to collaborate on design in the same way as normal proposals here as it can't be a pick-and-mix process. At least my layout didn't go entirely to waste — it's now being used (in an adapted form) on the Chinese Wikipedia, and the footer on Commons. — Pretzels 11:28, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

• Did You Know that the WMF already did this for anyone using the mobile version, which completely eliminates the DYK and On this Day features of the main page? Beeblebrox (talk) 18:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Did you know that the mobile frontpage is quite configurable and that the community can include any section they want to ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:09, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, surely it should then be configured to include the same content as the desktop version? Beeblebrox (talk) 17:39, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The desktop Main Page is horribly bloated, that's exactly why the call to redesign it recurs so often. The mobile edition is great! — Pretzels 19:09, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The main page of mobile version should at least have a direct link to today's DYK and OTD. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:41, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Featured Topics on the Main Page

Oh sweet lord its a miracle. Featured Topics are (sorta) on the main page thanks to Today's Featured Article. Thank you TFA delegates for letting this happen. Now I need to make sure the topics don't get vandalized. GamerPro64 04:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

• So, similar to the Maya Angelou topic, right? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:40, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • It appears to be the idea. GamerPro64 21:29, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Greg Wohlwendpedia

Fess up, how much did Greg pay to have his games lovingly showcased on the main page? Not just one, but tons, and we have a little gallery to go with it. What a delight. Nohomersryan (talk) 21:23, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

This was nominated at Template:Did you know nominations/Greg Wohlwend. — RockMFR 22:43, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

• Or, ya know, somebody might enjoy his games and write about them? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:18, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Well that's just silly. Liking something and doing work on it. Unfathomable. Clearly this random person knows the truth of how Wikipedia works. GamerPro64 02:44, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Indeed. Why, I almost didn't notice the 20 Ben Franklins the gay avant garde experimental film industry sent me. I only take cheques. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:25, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Remove the animation and replace it with an image that has one of his games as an example. Now it looks like an irritating advertisement and distracts from reading the text. 86.60.193.233 (talk) 06:09, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

• I, on the other hand, liked the gif and would say more and more such gifs should be put on main page. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

A sport taking precedence over humanitarian disaster

Presently, in the news section, Rory McIlroy's sporting win is the top story. On balance, while notable, this is neither amazing nor remarkable. The many humanitarian disasters currently taking place must have more prominence. –– ljhenshall ^{(talk page)} 00:53, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Items are placed chronologically. Calidum ^{Talk To Me} 02:46, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

ITN is also not a death, disaster, and destruction ticker; it is there to feature articles of all subjects, as they come chronologially(per Calidum). 331dot (talk) 09:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Israel-Palestina conflict

Should not "Operation Protective Edge" or more generally the major conflict in Israel & Palestina be listed in the ongoing events alongside the conflict in Ukraine? Simen113 (talk) 14:12, 23 July 2014 (UTC) Simen113

It's already in the main ITN section: "Israel launches a ground invasion of the Gaza Strip.". The Rambling Man (talk) 14:26, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Just saw it has been added now! Maybe someone took my suggestion:) Simen113 (talk) 14:39, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

It was discussed here - Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates#Ongoing:_Operation_Protective_Edge. CaptRik (talk) 17:04, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

WP's congressional block

Are we going to say anything about this? Sca (talk) 14:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

In what capacity or location do you think something should be said? 331dot (talk) 14:24, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Good question. Suggestions? Sca (talk) 14:35, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

The best place would probably be ITN but we would need an article to link to(and add this info to) for the nomination. 331dot (talk) 14:43, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Doubt it would meet ITN criteria. Sca (talk) 14:46, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps we should have some sort of "To our Readers" page? Sca (talk) 15:10, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

For what? The story you linked to is not likely to be of significant interest to our readers. It may be of interest to some editors, but we already have the newsletter for that and besides, I'm not sure it's that interesting to most editors except for those affected (who will find out if they try to edit). Nil Einne (talk) 15:36, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

We have a place for this kind of 'about Wikipedia' content. It's called The Signpost. I suggest you bring it up there. Modest Genius ^talk 15:45, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

I've seen The Signpost before. Do you think the general public using Wikipedia looks at The Signpost on a regular basis?

No whoever you are. But I very much doubt that the general public will care about this. Modest Genius ^talk 16:34, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

How does this differ from any other institutional range-block? Why does this one need a special announcement? AlexTiefling (talk) 15:14, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Not being involved in administrators' duties, I don't know how it may differ from others.

I thought it might be significant because it targets a high-profile government institution, and because the BBC thought it noteworthy enough to write a story about it. Sca (talk) 15:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

The BBC also currently has articles on pub brawls and cinema re-runs, but that doesn't mean either of those merit coverage on the Main Page. Modest Genius ^talk 15:48, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Modest, I didn't say anything about the Main Page. Sca (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Well it is implied that you are talking about the Main Page when you edit the talk page for the Main Page. This is the page to discuss the Main Page. It is not the page to discuss Wikipedia in general. A better spot is the village pump. GB fan 16:02, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Exeunt. Sca (talk) 16:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

This is Talk:Main Page. Its whole purpose is to discuss the Main Page - it is not a general discussion board (for that, try the village pump). I made a good faith assumption that you were using the talk page for its correct purpose; apparently I was wrong. Modest Genius ^talk 16:32, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

@Sca: I agree with the others that since this is not concerning the main page, perhaps it would be best for you to bring this up at the village pump. I think the most relevant page would be WP:VP/M. Dustin (talk) 16:35, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done Sca (talk) 00:20, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

You can discuss issues and Wikipolitics at User talk:Jimbo Wales too. Seattle (talk) 17:56, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

– Gaza conflict – does not need mentioning of Israel?

At this moment, MP says "Ongoing: ... – Gaza conflict –". That is too short, into being POV by omitting the word "Israel". Actually I am astounded that someone made the link label this way, intentionally. -DePiep (talk) 23:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)