Talk:Main Page - Wikipedia

01:26, Friday, October 4, 2024 (UTC)

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 01:26 on 4 October 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.

Today's FA

Tomorrow's FA

Day-after-tomorrow's FA

Current DYK

Next DYK

Next-but-one DYK

Today's OTD

Tomorrow's OTD

Day-after-tomorrow's OTD

Friday's FL

(October 4, today)

Monday's FL

(October 7)

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.

Today's POTD

Tomorrow's POTD

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? —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 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

I agree, it looks a bit Windows 95-ish, if you get me. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:45, 27 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

In Netscape I find gray boxes at the corners. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.232.148.109 (talk) 15:20, 24 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

The boxes are shifted in Opera (9.27) down and to the right. Regardless, I took a look at FF3b5. While I do find it kind of distracting, if I had to have some form of it instituted, I'd go without the shadows on the images. The images are unbordered right now and should stay that way. Having borders/shadows is distracting.The freddinator (talk) 02:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

May i suggest a colour scheme change? the other language wikis look so much brighter, because the colours are more bold! I liked the example in Mistman123's sandbox, so here is my attempt: User:Kennedygr/sandbox - i like to brighter colours, (at least the left.) havent thought of the right side, and the images on the title bars help too? ← κεηηε∂γ ^{(talk) (secret)} 14:26, 25 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I get the tiny boxes to the lower right.(firefox 1.5.1.12, Adblock+, flashblock, imagezoom, low memory requirements...) The Sreenshot looks very good. Perhaps you can find a site that it works at or poke around at browser watch. 71.193.2.115 (talk) 06:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hey guys! I think I fixed it!! Please check it out and let me know if it works for all your browsers. If you like it we can put it on the Main Page! Regards. ~RayLast ^«Talk!» 01:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Works for me in FF2. Personally I reckon the shading is a little too heavy though. I mean sure it looks good now, but shadows can be the sort of look that gets old quickly. Incidentally, I did something sort of similar with round shadows with a header I made for the top of my talk page a while back (only round in Firefox I think). • Anakin ^(talk) 19:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ick, it's ugly. Sorry. I don't think I could stand looking at that everytime I visited Wikipedia; doesn't really suit the Vista age. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I agree with WBOSITG...sorry. --^LaPianista! 00:45, 5 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, not bad. I suggest making the shadows a gradient fill rather than 3 superposed rectangles and making them a bit smaller, then you might be on to a winner Modest Genius ^talk 19:21, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I find it works on my version of firefox. (Anonymous) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.190.21.159 (talk) 23:53, 7 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Looks good in Safari. Lunakeet 21:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Alright, I now added the "simple=true" parameter that only displays one shadow shade for my experiment on the Main Page sandbox. Visit the Shadowing Template for details on the template parameters. ~RayLast ^«Talk!» 15:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I preferred the previous version tbh, looked more like an actual shadow and less like a box behind it. The corners really need to have diagonals or it just looks wrong. So you know what I mean:

currently

|______
  |____

my suggestion

|______
 `------

Modest Genius ^talk 20:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

...are featured on the Wikipedia Main Page. Sigh. Our systemic bias really shines through sometimes. Kaldari (talk) 16:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Not to mention it's all written in English. Our Anglo-centrism is pretty glaring.-Wafulz (talk) 17:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Last I checked there were English-speaking women as well. And how come we never have turtles? Kaldari (talk) 18:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

To be honest, one of the men is a bit on the grey side. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

If it makes you feel better, the next featured pic on DYK is a black woman.--Bedford 19:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yay for racial equality at DYK! =P weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Uh... so based on one afternoon's collection of pictures you're saying what? That the internet is biased against women of color and non-avian species of animals? I'm sure there are appropriate political message boards where you can listen to yourself vent. (Pardon me for the use of English, I don't mean to be biased against the Dutch/Cantonese/Pulaar/Hindi speaking communities.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.72.30.67 (talk) 23:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

There are more ant species than humans, why isnt this reflected in news and DYK sections? This is an outrage. -Anon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.17.34 (talk) 04:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

{{sofixit}} ;) 68.101.123.219 (talk) 02:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

How have the fundraising ads been chosen? Where can I find discussions and more details about the 2008 fundraising program? Thank. 131.111.247.194 (talk) 20:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

See meta:Fundraising and the current fundraising landing pad. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 09:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks but I don't see any information about the 2008 fundraising. Only the past fundraisers... 131.111.247.194 (talk) 09:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I find it interesting yet appalling that the flag of Germany was selected as the feature article one day after Israel was selected on its independence day. --165.124.138.191 (talk) 03:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I had similar thoughts as well.--Bedford 04:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Two days. --Howard the Duck 05:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

See also: apophenia Raul654 (talk) 07:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Why? Germany and Israel have friendly relations as they are both committed to the ideals of democracy. -anon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.17.34 (talk) 04:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

If you instantly associate Germany with Nazism, I think the problem is at your end. J Milburn (talk) 07:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Oh that's what it is? lmao I spent quite a while trying to make sense of that comment without any success. 86.137.221.99 (talk) 13:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Latin Wikipedia now has over 20,000 articles. Harris Morgan 13:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC).Reply

I think there's a bot that takes care of that. Daniel Case (talk) 20:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

There isn't, we need an admin to do it. I would, but I do not want to edit the main page right now. J Milburn (talk) 21:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Looks like its been done.-Wafulz (talk) 22:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

By CapitalR, if anyone cares. J Milburn (talk) 22:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

merh. 86.137.221.99 (talk) 00:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

and yes yes i know, fix it myself, except that i cant edit this page 86.137.221.99 (talk) 00:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

You should be able to edit today's featured article by clicking on a link to it. 99.230.152.143 (talk) 00:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

yes but that doesnt help me change the crap blurb on the main page. 86.137.221.99 (talk) 01:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Post a draft at WP:ERRORS and get help from WP:ANI if needed. --74.13.124.4 (talk) 03:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Actually it does. The blurb is nearly always taken from the article lead. Until and unless the article lead is 'improved' it's doubtful the main page blurb will be changed since as the comment on WP:ERRORS states, the main page always defers to articles and problems that occur in articles should be fixed first there before making a complaint Nil Einne (talk) 06:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I just doubt that either of you need to edit it. :P crassic!^[talk] 03:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

oh please, it reads like an advertisement for a film more than it does an encyclopedic article. "in cinemas next week: minnesota, the story of a town ..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.221.99 (talk) 03:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

It sounds like you're complaining that it makes too strong an effort to grab the readers attention or what? In what way is it "crap"? It reads nothing like a cinema advert. Tourskin (talk) 07:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I think the awkward first sentence ("The history of Minnesota is the story of a U.S. state...") is the biggest problem. Is there a rule that says we must include the title of the article in the first sentence? It always looks silly in those "history of..." articles. Zagalejo^^^ 08:04, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Maybe something like "The history of Minnesota began in...." or similar? weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 10:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

That would be fine, except it makes the assumption that our readers already know that Minnesota is a U.S. state. The problem is, it's hard to keep both "history of Minnesota" (the title of the article) and a description of what Minnesota is (a U.S. state) in the first sentence without it coming across as awkward. Without mentioning what Minnesota is in the opening sentence, it's slightly confusing, and would be akin to "The Third of May 1808 was completed..." Pretty much the least-horrible-sounding thing I can think of is "The history of Minnesota, a U.S. state..." Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 12:15, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

As I remarked above, since the same issue occurs in the FA, it is best if this discussion is held there where it can be considered by the editors of the article who may be able to offer alternative suggestions or point out any problems with any suggestions, and where it is probably not going to be archived in 3 days, rather then here where it is of little interest to the majority of editors here, and doesn't really concern the main page directly anyway. If this is a wiki-wide problem concerning all 'history of...' articles, then somewhere like WP:VPM would probably be better Nil Einne (talk) 14:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

This was really easy fix, people. "The [[History of Minnesota|history of the U.S. state of Minnesota]]..." howcheng {chat} 20:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

This is another reason why it's usually advisable to discuss/carry out changes in articles first. Now the improved version is on the main page, but not in the article Nil Einne (talk) 20:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Please bypass the redirect for worst films ever made in TFA. Thanks 117.193.34.227 (talk) 13:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Please post this in Wikipedia: Errors above. Thanks. ☯Ferdia O'Brien ^(T)/_(C) 13:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Won't be fixed per WP:R2D. ffm 00:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Death announced. Please could we put her in the 'In the news' section? Yours hopefully, --Major Bonkers (talk) 20:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Please post this at Wikipedia:In The News/Candidates. Thanks. ☯Ferdia O'Brien ^(T)/_(C) 20:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Will do, thank you. (No great hope of success, but just maybe...).--Major Bonkers (talk) 21:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Moved to WP:ERRORS ffm 00:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)Reply