Jump to content

Talk:Main Page: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 72: Line 72:
:::More to the point, there is absolutely no use bringing something either here or on ITN/C if no article exists. (There is also no point bringing something that happened 26+ days ago either). Of course, [[WP:ITN/C]] does address both these points [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 20:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
:::More to the point, there is absolutely no use bringing something either here or on ITN/C if no article exists. (There is also no point bringing something that happened 26+ days ago either). Of course, [[WP:ITN/C]] does address both these points [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 20:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


: If only a headline is to be posted, the place should be [[Portal: Current events]], not ITN. --[[Special:Contributions/199.71.174.100|199.71.174.100]] ([[User talk:199.71.174.100|talk]]) 23:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
: If only a headline is to be posted, the place should be [[Portal: Current events]], ITN. --[[Special:Contributions/199.71.174.100|199.71.174.100]] ([[User talk:199.71.174.100|talk]]) 23:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
: Perhaps [[Wikinews]] is a better place for news like that. --[[Special:Contributions/199.71.174.100|199.71.174.100]] ([[User talk:199.71.174.100|talk]]) 23:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
: Perhaps [[Wikinews]] is a better place for news like that. --[[Special:Contributions/199.71.174.100|199.71.174.100]] ([[User talk:199.71.174.100|talk]]) 23:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

It is so serious. 900 people need psychological help
http://www.novinky.cz/clanek/137882-policie-odlozila-vyslech-zraneneho-ridice-ostravske-tramvaje.html


== Abraham Lincoln shot ==
== Abraham Lincoln shot ==

Revision as of 15:10, 18 April 2008

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

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 07:48 on 29 June 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]

Today's FA

Tomorrow's FA

Day-after-tomorrow's FA

Errors with "In the news"

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Current DYK

Bermuda onion

I think Bermuda ought to be hyperlinked in this hook. Zanahary 02:35, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next DYK

Next-but-one DYK

Errors in "On this day"

Today's OTD

Tomorrow's OTD

Day-after-tomorrow's OTD

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(July 5)

Monday's FL

(July 1)

Errors in the summary of the featured picture

Today's POTD

Tomorrow's POTD

General discussion

Experimenting

I've been experimenting with a shadowing template I created and decided to test it in my Main Page sandbox. Please check it out and give me feedback. ~RayLast «Talk!» 23:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. It doesn't work for Firefox. Darn I hate these differences. ~RayLast «Talk!» 23:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It works fine in my Firefox, having said that I'm using Firefox 3b5. I took a look, its an interesting effect, might steal it for my userpage if you don't mind. Time to see if the masses like it now :). Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 12:07, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't work for Firefox 2. So people won't like it. I'll try and fix it later some time and let you guys know. ~RayLast «Talk!» 14:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What was supposed to happen anyway? I saw little gray boxes at the corners. FF 2.0 user. --Howard the Duck 16:16, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll screenshot it in a few minutes, thanks for the intel on my talk page btw Mistman123. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 16:23, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, it appears my work PC is being as useful as ever, so I'm going to have to extend that "in a few minutes" to in a few hours :( Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 17:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I made a screenshot for those who have Firefox 2. I'll be trying to fix this later. Maybe after taxes. ~RayLast «Talk!» 18:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well once they roll out FF3.0 there'll be no real need, FF like to make sure everyone is using the correct version. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 19:39, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is actually a significant number of people who use the older versions- see the lower table here. J Milburn (talk) 19:48, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted your opinions on how it looked. I don't think it should be implemented anytime soon anyway. I'm thinking of adding some image buttons and test some other stuff to make it look nice, although I really like the current, simple, nice colored main page. I don't envy any other Wikipedia main pages in other languages. Simple is nice. ~RayLast «Talk!» 20:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... that's actually really nice. I don't think it's completely appropriate for the main page but it's an interesting bit of code, that you can actually get it to do that. Well done. I might nick it for my userpage too, when FF3.0 rolls out, and sod the people who deliberately click 'no' at the upgrade prompt. Just looking at the source... doesn't it add a hell of a lot of code to the page it's transcluded on though? Just for a few images/headers? Any way you could shrink that down a bit? —Vanderdeckenξφ 09:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks great. I'd agree with this being on the Main Page once a stable version of Firefox 3 is released. The people using the older versions won't be hurt in any way, the only difference for them will be the little grey squares. Puchiko (Talk-email) 16:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't look correct in Konqueror 3.5.8 either -62.172.143.205 (talk) 19:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yuck... I don't think it looks too good from the screenshot. Makes everything look too deep and complicated. -Tarthen Blazerken (talk) 08:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well anyone interested in helping me fix it for other browsers, you can get/copy the code from {{User:Mistman123/Templates/Shadow}}. I don't have enough time to go through the code and test changes in all these different browsers, so any help is certainly welcome. When you get something working please let me know or post your code's link somewhere so I can check it out and possibly copy it back . ~RayLast «Talk!» 20:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Safari 3.1 doesn't display this alternate page at all nicely, inserting a small two-tone grey square on the bottom right of the box but no further. Bobo. 02:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. The template's page has the Safari caveat too. You can help fix it though. ~RayLast «Talk!» 03:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since Firefox 3.0 doesn't run on Linux using wine, I would say ":("--Jahilia (talk) 15:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think it shall once Firefox 3.0 will be released. Right now, it's not Firefox 3.0 it's Firefox 3 Beta 5. Puchiko (Talk-email) 17:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Czech Disaster

One of the worst tram disasters in europe. http://www.novinky.cz/clanek/137461-v-ostrave-se-celne-stretly-tramvaje-tri-lide-zemreli.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.71.211.66 (talk) 17:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The correct place to suggest news items would be WP:ITN/C. However, I don't think this is internationally significant (three dead people so far). Puchiko (Talk-email) 18:07, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Significance does not depend on the amount of dead people. A building bombing can be really significant internationally even if no one is killed. Terrorist activities against trains, trams, buses, and buildings are relatively significant. Relative to many things. This specific event might not be significant but by other reasons. Just to make clear there shouldn't be a link between significance and the amount of dead people. ~RayLast «Talk!» 18:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While an event can be significant with few deaths, the numbers of deaths is definitely a big component of significance in many cases. In any case, this discussion should take place in ITN/C as mentioned above and we need an article before it can even be considered Nil Einne (talk) 18:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So why did we have the Heathrow crash thing on forever? Benjamin Scrīptum est - Fecī 20:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Moved to Template talk:In the news#Czech Disaster (since no one else would) Nil Einne (talk) 20:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
85.71.211.66, you know the place to make suggestions for ITN is WP:ITN/C. So please stop posting news on this talkpage.[1] [2] [3] Thanks. --199.71.174.100 (talk) 20:42, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to put it here but i would like to ask someone to put the czech car pile up on main news. Thanks http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=czech+crash+pile+up&spell=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.71.211.66 (talk) 17:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should discuss this at WP:ITN/C instead Lympathy Talk 18:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As you have been told on several occasions. If you had done so 5 days ago, as you knew you should have, on the 12th, if would more then likely be there by now. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 19:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
More to the point, there is absolutely no use bringing something either here or on ITN/C if no article exists. (There is also no point bringing something that happened 26+ days ago either). Of course, WP:ITN/C does address both these points Nil Einne (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If only a headline is to be posted, the place should be Portal: Current events, ITN. --199.71.174.100 (talk) 23:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps Wikinews is a better place for news like that. --199.71.174.100 (talk) 23:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is so serious. 900 people need psychological help http://www.novinky.cz/clanek/137882-policie-odlozila-vyslech-zraneneho-ridice-ostravske-tramvaje.html

Abraham Lincoln shot

Does it strike anyone as a bit odd that on the anniversary of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, the assassin--not Abe Lincoln--is pictured? I realise that most visitors to the Main Page will be more familiar with Lincoln's image than Boothe's, but this makes it look like Wikipedia supports the assassination. Webbbbbbber (talk) 01:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support????? That's stretching quite a bit. --74.13.125.50 (talk) 02:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So putting Abe's picture would mean Wikipedia supports his death then? Sounds like nonsense to me. ~RayLast «Talk!» 03:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, quite the opposite: Putting Boothe's picture supports Lincoln's death, if you want to view it in simple terms. See below for more discussion. Webbbbbbber (talk) 05:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Boothe was just as important to the event as Lincon, and Wikipedia isn't censored. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 03:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly I'm surprised that there is so much objection to my comment. In general, I have found that on anniversaries of assassinations, more space (including, but not limited to, images) is given to the person assassinated. For example, on the anniversaries of the assassinations of JFK, RFK, and MLK, their photos will be featured more prominently than those of Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, or James Earl Ray. This is not because of censorship, but because people prefer to remember the acts of the assassinated to those of the assassin, at least in general.
It's easy to imagine someone who, on the anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s assassination prefers to gaze upon the image of James Earl Ray, than that of Martin Luther King, Jr.; but most publications I encountered featured MLK's images far more prominently than JER's. Again, I don't think most people would construe this as censorship, but you do have me wondering if Wikipedia featured James Earl Ray's photo, and not Martin Luther King's on April Fourth. Webbbbbbber (talk) 05:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why does it matter? We're not "supporting" anyone here, just providing encyclopedic information. Both figures are very relevant to the event in question (as would be a picture of Ford's Theater or something), so it's perfectly appropriate to show either, regardless of which is "more often featured." -Elmer Clark (talk) 05:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This seems somewhat moot now that the picture has been removed. In any case, as Elmer Clark says, the picture is primarily intented for informational purposes, wikipedia is not a WP:memorial after all so who or what people prefer to gaze over or remember seems somewhat irrelevant. The most noteable days connected with rememberance of people who are assasinated tend to be their birthdays anyway Nil Einne (talk) 07:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kind of ironic that Booth actually wanted to be remember as a Hero for the South: maybe this was a belated compromise? --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 08:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The sheer cluelessness of this comment is unbelievable. I can't believe we actually changed the Main Page because someone said that a picture of John Wilkes Booth means that we support the assassination of Lincoln, and are likely to favor James Earl Ray over Martin Luther King Jr. Since when did we start pandering to commentators who call us racists? Webbbbbbber, why aren't you expressing your outrage that the replacement picture of Edward IV relating to the Wars of the Roses is a gross example of Wikipedia's obvious hatred for the House of Lancaster? Sheesh. - BanyanTree 09:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well Zz didn't give a reason for the change. Maybe it was to avoid further discussion on this (which unfortunately failed), maybe it was because the JWB image had been around for a while (at least 2 years) and was due for a change anyway. Nil Einne (talk) 11:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You have to link to sarcasm when you do that, Nil Einne, I've found, or else people get confused. You could have done this: maybe it was because the JWB image had been around for a while (at least 2 years) and was due for a change anyway. Benjamin Scrīptum est - Fecī 21:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was more thinking of "we have a image that finally aligned next to the relevant entry". Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for jumping to conclusions, Zzyzx11. My outrage got the better of me. - BanyanTree 01:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't link to sarcasm, and I wouldn't have, because no sarcasm had been intended. The image had indeed been on the OTD entry for two years. I didn't look further so maybe it had been longer. I don't spend much time on OTD so I'm not sure but I would presume it's reasonable to turn over images every one in a while but on the other hand, it isn't essential either (since they only appear every year). And I genuinely had no idea why Zzy removed the image (as the above discussion shows, I was wrong) so I was genuinely uncertain as to why this image was changed. So my comment was intended to convey the fact that there are multiple reasons why this may have been changed, and it was pointless to jump to conclusions as to the reason without asking zzy first. Nil Einne (talk) 15:55, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Languages and Firefox 3b5

I'm currently using Firefox 3 Beta 5 and it is almost impossible to click the Persian language link on the bottom of the main page in the Wikipedia languages section (More than 20,000 articles). The text uncontrollably shifts left and right with the rapid switching of the positions of Norsk and Persian. This is likely a problem with the right to left reading of Persian and some weird problem that I believe only applies to Firefox 3 Beta 5 since Internet Explorer and Firefox 2 allow clicking of Persian. 128.227.143.178 (talk) 16:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. I'm using 3.0pre from April 11th. nneonneo talk 16:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Works fine here to, and I'm on 3b5 too. Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 19:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, it's a known problem of Firefox 3 Beta 5. Don't know why you don't have the problem. 128.227.104.129 (talk) 19:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We're not experiencing the issue because it says the issue is fixed on that page, are you sure your on Beta 5? Ferdia O'Brien (T)/(C) 19:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely on Firefox 3 Beta 5 with last update dated April 2. Clicking on update Firefox indicates that I have there is no update. Also should note that the line above it with the Hebrew language is also impossible to click for me. Also I am not the only one running Beta 5 that has this prolem. 128.227.104.129 (talk) 19:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[4] and the bug discussion seem to suggest this bug wasn't fixed in the b5 release Nil Einne (talk) 20:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is never wrong?!

I found something wrong in "In the news" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.246.135.244 (talk) 00:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Report that mistake to WP:ERRORS asap and suggest changes there, please. --199.71.174.100 (talk) 03:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Quote Steve Colbert: "together we can define a world we can all agree on." That's his comment on wikipedia. Yes, there can be error, and then we correct them 10,000 times. Lightblade (talk) 08:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need to quote Steve Colbert. Our own Wikipedia:General disclaimer says "However, Wikipedia cannot guarantee the validity of the information found here. The content of any given article may recently have been changed, vandalized or altered by someone whose opinion does not correspond with the state of knowledge in the relevant fields." and other stuff to indicate that wikipedia does definitely contain errors. Nil Einne (talk) 11:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Virginia Tech. Why?

Since when did Wikipedia become a memorial service? What a pathetic and transparent choice of FA.Joy.discovery.invention (talk) 00:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Transparent: 2 a: free from pretense or deceit : frank b: easily detected or seen through : obvious c: readily understood
Sounds like a good thing to me. 128.227.104.129 (talk) 01:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know I kinda think its useless when people ask theses questions "Why is Bulbasaur on the main page".."why is Halo on the main page". Because their featured articles! -- Coasttocoast (talk) 01:28, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just correcting your grammar there Coasttocoast, its "they are", so they're not their. Tourskin (talk) 01:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Bulbasaur was on the main page? Awesome! Go pokemon!Tourskin (talk) 01:36, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit curious as to why the shooter's name isn't mentioned. We do have an article about him. --Maxamegalon2000 03:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I could be wrong, but I believe that was a conscious decision, so as not to give more notability to the shooter. Ral315 (talk) 03:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh crud - I didn't realize that suggested writeup omitted his name. That was an oversight on my part. Raul654 (talk) 04:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've adjusted the main page blurb accordingly. Raul654 (talk) 04:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To Ral - With respect, it's not Wikipedia's business to pretend that someone is more obscure than in fact he is. Our notability criteria are essentially populist, and I don't see how they could be otherwise. Let's leave normative judgments about what people want to know to the critical social theorists. — Dan | talk 04:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I said on Talk:Virginia Tech massacre, it is not our job to worry about people who want herostratian fame or to practice Damnatio memoriae. Raul654 (talk) 04:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also: National Instant Criminal Background Check System is overlinked. indopug (talk) 07:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Raul654 (talk) 07:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who designed the main page?

Is there some one person that had the main influence on the design on this main page. I'm asking because I'm trying to find someone that wants to design a new homepage for en.wikiquote. --Steinninn 23:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

me.--24.109.218.172 (talk) 00:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The current design of the main page is based on the discussion archived on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability/Main Page. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wikiHow

is wikihow and wikipedia related? Also why cant i post messages in topics? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Winkytinky (talkcontribs) 04:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC) nvm i found out how to lol its different but are yall related? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Winkytinky (talkcontribs) 04:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikihow and Wikipedia are not managed under the same companies. Wikihow is entirely seperate from Wikipedia. The only thing in common is that they both run wiki software. --Hdt83 Chat 07:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As the name implies, wikiHow is a wiki, just like Wikipedia. It also uses the same software: MediaWiki. But it is an individual site, not in any way affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation. All projects by the Wikimedia Foundation can be found here. Cheers, Face 08:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]