Talk:Main Page

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 64.229.231.116 (talk) at 15:12, 15 November 2006 (→Today's Main Page). 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.

Template:Main Page discussion footer

Picture of the Day 01-Nov-2006

Credit where credit's due — today's PoTD is an excellent example of a great candidate where the picture is of interest in itself, rather than the subject matter. Nice. Bazza 15:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Rule: No politicking

A New Rule for Wikipedia: Wikipedia is not to be used to either promote or slander a candidate in a political campaign. Das Baz 16:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds entirely reasonable to me. Seeing as people asserting their own views in debatable topics (*cough*Evolution*cough*), the last thing we need here is some retard spewing political propoganda. --HN-73r 23:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A new rule isn't really needed since politicking would be covered by WP:BLP, Wikipedia:Libel, and WP:SOAP (among others). Koweja 23:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If a new rule is really what you want, please propose it at the wiki-village pump. Good luck over there. --PFHLai 17:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to propose a new rule here at the village well: let's call it the credibility rule. Only people who are credibly related to a subject can write an article about it. Who's going to enforce it? Well nobody of course. This is wiki country. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.221.151.125 (talk • contribs) 23:11, 10 November 2006 {UTC).
This rule would be an excellent one if it was passed. But remember this rule would apply to the lefties as well so no George Bush Bashing or ill informed anti Iraq War crap. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sniper 2 (talk • contribs) 02:08, 11 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Way to duck under that point, Sniper.--Agent Aquamarine 07:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That rule would defeat the purpose of Wikipedia. If only experts can write an article, the why even have wiki formatting? Also, how would you enforce this rule? I could claim to be Bill Clinton, and you would have no way to prove that I was lying. Then I would just shove WP:AGF down your throat and move on to writing the article. See my point? -- THL 09:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michelangelo - speed painter?

"On this day... 1512: The ceiling of the Sistine Chapel (pictured) was repainted in fresco by Michelangelo."

Did he perhaps FINISH painting the ceiling on this day? Honuswagner 16:52, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This was fixed after the user later posted to WP:ERRORS. - BanyanTree 17:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

white stripes

i can't find this anywhere, and i just need to know -- what's with the white stripes being the main page image? i mean, the image always sitting in the top left that links to the main page. it's been like this for a few days and i don't get it. --dan 20:30, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

okay it's gone back to the normal picture now, so crisis averted. i'm still curious what that was all about though. --dan 21:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Montreal, Quebec

1817 - The Bank of Montreal, Canada's oldest chartered bank, opened in Montréal, Québec.

There have been three discussions on this topic on this talk page and countless discussions about it in the Wikipedia Community. At this point I will restate the basic fact that in the English Language, Montreal and Quebec do not take accents. These names are the native names used by the native Anglo-Quebecer population, who have lived in Quebec for hundreds of years. Let me clarify in point form:

  • Anglophones have lived in Quebec for hundreds of years, forming a basic part of Quebec society (see Anglo-Quebecer)
  • The Island of Montreal is over 20% Anglophone
  • There are numerous municipalities throughout Quebec and on the Island of Montreal which are majority English-Speaking. Their inhabitants are Anglo-Quebecers and not foreign English speakers.
  • Anglophones form a minority within Quebec but are linked to the larger English-Speaking cultures around them.

Seeing as how a sizeable segment of Quebecers are in fact native English speakers who write Montreal and Quebec without an accent, writing those names in this way reflects both the English-Language norms and the form preferred by the native community when speaking English (even francophones tend to write it without an accent in English).

Montreal and Quebec are not names imposed on these places by modern day Anglophones Imperialists. In fact, calling them Montréal and Québec in the English language is disrespectful to both local customs and the native Anglophone Quebecer population. It is a politicized issue, and in choosing to write these placenames with an accent, Wikipedia's administrators show support for a contentious point of view which many Anglophones consider slightly offensive, demonstrating a lack of Neutral Point of View.

This may be avoided entirely by using the proper English names of Montreal and Quebec, which are accepted in both the larger English speaking community and the native Quebec population (for use in English), and are not considered offensive even to ultranationalists who would prefer the complete removal or assimilation of Anglo-Quebecer population.

I ask, then, why the Wikipedia administration continues to insult not only the Anglophone Quebecer population (by disregarding their existence) but also the Quebec population at large (by imposing their outside view of how things should be written rather than how Quebecers prefer to write them). It is especially troubling that the Bank of Montreal (no accent, but written with an accent in French as “Banque de Montréal”) was founded by Anglo-Quebecers and was originally designed to serve this minority population’s trade interests.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.53.137.52 (talk • contribs) .

Agreed. Accent marks removed. Not only per your explanation but because the article names don't include them. —Wknight94 (talk) 01:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Please excuse my little diatribe. In fact I was only restating the reasons why the Wikipedia Community decided to use those names in the articles in the first place. --70.53.137.53 23:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote that line with the accent mark on the letter E. I am rather surprised (and somewhat disturbed) that it would be considered disrespectful or offensive at all. I had no idea how this would be interpreted in such a manner. Please do not read too much into my use of accent marks. That's simply how I spell the words in everyday life, as I do with other loanwords like café, coup d'état, fiancée, resumé, Beyoncé Knowles, Renée, etc. I had no intention of insulting anyone and would like to apologise to anyone who found that insulting. --PFHLai 16:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all on topic, it would make it easier on 'us English speakers' if we did use the accent marks. So we'd now the diference between late and laté... --Monotonehell 10:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the argument is that Montreal is not a loan word — it's the English language equivalent of the French name Montréal. The loan words listed above are spelt that way because there is no English equivalent. Btw, thought it was latte?  :-) Bazza 13:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Shush you, it's also Italian. I just couldn't think of a real example at the time ;) --Monotonehell 18:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I always thought the accent mark is there for pronounciation purposes. --PFHLai 18:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you made me think of one, I always stick an accent on resumé otherwise it's resume. --Monotonehell 18:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The 10k's

There seems to be some disagreement about what to do with the 10k section of the links to other wikipedias that was removed by Raul because he felt it made the language links section too large. The way I see it there are four options, enumerated below, and I think it would help to have people express their preferences and why. Dragons flight 15:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore the 10k Wikipedias

Include a section of 10ks in {{Wikipedialang}}

  • This is my first choice, because I like seeing Wikipedias seperated by size. Dragons flight 15:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would prefer the Interwikis fully removed and the Wikipedialang template lengthened to include Wikipedias with at least 10k if not those with a much lower number of articles. After Raul's recent changes along with the previous change that drastically reduced those listed, a number of other language Wikipedias now do a much better job of promoting the small and growing Wikipedias, and, after previously having been reverted 4-5 times, it is disappointing that Raul seems now to have the upper hand in the war of attrition. I can no longer count the number of times now he has made these fly by night changes and then placed the burden of proof on those who favor the old custom of promoting the other, growing Wikipedias on the already substantial English one. Tfine80 01:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep! I agree on it

Include the 10ks in the {{MainPageInterwikis}}

  • I think this is the best option. What does a Wikipedia's size have to do with where in the list it comes. Better to treat all WPs the same and alphbetise them (Quality vs Quantity). The only concern is the total length of the list, there we need an arbitary cutoff. We don't need this scoreboard, it's not very academic and does nothing as a KPI. --Monotonehell 03:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Include 10ks in both interwikis and Wikipedialang

  • This is my second choice. I'd rather not have them in the interwiki bar, even though we have the space, because within an alphabetized list I think it obscures which Wikipedias are the largest (and hence most significant). Dragons flight 15:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like seeing as much languages as possible, as it is perfectly in line with all the idea of Wikipedia, and the less articles a wiki has, the more highlighting it needs. It is very rare that someone will refrain to click on a language because it has only 10k+ articles, but would have if it had 20k+, so no objections to interwiki.--SidiLemine 16:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see any harm in including small bits on the navigation bar and at the bottom of the page, esp. when their removal gets people upset. --PFHLai 16:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove {{Wikipedialang}}, set interwikis to page body

  • As far as I can tell, no Wikipedia includes both a bottom template and side interwikis. The insertion of {{MainPageInterwikis}} has made {{Wikipedialang}} redundant, and {{Wikipedialang}} should be removed. The length of the interwikis column should be set at "not vertically longer than the body of the Main Page". For example of a decent size, see de:. For a too long interwiki column, see es:. I don't particularly care what the cut-off number is as long as the Main Page is compact. - BanyanTree 00:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why keep the bad history as well?

Have any of use wondered, why does wikipedia keep the whole history of articles, even the bits that contain vandalism, i mean isn't that a waste of space. why not just keep the good history, not the bad history. To me, its seems like a stupid idea to include bad history.

Pece Kocovski 09:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Partly to maintain the transparency of the system and the accountability of individual editors -- once we allow people to easily remove edits from page history, we lose transparency, which means it's more difficult to hold people accountable for their edits. Edits which do need removal should see requests for oversight. Luna Santin 09:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Its not really a waste of space either. Text uses very, very little disk space on Wikipedia, at least compared to the images and other media. — Dark Shikari talk/contribs 11:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And who judges what's good, and what's bad? Bazza 11:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Decider, of course! — Dark Shikari talk/contribs 11:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, he doesn't decide over good and bad. Only what's best.--SidiLemine 11:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's also useful to keep track what "bad users" do. Repeat offenders can be more easily identified. And sometimes, things get removed by mistake. Keeping the 'complete' history makes it easy for anyone to restore old stuffs afterwards. --64.229.205.180 13:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes it's also just fun to read the vandalism that happens to pages....or am I the only one that does that ;/ Worlock93 15:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Sorry for the most recent edit, a friend of mine was over and I (foolishly) left my account logged on. Andre (talk) 00:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 00:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ouch. Not a big deal though, got reverted by an admin in under a minute. Gotta be careful as an admin :). — Dark Shikari talk/contribs 01:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reverted by me, actually :) Andre (talk) 02:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the first time that's happened. Don't worry about it too much. Canderson7 (talk) 02:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Might I suggest new friends? I'm not an administrator but if my friends ever come over I don't have to worry about wikipedia's main page being changed even if I were become I avoid that sort of company. Nil Einne 07:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah this is for Nil Einne, uh Wikipedia is not your life man, come on. It was meant to be edited all your people do is just sit in your dark houses and cry awfoul whenever someone makes a joke on this site, please do not get rid of the only friends you have because they disrupted wikipedia, that is just dumb. User:Bowstaffer
If my friends use my account to edit wikipedia, then they were never my friends. Thankfully (as I stated above) my friends are not those kind of people. If people wish to keep these sort of friends, that it up to them but it is not something I would do. BTW, wikipedia was meant to be edited by all people constructively. Vandalism which from a brief look through your edit history is all you've ever done is not constructive. You might want to consider the amount of other people's time you've wasted via your vandalism. Indeed, it is usually vandals that have no friends and no life (this is not a personal attack, I have no idea what your life is like but it is my believe that many vandals do so because they have no friends and no life). N.B. Other editors: the above user vandalised my talk page which is why I know s/he has a history of vandalism and indeed the reason I came back here Nil Einne 17:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Urdu Wikipedia

The translation of "FREE ENCYCLOPEDIA" in Urdu language has been inappropriately done as it says "DAIRA ALMAARAF" instead it should say in Urdu "DAIRA ALMUARAF" (Giving it totally different sound and pronunciation)not having the facility to type in Urdu directly in this window may not express in the way I want but if you consider it is worth to change because of its educational and scholistic importance. Tasawar Janjuah

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.127.241.2 (talk • contribs) 03:43, 2006 November 4 (UTC).

Where is the bad translation ? If the error is in Urdu Wikipedia, please post your complaint at http://ur.wikipedia.org/ instead of here. You may need help from administrators there. --PFHLai 17:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia clone site

The following site uses wikipedia's layout without permission: http://gtfoutsider.com/wikisider/index.php?title=Alan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.144.248.198 (talk • contribs) 06:06, 2006 November 4 (UTC).

This is allowed and common, so long as they don't use Wikipedia logos. They are using the free (as in liberty) MediaWiki software that powers Wikipedia and numerous other wiki websites. —Centrx→talk • 07:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
For more information on this, please see Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. --PFHLai 17:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not really - the linked site is neither a mirror nor a fork. It is simply one of many sites running on the Mediawiki code and using the Monobook theme, both of which are released for use under the GPL license. — ceejayoz talk 23:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ooops. None of our content is used. My mistake there. Thanks, ceejayoz. --PFHLai 03:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bias!

What, no mention of the blatant inexcusable Malaysian bias on the main page? Borisblue 21:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

good point, I've even heard that combution engines, such as the one pictured, are used in Malaysia as well...
Not only that but the Malaysian Trades Union Congress is part of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions and now therefore the International Trade Union Confederation. They're also part of the United Nations and so must have voted in the 2006 United Nations Security Council election. Oh and they're also a neighbour of the Philippines Nil Einne 07:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erm. Spelling error

In the little panel thingy on the news about the article for saddam huisain being hanged or something, someone spelt the world "against" wrong. lol. its no big deal but i just had to say it. lol. maybe someone wants to fix it up? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Revert101 (talk • contribs) 10:49, 2006 November 5 (UTC).

Someone took care of that already. Next time, please report small mistakes like that at Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. Thanks. --PFHLai 13:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Typo

V for Vendetta –Ketuanan Melayu – Slate industry in Wales

Should be a space after the first dash. --Zeality 00:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's odd, the space is there in Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 6, 2006. Anybody more familiar with the heap of transclusions that is the front page care to have a look what's happening? thanks. --fvw* 00:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, now it isn't. I could have sworn I saw it last time I checked. Oh well, it's fixed now. Thanks for reporting this. --fvw* 00:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you consider adding a purge link like this after the number of articles? Sometimes the count isn't accurate.

6,898,838 articles in English (refresh) --67.124.38.149 01:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I think <shift>-F5 will accomplish the same thing - on IE and Firefox anyway. —Wknight94 (talk) 01:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is it really necessary to have an up-to-the-second count? I don't like the idea of having a "wipe the cache on the most viewed page on the entire website (with all its templates, too)" button readily available. — ceejayoz talk 02:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On average, several articles are created every few seconds, with a somewhat slower rate of deletion as the new page patrol and deletion debates sort through new pages. It would thus be quite odd if the number at Special:Statistics was exactly the same as this number (6,898,838) by the time you clicked on it, simply due to the constant flux. - BanyanTree 02:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
User:67.124.38.149, may I suggest getting an account and putting the purge link on your own user page ? You can bookmark your userpage and use it as "your customized MainPage". -- PFHLai 06:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Add Persian to other languages

Can someone ADD Persian fa: to the In other languages bar, in the main page. --Kaaveh 04:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Main Page/Archive 82#Where are the interwiki links? and Talk:Main Page/Archive 82#Language template. Comments at #The 10k's above are encouraged. Thanks. --PFHLai 05:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Same request but for arabic language. Is there a boycot for some languages?
Presently only languages with 20,000 articles are added. Whether or not this is the best approach is one of the things discussed at the links above. Dragons flight 09:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Arabic only needs a few more articles to pass the 20k mark at this point, anyway. It should be up there in a month or two. —Cuiviénen 16:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

US election

So, since this is obviously is going to come up tomorrow, what do we do about it? Do we wait until results begin to come in, report on "important" races, or provide a link to the relevant article, a la World Cup? Titoxd(?!?) 18:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See on-going discussion at Template talk:In the news#U.S. Congressional elections. --64.229.230.71 20:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hell no we shouldn't mention it. It's taking place in the United States. Don't you think the conch shell collectors union strike in Karibati is more important? If not, you must be biased. --Descendall 01:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Biased? The bias is shown in not including Nicaraguan general election, 2006 on ITN. Daniel Ortega is President again, which was also yesterday's news. How come Tajikistan is chosen over Nicaragua? --64.229.222.233 14:06, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you think the Nicaraguan general election, 2006 article is updated well enough, please draft a headline and submit it at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Thanks. --PFHLai 17:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On this day...

The Last spike link links to Last Spike which is a Disambiguation. It should probably link instead to Last_Spike_(Canadian_Pacific_Railroad). Kc4 01:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. In the future, please use WP:ERRORS for corrections like this. Thanks, BanyanTree 03:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia as a source for an academic paper

Is Wikipedia a valid source for an academic paper?

See Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia. - BanyanTree 03:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Short answer, hell no. Long answer see above. --Monotonehell 04:00, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you want good grades, don't cite any encyclopedia (Wikipedia, Britanica, Encarta...) unless you are quoting general statements verbatim. Read the references listed at the end of the article and use those as your source. --64.229.225.25 13:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Creative Commons images

I hope this is the right place to ask, but I have a quick question. I am a regular contributer to the articles such as Holden Commodore, Holden VN Commodore, etc. I originally had promotional images on each of these articles but they have since been removed. These images were only there temporarily until free images could be found. But then I came across the website richardlewis.is-a-geek.com/, who releases his work under the Creative Commons. The images I want to use are under the page richardlewis.is-a-geek.com/pictures/thumbs/commodore.htm. Would it be O.K. to use these? I have E-mailed the site owner, but am unsure if this will be enough. Regards OSX 06:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright on most of the images on that page are not owned by the owner of the web page. I am pretty sure that the creative commons license used "Non-Commercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes." is not free engoug to be used on wikipedia and can only be used as fair use.--Clawed 07:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Creative Commons images under an NC or ND license are not allowed, at least not without an accompanying fair use rationale. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 08:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Any further questions? Try Wikipedia:Help desk. --64.229.225.25 15:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seady weed dragon

Did anybody else make this spoonerism while reading PotD?.. just me then? :/ --Monotonehell 09:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're not alone. In addition, because of the bright colours and the poor way Mediawiki thumbnails images, I thought the picture was a cartoon until I clicked to see it in full. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 09:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

archiving

Someone should archive this page. It's already over 129 kilobytes long... In wikipedia guidelines it states that a page should be archived at 32kb... I'm not good at editing so someone else should do it.205.188.116.138 23:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That guideline is for articles... not talk pages or non-mainspace pages. ---J.S (t|c) 00:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, what? We don't archive articles at all. --Descendall 01:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's more than Talk:Main Page/Archive 81. 205.188.116.138 is probably right. —Wknight94 (talk) 00:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved most of the older talks from October to Archive 82. Hope this helps. -- PFHLai 05:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

$10,000 donation to Wikimedia

Did anyone else notice this $10,000 donation by the W. Glen Boyd Charitable Foundation, back on October 10th? Maybe we should have something on it in the Signpost... — BRIAN0918 • 2006-11-08 03:45Z

In the Signpost ? You may want to post at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions instead of here. Hope this helps. --PFHLai 05:34, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On this day - Picture

Um, am I the only one who sees some girl holding a wine glass and not Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen? --Ouzo 05:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is the girl still there? She's gone? I don't see her anywhere on the Main Page. --64.229.222.233 14:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Clear your cache. (Ctrl-F5 on a PC, Apple-F5 on a Mac.) —Cuiviénen 18:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ITN wording for US election and Rumsfeld

Pelosi (soon to be speaker of the house) and Rumsfeld (stepping down is big news). Bob Gates is slated to replace Rumsfeld. LILVOKA 17:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The parties are not currently tied in the Senate. The Dems have 50; the Republicans have 49. Granted the Dems have to win Virginia to get over Cheney's tie-breaker, but the current wording is incorrect. savidan(talk) (e@) 19:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The United States midterm elections result in the the Democratic Party winning control of the House from the Republican Party and the resignation of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld (pictured).'
This wording seems to imply that the midterm election is the cause of Rumsfeld's resgination. Rumsefeld should be in his own sentence or his own little section like before. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.211.4.35 (talk • contribs) .
That's already done (to my satisfcation anyway). On another page, I disagreed with someone who wanted even less connection - the two events happening literally hours apart can't possibly be some cosmic coincidence. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bigger problem: the the. I would fix it if the Main Page were not protected. Hashproduct 22:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I found it! I saw someone complain about that and I simply could not see it. One of those things where the brain just skips over it (like trying to count the number of f's in a paragraph and skipping all of the "of" occurrences). —Wknight94 (talk) 22:14, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How long is Rumsfeld going to be on the main page? Until Wikiliberals are satisfied? Haizum 02:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, finally. Haizum 06:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Tomorrow's Featured Article - a fault?

The current day in GMT is the ninth, but Tomorrow's edition of the main page shows today's featured content as part of its layout, ref today's featured article of Karen Dotrice and Tomorrow's of the same. Is this a fault, and if so, is this fixable? I'm not sure if this has been the case before now, but. Bobo. 06:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clear your cache. (Ctrl-F5 on a PC, Apple-F5 on a Mac.) --64.229.178.41 12:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i think this is a load of crap and that you are so stupid i mean any body could say this adn make it up yo —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.187.163.190 (talk • contribs) .

Please avoid personal attacks.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 16:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Heh heh. Consider myself insulted. It's working better now. I blame myself for not knowing how to do these things. Thank you, 64.229.178.41. Bobo. 03:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Schicksalstag" in Germany?

As a German I've never heard the expression "Schicksalstag". Some major events in German history happened on november 9th, but we don't call that "Schicksalstag" and we don't really commemorate these events, except the one of 1938; however, the expression "Schicksalstag" is wrong and irritating.--62.246.64.12 14:27, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to de.wikipedia it's a term mostly used by historians and jounalists, but has become used more often outside those circles since 1989.
Nach Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs wurde von verschiedenen Historikern und Journalisten
für diesen Tag der Ausdruck Schicksalstag geprägt, der aber erst nach den Ereignissen
vom Herbst 1989 weitere Verbreitung fand.
Simply because you havent heard of something doesn't make it untrue. But having said that, neither the en or de articles have any references. It's possible this term is WP:POV loaded? --Monotonehell 02:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amman Bombings

They happened today. How can you add them to the "On this day" section? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amman_bombings —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.108.134.36 (talk • contribs) .

It's already at November 9, from where new items are pulled. If you want to make a special request for next year, the relevant talk page would be your best bet. - BanyanTree 20:59, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Allopath"

Today's (11/9/06) DYK includes "..that Kadambini Ganguly (pictured) was one of the first female graduates in the British Empire and the first female doctor (allopath) in South Asia?"

Any chance we can change "allopath" to "M.D." or an equivalent? "Allopath" is held by some to be offensive.

This old DYK has left the Main Page. Next time, try WP:ERRORS. --64.229.178.190 14:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
At the time I posted it was up. AND it was changed before it went down. My mistake for not signing/putting a timestamp on my comment 67.182.22.63 03:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Medical images and the main page

Having come across the debate again on a page of BJAODN a suggestion - if the image or equivalents appears in "local library" medical encylopedias, use it, if the disease/syndrome/whatever is only described, use a diagram. It might also be useful to have a "medical image some might find unpleasant" warning on the relevant pages with a diagram at the top (ie for those of us who just want to know what "xyz-ism" is but don't want the glorious technicolour images).

That said, there will always be a degree of subjectivity in the matter - we can all think of images we object to (for whatever reasons) - and some "objectionable images" will inspire people in a positive way. Jackiespeel 15:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remembrance Day

I see that Armistice Day is in the anniversary section of the front page. Would anyone support a change to Remembrance Day and Ode of Remembrance type thing (ie. solemn remembrance of past, present and future sacifices, rather than military history about the end of World War I? Carcharoth 00:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remembrance Day is there already. --64.229.4.229 01:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Time to go to bed, I think! :-) Carcharoth 01:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean to send you away, Carcharoth. I am sure you'll come back refreshed. Sweet dreams! --64.229.226.79 17:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is all messed up!

It keeps displaying in the nostalgia skin. Is anyone else experiencing this problem? It's been like this for the past three hours. Floaterfluss 07:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The easiest way to change it back is to try this link to Special:Preferences, change your skin preference back to Monobook, and purge your cache. Titoxd(?!?) 07:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
THANK YOU SO MUCH!!! Floaterfluss 07:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, another best FA ever :-)

Euler the Toiler is my hero... long live generatingfunctionology! And Euler's Identity! And the Pentagonal Number Theorem! And gamma! And... oh, there's just too many to name. :-) --3M163//Complete Geek 14:03, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Nancy Pelosi not the "In the News" photo anymore?

Donald Rumsfeld's resignation is nowhere near as noteworthy. Past U.S. Presidents have gone through three Defense Secretaries in their terms. The photo should be of Pelosi.

Maybe this answers your question--thunderboltz(Deepu) 14:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On this day

Although Armistice Day is mentioned as taking place today, there should be a mention of it being the end of hostilities in World War 1. Motorfix 14:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"1918 - Germany signs an armistice treaty with the Allies, ending World War I on the Western Front." -- Zanimum 15:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A new wikimedia subsituance?

I want a wiki in which people are able to present experiment reports, preferably using the scientific method. Call it wikiscience or something. This will enable wikipedia to have a source for some statistics or facts. GstrOSx 09:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A little trick to introduce original research to Wikipedia? It seems this idea will be possible using Wikiversity: [1]. Perhaps you could start a science project there, but I don't think it would be considered a reliable source for Wikipedia.--cloviz 17:08, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the News pictures

Wouldn't be easier for the reader if the images in the 'In the News' section were always placed adjacent to the relevant article rather than the first article. As things are done now, it seems confusing. Hmains 18:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A problem arises if a short item at the bottom of the list were to provide the image. The formating of the section would be less-pleasing. Gentgeen 05:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Hmains. This is what newspaper layout people call "bad juxtoposition." Right now, Nancy Pelosi appears to the casual observer to be the legislator who was assassinated in Sri Lanka. "Comprehensible" should be more important than "pleasing," and if you want both, just always list the news item with an accompanying photo first.
The problem with that is the way items are added to and removed from the list. Koweja 01:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, there could be a new image for each top item, but there aren't enough free images for that. —Centrx→talk • 01:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps an image that changes when you hover over text with your mouse, and have it default to the image for the top article? This should take care of accessibility problems caused by the javascript - or if that won't work, have the server randomly pick an image to put up among ones associated with the current items. Koweja 01:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I liked the previous suggestion of assigning a different color (like light blue) for the news item with the corresponding photo, while the photo remains at the top. I also like the smaller (pictured), but they were all either voted down or ignored. --Howard the Duck 04:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Most people's eyes have been trained by generations of newspapers, TV news programs, and now web sites: when text and a photo are contained within the same module, the photo and text are presumed to go together. In this case, the text of the first item usually wraps under the photo, unambiguously placing them in a single module. The solutions recommended do not resolve this basic problem. --— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.162.99.230 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This has come up MANY times over the past year. I've made several suggestions;

  • Changing the background colour of the text that goes with the photo to make it obviously different.
  • Keeping the latest item with a picture on top until it is replaced by another item with a picture. The items without pictures start in second place in the queue.
  • Replaceing the picture with a generic icon of some sort when the lead item has none.

All of which have been poopooed for no good reason [jokeing ;)] Maybe we should settle this once and for all? --Monotonehell 18:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problems in tensing

In works of literature, films, and video games, many events are incorrectly stated in past tense. As a work of fiction that is immortal, events are properly stated in present tense. It is suggested that users help correct this mild issue. (from a friendly user) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 170.211.117.7 (talk • contribs) .

We are all editors here, including you. Be bold and make the edits you think are needed. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to bring this up with WikiProject Television as they are the ones most likely able and willing to fix these problems.

Penley on DYK

The entry for Penley is problematic. Is there any way to link today' "Did You Know" to the Penley Polish Hospital section of North_East_Wales_NHS_Trust? Thanks. Eddieuny 20:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This old DYK has left the Main Page. Next time, try WP:ERRORS to suggest minor changes on the Main Page. -- 64.229.179.9 15:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

short FA blurbs

I really like the short FA blurbs that have appeared the last couple days. It forces the writing in ITN to be a bit more concise. (I admit to having added clauses in ITN items just to make the section long enough to match the neighboring FA.) It also increases the visibility of DYK and SA. More please. - BanyanTree 00:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. The FAs were sometimes becoming mini-articles in themselves. Bazza 18:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Gates???

When I mouse over the picture of Nancy Pelosi, it says Robert Gates. 71.12.182.210 02:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. In the future, please report items like this at WP:ERRORS - BanyanTree 02:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Main Page

Today's FA is huge, and apparently each side of the Main Page is not evenly balanced. I reinstated a news headline at T:ITN, but it appears to not have done much. Can anyone remove a current DYK and use it for another day, if possible? The last one (Lucien Bianchi) is very long, and removing it would definitely put the page back to normal. Nishkid64 00:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Lucien Bianchi can get a spot in the limelight tomorrow. However, the FA is not exceptionally long; I think it is more that ITN is shorter than usual. —Cuiviénen 01:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. I'd updated DYK an hour before the Featured Article shifted over, and based the choices on the length of the FA blurb at the time. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 02:40, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The left side is still longer than the right. Please re-instate one more old news headline on ITN. BTW, tomorrow's FA is even longer! --64.229.231.116 15:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&oldid=87993690"