Talk:Main Page

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Raul654 (talk | contribs) at 02:25, 21 February 2006 (→David Irving). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is the talk page for discussing changes to the Wikipedia Main Page: please read the information below to find the best place for your comment or question. For error reports, go here. Thank you.

Today's featured picture

  • Today's featured picture is taken from the list of successful featured pictures, If you would like to nominate a picture to be featured see Picture of the Day.
  • To report an error with "Today's featured picture...", add a note at the Error Report.

Main Page and beyond

Otherwise; please read through this page to see if your comment has already been made by someone else before adding a new section by clicking the little + sign at the top of the page.

Main page discussion

  • This page is for the discussion of technical issues with the main page's operations. See the help boxes above for possible better places for your post.
  • Please add new topics to the bottom of this page. If you press the plus sign to the right of the edit this page button it will automatically add a new section for your post.
  • Please sign your post with --~~~~. It will add the time and your name automatically.



So why not the small print?

I've been following the cartoons controversy and it is obvious we have no answer to the dilemma of whether we should always publish (right of free speech) or censor (pander to some sensitivities). On the talk page, User:Moocats said "There is no particular approach which will satisfy a tidbit of the free information protagonists (myself included). No magic solution, no special template, no words, no phrases, no pictures........No warning is needed, if a user is coming to this (cartoons) page, they will see the image and leave, or view it and read the article.". Right, almost. However, why don't we add a brief sentence to the existing Main Page line which says "In this English version, started in 2001, we are currently working on 972,223 articles." Add something like "Wikipedia endeavours to be accurate and balanced without fear or favour, but recognises that some information which is admired by many readers may be objected to by others". A sort of small print warning that basically says there may be content some readers may object to. Sort of You-Have-Been-Warned in a nice way. Yes, I know we have Wikipedia:General disclaimer but I'd guess very few Wiki visitors ever see that page, and even if they did, they wouldn't bother wading right through to the dreary end of it. We need to add something to the Main Page which is brief -- not screeds of legalese -- just a one sentence 'warning'. My 02c worth. Moriori 20:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first line of the Main Page says "Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia". That word 'encyclopaedia' is sufficient warning that there will be stuff that people object to, such as articles on alternative religions, science, pictures of genitalia, etc. --Malthusian (talk) 22:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Then you have no objection to junking Wikipedia:General disclaimer? Moriori 22:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What should Wikipedia be embarrassed about? Wikipedia does not allow Original Research. Presenting selected information with a disclaimer would introduce a point of view, and as long as the picture remains, I do not think it would quell any of the rage (whether authentic or exaggerated) on the talk page. --Grocer 22:12, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No POV danger from Moriori's suggestion. M is not asking for warnings on certain pages, just a note on the main page advising people that they may find some (not stating what) content objectionable. Psud 13:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1,000,000th article

  • I'm just a regular user, but I was wondering if there was anything going on for the 1,000,000th article. We're getting real close to it.

Richardkselby 01:22, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if anything special is planned for the MainPage, but you may be interested in a little fun at Wikipedia:Million pool and Wikipedia:Millionth topic pool. :-) -- PFHLai 16:52, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Something should definatly be planned!!! -- Adjam 08:56, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably we'll use Template:Main Page banner, as previously. — Dan | talk 08:59, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sindhi

moved to Talk:Sindhi people, and Talk:Sindhi language. -- PFHLai 07:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly Let Me Know How to Create A Page in Sindhi ARABIC Script

moved to User talk:Aursani. -- PFHLai 08:12, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iraq War Protests

Under "selected anniversaries": surely the link you direct to February 15, 2003 anti-war protest rather than where it currently goes? --James Kemp 00:21, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Thank you. I've re-wikified the line to link to the suggested article. -- PFHLai 07:21, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bird Flu in Austria, Germany

Nigeria is old news. The Main Page should now talk about new cases discovered in Germany and Austria. —Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 04:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please update relevant wikiarticles and post a suggested headline at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Thanks. -- PFHLai 09:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know:

That even in the British spelling of "humorous" there is no u after the first o?Copey 2 06:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thats true. Humour becomes humorous... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.18.55.61 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 2006 February 16 (UTC).

Your continued donations...

Look at the data: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/ongoing/index.php/2006-02/

Conclusions:

  1. This notice is not an effective means at raising funds.
  2. Having this notice up outside of the fund drives may have a serious negative impact on the fund drives. The next time it says, "Wikimedia needs your help" the new instinctive reaction is, "Oh, they're always asking for money".
  3. If the individuals who maintain the main page insist on having this notice up all the time, then, again, just look at this data: http://fundraising.4.org/ongoing/index.php/2006-01/

The conclusion here is that Jimmy's personal appeal is FAR FAR more effective at raising funds.

  • Therefore: if enough people are insisting on keeping this notice up, AT LEAST change the link back to Jimmy's personal appeal until we find something else that is even more effective. Not doing so is only going to have a negative impact on long term fundraising for Wikimedia. Djbaniel 09:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK: Puerto Rican Spindalis is the -national- bird of Puerto Rico (not a nation)

Should be official bird, not national bird, as Puerto Rico is not a nation, but a commonwealth of the United States.

The DYK template is protected, and Template:Did you know talk page said that errors should be pointed out here. Maybe it should only be semi-protected. --Pmsyyz 10:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article says "national bird", so I'm not revising what's on MainPage yet. You may want to take this up with the author at Talk:Puerto Rican Spindalis. A discussion on this issue has already started there. ... Everything on the MainPage is protected to avoid vandalism. I wish things were different, too. -- PFHLai 16:42, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Puerto Rico is a COUNTRY of its own, under US control. National Bird of Puerto Rico is a completely acceptable phrase. --Revolución (talk) 22:02, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is no longer on MainPage as a DYK item. Please be encouraged to continue this discussion on Talk:Puerto Rican Spindalis. Thanks. -- PFHLai 00:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK: redirect

If you changed "the Nestor Cup" to "Nestor's Cup", you would avoid every clicker getting redirected to the latter? Won't somebody please think of the servers! 57.66.51.165 11:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed :-) --HappyCamper 12:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haitian Elections

AP reports that hundreds of ballot boxes have been found in a Haitian garbage dump, and apparantly there are parts of partially burned ballots and vote tallys in the same location. Given that this makes the elections in the country totally illegitmate, that it is certain to fuel the on going riots, and that there are multinational forces in the country, this probably deserves mention in the news section. --Descendall 23:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have fun updating Haitian elections, 2006. :-) When it's ready to be featured at ITN on the MainPage, please post a suggested headline on the ITN Candidates' page. Don't forget to post newslinks at Current events as well. Thanks. -- PFHLai 00:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's now posted at ITN on the MainPage. -- PFHLai 17:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another great choice for a featured article

It's not like they picked gas metal arc welding twice already or anything. My favorite part about them is the diversity. 24.243.188.42 04:29, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you're talking about the discussion at Talk:Gas metal arc welding#Wow, *great* choice for a featured article. But Anarcho-capitalism has already appeared on the main page, and it's been several months since the last welding article appeared on the front page, so no hard feelings, right? I guess I'm too focused on getting articles featured on one particular topic. --Spangineer (háblame) 06:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, Spangineer. Continue your good work with welding-related featured articles. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 06:55, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good job spangineer. Don't mind him. He's not fit to interact in human society: [1] Lotsofissues 10:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey genius: that comment about anarcho-capitalism was 6 months ago. No, I'm pretty obviously not referring to it. I'm referring to how gas metal arc welding has been featured as an article AND as a picture, and now we get another very similar welding article. It's stupid. Do you get it now? Well, no one ever faulted Wikipedia users for being very bright. 24.243.188.42 00:33, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Take it easy, now. Remember to be nice and civil and assume good faith in Wikipedia, please. --PFHLai 18:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK error

...that Pigeon Post, winner of the first ever Carnegie Medal for children's literature, is the only Swallows and Amazons book that does not feature some sort of sailing adventure?, yet the article itself says This book is one of the few Swallows and Amazons books that does not feature sailing. Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 09:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This item is no longer at DYK on the MainPage. -- PFHLai 17:30, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Ghraib pictures on ITN

"Previously unreleased photographs from Abu Ghraib prison _are said to_ depict homicide, torture, and sexual abuse" No, they undeniably depict that. If you want to imply that they may be false, you should put the "apparent" in there like all the news agencies do. But my opinion is that both that and the original headline are poor attempts at "balancing" an issue that I suspect no one would have thought needed balancing if it hadn't been politically controversial in the US and UK. Vintermann 13:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wanna propose an alternate headline ? Please post it at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Thanks. -- PFHLai 17:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disappointed in headline text regarding Haitian election

(reposted with alterations from Talk:Haitian_elections,_2006)

Specifically the sentence including "after several thousand blank votes were discounted, giving him the majority needed..."

This insinuates that Preval would not have won if those several thousand had not been discounted. This isn't something wikipedia knows. I'm very disappointed that this error of association made it to the front page.

I suggest this alternative text:

Former president René Préval is declared the winner of the Haitian presidential election after several thousand blank votes were discounted. Mr. Preval had a majority of the vote and therefore a run-off election was not held.

This replacement text adheres to NPOV, is encyclopedic, and only says what we know. Again, suggesting that Preval owes his victory to the discarded ballots is unsourced, improper, and biased. -Kasreyn 18:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out. And, I thought the protests should be mentioned. A shorter headline is now on ITN. I hope it's not disappointing now. -- PFHLai 18:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Redirect

The link to Ernest Millington redirects to Ernest Rogers Millington, so could an admin change the template to help the poor old servers ? Robmods 19:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

new word for the dictionary

upfall

I discovered this while I sat in my literature class. We were talking about coruption of power and its downfall in some places. So, I said what if everything goes good; would that make it an upfall.

Tokelau

Do you really think it's NPOV to say they voted to remain a territory, when 60% actually voted for self-governance, thus making it a majority that voted to NOT be a territory. I think it should be reworded "Tokelau fails to gain a two-thirds majority in their self-determination referendum, with 60% voting for self-governance." --Revolución (talk) 01:02, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WHERE IS CHENEY's Mess-Up?

I came here looking for the Dick Cheney Story!! Where is it? I didnt expect wikinews to be slow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.158.163.13 (talk • contribs)

Did you miss Dick Cheney#Hunting incident? hydnjo talk 02:39, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Difficult though it may be to believe, other things have happened in the world since the breaking of the Dick Cheney story; accordingly, Template:In the news (to which you are presumably referring when you say "Wikinews") has moved on. — Dan | talk 02:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In case you still don't know how to use the search box in Wikipedia: Dick Cheney hunting incident. Enjoy. -- 199.71.174.100 01:25, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it's not like you need to cover an ongoing controversy. Remember, Wikinews only had a Hurricane Katrina link up for a day, two at most, after it hit!

Main Page Lack the Subject of Economy

I see that the main page is lack of subject Economy. I suggest that you must put into it..thanks.

che 05:53, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Click on "Society" on the 4th line from the top on the MainPage. There, you'll find a link to Portal:Business and Economics. -- PFHLai 08:20, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neiborhood

Looks a bit wrong to me. Piet 08:57, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the News

The header about the smoking ban is slightly misleading as it implies it pertains to all of the UK. In fact the newly-announced ban refers to England only as the rest of the UK had already legislated to introduce bans. Demogorgon's Soup-taster 10:23, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orange Free State Flag

I think the Orange Free State flag needs to be moved down to it's article. Skeeter08865 14:46, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We usually don't move the image at Selected Anniversaries around. What if the image corresponds to the 4th or 5th item ? The image may stick out at the bottom, messing up with the layout of the whole MainPage. So, the image is always at the same spot -- top right of the Selected Anniversaries section. I suspect you are using a small screen and/or displaying text in a large font. The Orange Free State flag is actually immediately above the corresponding text on my screen at home. At work, where I have a slightly wider monitor, the flag is next to the corresponding text. -- PFHLai 18:02, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


So now I'm a grammar Nazi - because I take offence at the above "it's article" which means "it is article" and does not indicate possession, which obviously is what you want to express. A little apostrophe makes that much difference - and it makes me a Nazi. Attention to detail used to be a good dogma - before the English language was adulterated by people who insult others before learning the basics. HPB, 20/02/06

Abu Ghraib - In the news...

Why has the Abu Ghraib story been removed from the In the news section? This is a story that is still unfolding and is of the utmost importance and notability. As of yesterday Salon.com has obtained what they believe to be _all_ of the material. See [2]. Nonplus 16:52, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, other things have happened since the release of these pictures, so newer news headlines have displaced this old news from ITN. If the Abu Ghraib Prison abuse page gets more drastic updates (not just an external link), please draft a new headline for ITN and post it at WP:ITN/Candidates. Thanks. -- PFHLai 17:46, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the subheading is listed twice. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 00:11, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed now, thanks! --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 01:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the featured picture paragraph should say "because of" not "thanks to." It looks more formal and encyclopedish and doesn't imply action. Dave 02:16, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to "As explained via." —David Levy 02:21, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smoking ban

I think a more correct (and grammar Nazi-pleasing) form of words would be: "The British House of Commons votes to enact legislation that will lead to a ban on smoking in public places". Can someone change it please? Thanks! Batmanand 12:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you clarify what you meant by the phrase, "grammar Nazi-pleasing" because at the moment, I am unsure of what you want changed. Thanks Yellowmellow45 12:17, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Grammar Nazi-pleasing" = something likely to please a grammar Nazi. "Grammar Nazi" = someone who takes strong exception to even relatively minor gramattical errors. Batmanand just wants the phrasing on ITN changed to a more pleasing version, not to one that promotes the Third Reich.--Cherry blossom tree 12:31, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if my turn of phrase was not clear... I was not trying to bring up images of hordes of black shirts marching down the ITN street if what I said did not happen. All I meant is that, technically, the House of Commons does not "pass" anything, let alone a ban. All they do it vote whether or not to enact legislation. That was the only change I wanted; sorry if this caused trouble or offence. Batmanand 14:44, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, No, don't worry!! I see what you meant! Yep, I agree Yellowmellow45 14:47, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to moan, but is anything going to happen with regards to my above request? I did make it 8 hours ago... Batmanand

Just did it now .... Sorry to keep you waiting. I like to sleep in on weekends, ya know .... -- PFHLai 20:38, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AOL blocks of almost 2 hours?

This has nothing to do with Main Page. Moved to the user talk page of the blocking admininstrator concerned. (This talk page is not a forum to complain about other Wikipedians.) -- PFHLai 20:25, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Asking the admin in question why a range block was needed that would wipe out over a third of all AOL users for almost 2 hours, apparently was the justification for the block, so it didn't seem like a good idea to put it there--64.12.116.203 20:56, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure it would just be deleted, by the admin in question--64.12.116.203 21:40, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK The More button on Main article needs fixing

It currently points to the article on Indian history.

My mistake. I have fixed it. Raul654 02:15, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POTD Photo Credit

Hi, would it be possible to change the photo credit from "Jeff Davidson" to my username "Tokugawapants" to avoid some confusion/complication? I've already changed it on the POTD page but I guess the Main Page is completely locked. Thanks. Tokugawapants 06:58, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. (Wikipedia:Today's second feature/February 19, 2006) Raul654 07:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Sea Turtles (clarity)

"There are seven surviving species of sea turtle and all endangered."

I think that sentence is missing something. I suggest the following wording as an alternative:

"There are seven surviving species of sea turtle and they are all endangered."

Rod ESQ 20:25, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is great, but what if you want to add a little opinion...

You start a blog right...? Yeah, but what if you just want to write about one thing - you don't want the burden of a blog - afterall its a log that should be updated. So, a website, right? But then you are back to the problem of getting it all set-up (and frankly I don't wanna learn).

I was just PMed in a forum with regard to a rather long post I had made by "Bank of Info" (bankof.info). Although I don't approve of unsolicted approaches, this one caught my eye. Might be one to watch.

Uh... what?Borisblue 22:50, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shani Davis

With Shani Davis taking home an Olympic gold medal in speed skating, does he become the first black athlete to win an individual gold in the Winter Olympics, or the first African-American athlete to do so? 'Cuz obviously there's quite a difference, since if he's the first African-American to win gold in the Winter Olympics that means that a black person from another country could have done so. ekedolphin 07:40, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

seems to be first black athlete to win gold [3]. BrokenSegue 16:57, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My name is Harry V. Gina

-- He's the first African-American to win individual gold.

Well, his article says he's the first black athlete. --Elmer Clark 23:50, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polish "Did You Know" item

The second "Did You Know" item should have the word "the" before "Renaissance", and the last word "poets" should be "poet". (Rewriting as "one of the great Slavic poets" would also be grammatical if that was intended.) Art LaPella 17:09, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The latter has been fixed, but the former has not. —Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 22:43, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page Focus

I think the main page should be changed so that when someone loads the page the wiki search bar is already selected and they can just start typing without having to click on it. Most search sights already do this (Google, Answers, Yahoo) and it makes quick searching much easier. Zigbigadoorlue 20:27, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There has been considerable opposition to this in the past, with one of the major reasons being those who wish to read the main page are prevented from doing so until they remove the focus from the search box. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a search engine, one should not necessarily expect it to be constructed like the latter. Other online encyclopedias, such as Britannica and Encarta, do not. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Knowledge Seeker (talk • contribs) 21:08, 20 February 2006.

Canada Women Win Hockey Gold

Come on, lets get the Olympic Current events updated. The Canadian women just secured gold in what was without a doubt the most impressive women's tournament ever! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.65.141.226 (talk • contribs) 22:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Calm down. It's already on Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. -- 199.71.174.100 23:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Main Page" or "Main page"?

Is "Main Page" (as it is currently written) a title or a heading? If it's the latter, the MoS would favor "Main page"; likewise, Community Portal seems to be unduly capitalized, as it is generally written in lowercase in body text. ProhibitOnions 00:33, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed before. Technically, "Main Page" should be "Main page", but (1) the main page was created years before the manual of styl existed, and (2) it was decided that we shouldn't move it because it'd probably cause a lot of problems, for reasons that could (at best) be called pedantic. Raul654 00:36, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okey-dokey, I figured there was a reason like this, but couldn't find the pertinent discussion. Thanks, ProhibitOnions 00:42, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

David Irving

I realize this is a minor quibble, but should David Irving really be identified as a "historian"? I think "historical revisionist" is more accurate. Stlom 02:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He was considered mainstream historian for quite a long time (before the libel suit made him persona non grata in academic circles) Raul654 02:25, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&oldid=40510097"