Misplaced Pages

Talk:Main Page: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:16, 10 January 2007 view sourceLumos3 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users29,322 edits skewed taxonomic diversity.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 01:04, 16 January 2025 view source Beland (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators237,182 edits →Usability and discoverability: ReplyTag: Reply 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Main Page discussion header}} {{Short description|Wikimedia project page for Main Page discussion}}
{{#ifeq:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|autoconfirmed|{{pp-vandalism|small=yes}}}}<!--
{{Main Page discussion footer}}
Please start new discussions at the bottom of this talk page using the "NEW SECTION" tab, or use the "EDIT" link beside the section heading to add to it. The section edit link and "New section" tab are important, so please use them.
-->{{Talk:Main Page/HelpBox}}
{{#ifeq:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|autoconfirmed|{{pp-vandalism}}}}
{{Annual readership|title=the Main Page}}
{{Talk:Main Page/Archives}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 200k
|counter = 208
|minthreadsleft = 1
|algo = old(3d)
|archive = Talk:Main Page/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{MPH alert}}
{{Centralized discussion}}
{{bots|deny=SineBot}} <!-- disable SineBot on this page to make reverts easier per discussion 20/02/2013 ] -->
]
__TOC__
{{clear}}


= Main Page error reports =
<!-- BEGIN WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE --><!-- This page is automatically archived by Werdnabot-->{{User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Linkhere}} <!--This is an empty template, but transcluding it counts as a link, meaning Werdnabot is directed to this page - DO NOT SUBST IT --><!--Werdnabot-Archive Age-3 Target-Talk:Main Page/Archive 88--><!--END WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE-->
{{Misplaced Pages:Main Page/Errors}}
<!-- ---------------
Please do not write anything here.
Please go to Misplaced Pages:Main Page/Errors to place an error report.
To discuss the contents of the Main Page, please start a new discussion using the "New section" button above, or use the "" link beside a heading to add to an existing section.
--------------- -->


= General discussion =
<!-- *** Please start new discussions at the bottom of this talk page, thank you. *** -->
{{Shortcut|T:MP|WT:MP}}
<!-- ---------------
Please *start* a new discussion at the bottom of this talk page (e.g. using the "New section" button above), or use the "" link beside a heading to add to an existing section.
---------------- -->
==Usability and discoverability==
I would expect the main page of the encyclopedia to prominently feature both a table of contents and a search feature. This page has a lot of trivia, which is a nice secondary function, but no longer seems to serve its primary functions very well. It does have a search feature, but it's a small icon up at the top in a bar of icons, rather than being front and center and already open with a box to type in words (in the style of a search engine, like ).


It's a bit weird we visibly link to ], but the only link to ] (which is important enough it's linked to from every page on the site) is hidden behind the pancake menu icon in the upper left. We do have templates like ] that could be used directly on this page as a better gateway to actual articles, for those that are curious but don't have any particular query in mind or are looking for inspiration. ] (]) 20:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)


:Agree about the trivia, but remember opinions here come from the trivia writers. Last time I looked at portal usage statistics, it looks like a few people click to see what they are, and most of them don't click anything further. ] (]) 03:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)


:This appears to be an objection to the ], not the contents of ] itself. The default skins on desktop and mobile both have a large search box or icon right at the top of every page. The desktop skin also has a link to ] in the menu shown on every single page. If you don't like the way that requires opening the menu before that link is visible, I suggest you bring it up on an appropriate talk page for the skin (perhaps ]) or at the ]. ] ] 14:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
==WP:RM note==
::Yes, I'm objecting to the fact that the primary functions of the main page are hidden in a menu and in an icon rather than being directly on - if not the most prominent things on - the page.
The requested move is now closed with the result of '''no move'''. ] 14:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
::Wouldn't changing the skin change ''all'' pages? That seems like the wrong answer, since it wouldn't make sense to put the Contents listing on every page, nor would it make sense to have an open search bar on every page. Unlike the main page, I would expect the primary means of navigation to be clicking on links to related articles, as opposed to browsing through topics. (Search is sort of intermediate on those pages, so an icon seems like a good compromise.) -- ] (]) 21:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
::I see no reason why we can't have in the top box "Welcome to Misplaced Pages" a visually predominant search bar. Doesn't touch the skin. ] (]) 22:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I have whipped up a search box at ]. How does that look? -- ] (]) 01:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::::I like your idea but your design makes the page header (including the recently added editor count) take up 30% of content height on my display, with about 50% of that header wasted grey emptiness. Some smarter (responsive) design will be needed. ] (]) 10:07, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::How about moving the "Other areas of Misplaced Pages" into that box to fill some of that space?--] (]) (]) 14:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::Is that list considered more or less important than the featured content and news sections? -- ] (]) 16:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::What is the size of your display? Desktop or mobile? -- ] (]) 16:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::@Beland: large tablet, laptop and phone; it's the first which was problematic, but that's not the point. Good design will accommodate varying display sizes and orientation so as to maximise usage of space and readability. ] (]) 19:28, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::I'm familiar with responsive design; I just wasn't seeing what you were describing and needed to know how to replicate it. I do see what you are saying when I view the site in landscape orientation; my desktop monitor and phone are both portrait. I will try a flex container layout which will make better use of the space. -- ] (]) 01:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
:Can you describe what you would expect in a table of contents for the site? I'm struggling to see how it would work. --] (]) (]) 14:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::Above, I suggested using ]. -- ] (]) 16:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::Probably similar to the that had the list of major portals at the top? That's kind of a table of contents. I think as close as you could get, anyway. ] (]) 20:00, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:::That raises an interesting question: the old layout links to portals like ], but the modern navbar links to contents pages like ]. I'm assuming the contents pages are more appropriate than the portal pages? IIRC there was an attempt to drop portals from the project entirely (partly because they weren't being maintained?), and perhaps they were removed from the main page for some reason related to that? -- ] (]) 01:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)


== Misplaced Pages Birthday ==
:Actually it was closed due to Misplaced Pages not being a democracy so no result at all. ] ] 20:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


Since it is Misplaced Pages's birthday, shouldn't we add that to the "On this day" page? ] (]) 19:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::Moved to ]. ] 20:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
:It's a bit late to suggest that, don't you think? It's now the 16th of January in some countries. ] (]) 19:47, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

:] lists Misplaced Pages's anniversary as ineligible (in the collapsed staging area) because the ] article is outdated and its inclusion would be ]. ] (]) 23:33, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
== Images not loading ==

When I go on Misplaced Pages, images won't load, only images already in my cache can I see. Thanks for any help <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 02:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:It's probably because of your internet connection. I doubt that it has anything to do with the site.--] ] 02:51, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I am running a broadband connection and I stopped loading images after viewing a huge page. Do you know how to fix this?
It works now. Just had to wait a couple hours.--] 07:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Check your ] and ]. ~]] 23:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

==First article==
Just out of curiosity, what was the first article ever to be written on Misplaced Pages?
-Halibut Thyme

:Go to ]. There is a saved version of a particularly old one called UuU (i think) and another one at ]. You will have to click back on the redirect and look at the history. ] 16:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

:Possibly, see also http://nostalgia.wikipedia.org though I'm not really sure what its contents represent, or why it isn't linked from ]? —] 23:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
::Wow they had the donation banner back then too I didn't know that... --] 23:59, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:::Actually i think that is an error from Wikimedia as it shows current figures. ] 00:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
::::Actually I was being sarcastic. Should've made it more obvious --] 02:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

== Archive ==

Shouldent we have werdernabot archive this page? ] 19:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
:That might be helpful. How many days should it wait before archiving?--''''']''''' <sup>]</sup><small>]</small> 19:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
::How about 1 week? ] 20:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
:::It's about time. '''] ]''' <sup>(])</sup> 19:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
::::Is Werdnabot working on this page? ] 20:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::The top section of the page (saying "Happy new C.E."), is presumably the oldest. It was written on the first. This means the the bot won't archive anything on the page until the 8th, where it will archive some of the topics. Since this page has become quite full and all stuff on here is usually replied to quickly, I'm going to change it to 3 days. And if it's not already, since 3 days may sound short, I'll make it 3 days only if there is more than one comment. --]<sup>]</sup><small>]<sub>]</sub></small> 20:22, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

== April one ==

Over on the wikinews mailing list we were discussing what we would do on April 1, and Jimbo (as in THE Jimbo) mentioned that he has always wanted to have the front page of wikipedia have all the sections link to really unlikely but true articles/pics etc so that when people visit on April one they think it is a hoax but it actually isn't. You know the kind of articles, ] and the like. ] 10:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

: "''and Jimbo (as in THE Jimbo) mentioned''", ] ] your source. ;) --] 10:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

:Try to avoid Jimbo-worship :-) that way lies no wiki. But it does sound like a good idea; make people think we're pulling april fools, when we're really not. However, the articles linked to should be brought up to good quality, fully cited and possibly semi-protected before featuring on the main page. That way, what looks like nonsense could turn out to be a perfect example of the best of Misplaced Pages. DYK could be tricky, and ITN. ] 11:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

::I don't think DYK will be too much trouble; we can relax the "recent" rule for one day. A good source for ITN would be Reuters Oddly Enough: http://today.reuters.com/news/newsChannel.aspx?type=oddlyEnoughNews&WTmodLoc=Home-C5-oddlyEnoughNews-1. --] 13:44, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

:::Sounds like a great idea. In that case ] would be a nice touch, provided we can dig up more material about this character. ] <sup>] / ]</sup> 14:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

::::I nominate ]. ] 16:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

::::Choose any of the articles in ]. ]|] 16:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

:::::Or in ] for that matter. ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>&bull;&nbsp;16:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)</small>

:We tried something along these lines last year, but it wasn't planned as well as it should have been. We probably should start discussing specifics now, as this probably is our only hope of discouraging main page vandalism on the part of sysops who don't take their responsibilities seriously. &mdash;] 16:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

::It may also be worth making clear that gags within the project space are viewed only by the community and are not vandalism. Rollback and use of the {{tl|test}} templates are not an appropriate response to jokes. As I recall, some established contributors were treated rather rudely and harshly last year for rather mild and funny gags in community space. - ]] 02:15, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

:::By the same token, it must be made clear that vandalism is vandalism. Harmless jokes are acceptable year-round, but other jokes don't somehow become less harmful on 1 April. Certain sysops have performed inexcusable vandalism to the main page in years past. &mdash;] 02:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Are there any featured articles known as practical jokes? ] 16:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
:Just checked the list - ] and the ] are what I would call semi- or off-mainstream FA-quality articles, maybe they would be suitable? --] 17:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
::] is also an FA. —]<font color=green>]</font>] 01:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

::This was done last year, and the coordination page, ] is still there if people want to restart the idea. ] 19:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

:::What about ]? | ] <sup><font color="Tan">]</font> | <font color="Tan">]</font></sup> 01:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

::::That isn't a featured article. &mdash;] 02:01, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

:::::I know; I meant as DYK, or another use. It's something that would work (IMHO). | ] <sup><font color="Tan">]</font> | <font color="Tan">]</font></sup> 02:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

::::::Ah, okay. That might be usable, but only in a factual, non-alarmist manner. (We'd need to clearly identify it as a hoax.) &mdash;] 02:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

:::::::The word ''hoax'' appears in that article's title, I guess I'd call that clear identification. --] 06:54, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

::::::::I meant that we mustn't attempt to perpetrate the hoax via the wording used on the main page itself (which was ] last year). &mdash;] 16:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::Yes, I understand now! Thanks for the link, David. --] 16:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

:::::::How about something like "did you know people have signed petitions calling for water to be banned" ] 15:48, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

::::::::Good one! Maybe this (discussion) should be moved/continued ]? --] 16:03, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

::::::::That wording would work. &mdash;] 16:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

:More suggestions (for DYK): ], ], ] <tt style="color:#161;">''Gavia immer''<small> (]|]|])</small></tt> 15:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

:Why not "honor" a Feature Disambiguation Page and a Featured <s>Redirest</s> Redirect? I think that would be a good idea. ] 21:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

::Redirest? ] 21:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
::

== Reverting: Tried and True? ==

We all know reveting vandalism is the most common way to stop it. But is it the best? We should be thinking outside of the box, coming up with new ways to stop vandals. (Are there any?) Reverting is not always effective, and it's as dull as watching paint dry.

I know this is not the best place for this, but lets face it--you get the most respone on the main page. ] 17:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
:See ] for an example of a different method :) &mdash; ] <font color="#000088"><sup>]</sup>'''/'''<sub>]</sub></font></span> 17:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

:Well, other than blocking repeat vandals who ignore warnings, which we already do, the only other way I can think of to stop vandalism would be to stop people editing in the first place. We already do that, too, on a small number of frequently-used or problematic pages, in the form of page protection and semi-protection. Preventing unregistered users from editing completely is an idea that's been discussed before, but it's generally agreed that the drawbacks outweigh the benefits – ] 17:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

::I say block then on the first offence, serious editors never do it, ever.
:::It's often difficult to tell the difference between a vandal and a well intentioned but misguided user on the first edit ever. — ] <sup><font color="darkred">]</font></sup> 01:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
::::Another option would be to make it official policy to 24 hour ban any registered users who clearly vandalises twice without any warning. Currently policy dictates test3 or blatant vandal must be given. Some admins block for frequent clear cut vandalism without sufficient warnings but many people like me don't report such users and instead just give appropriate warnings. If it were official policy, I would report anyone who violates such policy. For IPs, perhaps 4 cases of clear cut vandalism in the past 3 weeks should be enough for a ban without sufficient warning. Of course, if people would warn appropriately, we wouldn't have such a problem. It's difficult for bots to adjudge I understand. But in cases of blatant vandalism, e.g. putting fuck into pages so often people give test 1 even with 3 other test 1s and thatsif they warn at all. I myself was blocked as an anon a long while back for a single instance of vandalism even tho it wasn't anything that bad. Against policy (or at least standard practice) but I didn't complain and it probably reduced the chance I would vandalise again altho I'm still miffed that this happened now that I know it's against policy or at least standard practice. P.S. By clear cut vandalism, I mean things like putting fuck, gay etc into pages. Deleting sections and whole pages kind of falls in between and I would say when it's a LP article we shouldn't ban so quickly in case it's poorly done attempt to enforce BLP. I'm in no way referring to content disputes and other misguided attempts to improve pages which some confused users call vandalism ] 15:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

== Ice Hockey Championships ==

:''Moved to ]''

=="By e-mail" link==

These links (one in the Featured Article section of the Main Page and one in the "On this day..." secion of the Main Page) lead to a 404 not found page. Could anyone fix this? ] 13:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
:They work for me. —<span style="font: small-caps 14px times; color: red;">] (])</span> 14:54, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
::Im getting 404 not found pages, but refreshing or reclicking the link takes me to the proper page. Apparently, though, trying to get to the main page: "MediaWiki does not have an article with this exact name. Please search for Main Page in Misplaced Pages to check for alternative titles or spellings." Refreshing worked again. ] 16:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

:::All mailing lists were recently (a few hours ago) to a new server, and as part of the process, the URL (and email) of the mailing lists were moved to a <code></code> address. The old list page should redirect to the new site, but there may be some (hopefully temporary) problems. Note that the link to the email list is included in ], and if the redirect stops working, we can change the current link to a simple URL. For now, though, I don't think that's necessary. Thanks! ] <small>(])</small> 16:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

== Ahmose ==

Take that ugly-ass picture of the dead Egyptian guy off the Main Page! ] 18:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

:That's today's featured article and will disappear by tomorrow. If you don't like it then ignore it. Simple.] 18:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The wikilink for ] on the FA teaser leads to a disambiguation page. It should be corrected to ]. ] 20:12, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Very interesting. I thought I would get a whole lot of responses involving two things: 1. "WIKIPEDIA IS NOT CENSORED!!!!11!!" and 2. "You're so stupid, you write 'ugly-ass dead guy' and you want it removed? Ha, ha!"
Instead, I got a very nice and simple answer, plus a comment which has nothing to do with what I said (except the fact that it's connected to the FA). ] 20:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Even more interesting, I was wondering how many people would complain that this picture and that of Nancy Peolsi got interchanged!] 06:20, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

== Two links ==

Why is there two links to the complete list on other language Wikipedias, in the 'in other languages' bit on the Main Page. I don't see why there is two thay link to the same page. ] ] ] 20:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
:There's one link in ] at the page bottom, and one link in the sidebar list ] (though it's not in that template's code, so it must be included via a subscript or css page somehow). Hope that helps. —] 21:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

== Did you know ==
Hi, Its not very important but I just noticed in the "Did you know?" section it says this:

...that curb feelers (pictured) are especially popular for hotrods with whitewall tires?

To be honest, thats not really true. I don't think I have ever seen a hotrod like that, not even the very old ones... Just thought i'd get that out while i'm learning how to use wikipedia. ] 21:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
:Make a comment on the ] page. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 02:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

== Question ==

I feel i'm asking a stupid question here bt what will happen to the status of the donations when the numbers reach the borderline? ] 00:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:Wild guess: The donation template will disappear? --] 01:11, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
::Wild guess #2: It will revert to zero so Misplaced Pages can beg for even more unneeded funds. --] <b> μολὼν λαβέ</b> 02:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:::I'm not sure what you mean by "unneeded funds". We are experiencing exponential growth, and the money is badly needed in order to keep up with this traffic and to improve our experience (be it reading or editing) here on Misplaced Pages. Look at some of the archives of this page for more details. Thanks! ] <small>(])</small> 02:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I'm not sure what you mean by "beg" either. Beggars don't give anything in return when Misplaced Pages provides everyone with internet access a massive amount of encyclopedic knowledge. <b><font color="teal">]</font></b>''<sup><font color="teal">]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="teal">]</font></b></sup> 06:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::Do we really have to feed the trolls? --<b><font color="orange">] ] ]</font></b> 06:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

== Dates ==

Should dates in articles be written from the perspective of local time or from the perspective of GMT time? For example, someone died on Jan 31st in his locality but it was still Jan 30th in Greenwich. --] 08:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:I'd say local time, although in the few cases where the distinction is important, it may not hurt to mention both. Additionally, you may wish to refer this to the ], where it will probably get more attention. ] 08:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

== RFA for ProtectionBot ==

As this community is more impacted by the request than any other, I would like to make you aware that I have ] for ], an automated process designed to protect the main page from vandalism. ] 09:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:Not sure this is the best place for this notice. The Village Pump or the notices section of the Community Portal seem more appropriate. ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>&bull;&nbsp;22:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)</small>
::This is the page that is directly affected, much like if there were a bot for ], ], etc., or even simply an AfD. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 22:42, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

== In the news/Speak of the house ==

Is it just me or has this piece of news hogged the spotlight for 2+ days now. If US news gets more attention its an unfair slant on other English users.
:It's not that it's hogging the spot, there's just not been any newer suitable item suggested at the appropriate place since. --] 12:11, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
::I'm kind of getting sick of it, too. Yes, I'm American, but I'm also a Republican! ]&ensp;<sup>]</sup>&ensp; 13:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:::Word to that, man. '''''<font color="darkblue">]</font><font color="lightblue">]</font>''''' 18:08, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
::::Why not have the Ashes item at the top? It's the newest, and there's supposedly no subjective order. ] 13:41, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::I was wondering about that, too. --<b><font color="orange">] ] ]</font></b> 17:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::: Is there a new PD/free picture for the Ashes? --] 17:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::::The image doesn't have to illustrate the top item, that's what the ''(pictured)'' is for. But I dont think arbitrarily switching around the items is worth the hassle. Just wait until something new hits the presses to displace it. ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>&bull;&nbsp;19:51, 7 January 2007 (UTC)</small>

::::::::It definitely shows bias toward the US. If the UK House of Lords gets a new chair, we won't probably hear about it, especially for 3 days. --] 21:19, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::Yes you would, and it would be on the template as long as it is not pushed out by newer news. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 21:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::Actually, I doubt we'd put a change in the House of Lords, which is not all that politically important and has no elections, on the Main Page. The House of Commons, though, would. —]<font color=green>]</font>] 21:41, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::::I think the reason the speaker of the senate item is there is because she's the first woman speaker. Ordinarily the inner workings of the senate wouldn't be ITN worthy. --] 01:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::Actually, I'd like to turn that around and say that the request for the rules be bent to avoid having the item in the lead is in fact slightly biased against the US. If it were an equivalent story based in Uganda or Japan, people would be complaining of staleness, but no-one would be demanding the re-arrangement of items to "freshen up" the section. ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>&bull;&nbsp;21:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)</small>
::::::::::As soon as we start bending rules like that we're guilty of introducing bias instead of letting the organic process continue. There's not normaly such a pause in ITN candidates, so I don't think its actually a problem. Go make some news ;) --] 01:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::::Well, I do have all the components for ] on hand, and 3/4 of a Master's in chemistry. I guess I could see about ending the dry spell of news myself :) ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>&bull;&nbsp;13:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)</small>
::::::::::::Can you hear ] breaking down your front door yet? ] 16:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Living in England, I'd be kind of shocked if I did. ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>&bull;&nbsp;12:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)</small>
: Still desperate to get rid of Nancy ? Please be encouraged to update pages related to ]. , and we have ] standing by at WCommons. --] 01:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

== SIDEBAR BROKEN ==

→ ''Moved to ]''. Please followup there. --] 15:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


== Grammatical Error ==

The "In the News Section" contains a grammatical error. "Defeat" in "Australia defeat England " should be plural. It should read "Australia defeats England". --] 01:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

:No, it shouldn't. "Australia defeat England" is correct. In both countries' varieties of English, groups of people are grammatically plural. &mdash;] 01:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

::This is truly bizarre usage and I was going to object as well, but it seems David Levy is right. Googling reveals it is common among sportswriters. I've never seen anybody do this when talking about the result of a war or something, though... ] 02:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
:::That's probably because most writers would use the past tense "Australia defeat'''ed''' England" it's just the ITN writing style that forces the use of this tense. These days due to the overwhealming amount of US media, in Australia both plural and singular are acceptable. It's almost to the point where "defeats" is becomming the norm. The logic is as David said above, a team is a group of people and therefore treated as a plural. Even though "a group" is singular in itself, it's to recognise a team effort. --] 02:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
::::It still grates on the ears. I always thought that a group "was" singular in word but plural in concept. But I ''am'' American, not English or Australian, and I don't know cricket at all, so it's out of my range. However, if it read "Australia'''ns''' defeat England" or something along those lines, would it still be good sportswriterese? ]]] 14:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::No, 'Australians' is not acceptable either. This is because You should not say "The Australian captain scored a century", but rather "The captain of the Australia team scored a century". Ditto "The England team", instead of "The English team". ] 11:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

A little off topic, I know, but "defeat" is the plural form of the verb. "Defeats" is the singular. The number in the verb must agree with the subject.--] 19:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:::::I'm based in the UK, and can confirm that sports teams are often referred to in the plural: see various instances of this at http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/league_cup/6236687.stm. The grammatically correct form is, as far as I know, to refer to sports teams in the singular (Arsenal '''was playing''' Liverpool last night; Arsenal's players '''were playing''' Liverpool's players last night), and this usage is creeping in to the British media. However, the plural is still the most-used form. Because I'm so used to hearing the plural form, I find the American singular strange - the exact opposite of what ] experiences. In general - and I don't know the reason for this, but I'd like to know - American grammatical usages are usually correct, whereas British grammar often deviates from the norms in various ways. --] (]) 08:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

== Png is NOT animation ==

Something needs to be done about the PotD - either fix the caption, which says the image is an animation, or replace the png with the animated gif... (The fact that there is a "view this animation" link does not remove the error.) --] | ] 08:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
:This has been the convention for animated images for a fair while now. It came about for two main reasons: to cut down on the time needed for 56k dialup users to load the Main Page (the png is under 20kb, while the gif is over half a meg) and easy thumbnailing of animations with large dimensions (480x360 may be a tad too large for people using an 800x600 resolution). It was believed that for the Main Page, usability took precedence over a niggling and somewhat pedantic point of accuracy. I don't much care which way it's done, but then I'm using a fairly top-end machine, so the gif is hardly a strain on my system. ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>&bull;&nbsp;09:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)</small>
::P.S. To help out a bit, I've changed the png image description page to redirect to the main gif, so in addition to the "view" link, you can now click the image itself to see the animation. I'm not sure how ProtectionBot'll react to having one of its uploads become a redirect page, but I'll keep an eye on it and delete it myself tomorrow if necessary. ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>&bull;&nbsp;09:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)</small>
:::The bot isn't running at the moment, so it won't do anything – ] 13:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

== WP: RM above ==

Will anyone object if i manually move the Requested Move to the archive to stop people adding to an already closed discussion? ] 18:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
:Please do. (Isn't there a 'force archive now' tag for (one of the) archival-bots?). —] 20:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
::I'm not sure. ] 20:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
::I've moved it.

For the archive requested move see ]

] 20:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

==TITLES==
Misplaced Pages needs to have an edit title feature, there are too many titles that have grammatical mistakes. These titles lower credibility, and make the site look BAD. Any thoughts? ] 21:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

: You mean page titles? There is one: any page can be renamed. If your account is less than four days old, you won't be able to do this yet; if so, make a request at ]. Otherwise, you can move it yourself using the "move" tab at the top of the page. If you mean section titles, anyone can fix them (unless the page is protected), just edit the section and change the text at the top – ] 21:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
::In fact it's probably better to bring up a move request on the article's talk page first as what you may consider a gramatical error may be a difference in dialect or a technical restriction. --] 04:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
:::It's OK, he only wanted to capitalize someone's surname – ] 13:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
::Ohh I never knew about the move thing, and my account is no close to 4 days (more). My bad.--] 04:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

==On this day...==
Can't find the right place to report this, so I'll start here - the image for January 25th's On this day... is gone. I can't seem to find a history for it either! ] 21:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
: It's now fixed. Thanks for pointing this out. --] 00:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

== Animatino Link ==

The link to the picture (animation) of the day is

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Today's_featured_picture_(animation)

If you click on the link, it takes you to that page. However, if I click the link from the main page, it turns into

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_picture_%28animation%29 (the same page, but with code substituted for symbols in the address)

Why does this happen?

--] 21:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

:See ]. ] ] 01:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

== Picture of the Day ==

I may be completely blind, but I don't see the picture of the day today. What's up with that? 22:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
:Nevermind; I see it now...--]|] 22:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

== Misplaced Pages Split? ==
Maybe there should be an english and american versions separate to wikipedia as a lot of the content is americanised and as I am english a lot of it takes figuring out which to be frank is not very good to do late at night.--]|] 01:26, 9 January 2007 (GMT)
:No, no no! We need to work on collaboration, not splitting up. A preferences for American/British English would be a lot better than a split. —<span style="font: small-caps 14px times; color: red;">] (])</span> 01:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
::A lot of articles are Britishized, and I really don't have a problem with it, though I'm American. A rule I use, is that if the article is about an American thing, use American spellings;if the article is about something British, use English spellings. If it has to do with neither, make a decision. --]<sup>]</sup><small>]<sub>]</sub></small> 01:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
:A profoundly idiotic idea, if I do say so, and I am not usually rude about this sort of thing. Separating versions by tiny dialectic differences would only result in two inferior versions of Misplaced Pages, mostly overlapping and yet neither as complete as the current united project. Mets501's idea, which I'm certain has been proposed before, would be a solution—it's already done that way at the Chinese Misplaced Pages—, but it seems like far too much work for our programmers for piddling differences. (Chinese had a much larger problem of two different character sets to deal with.) I suppose I have some advantage in understanding both easily, being British-American, but I don't understand what causes such trouble in understanding. —]<font color=green>]</font>] 01:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
::Same here, I don't have any problem at all understanding it and don't mind it's usage, so I would be opposed to user preferences. It may be the only way though, in the long run. —<span style="font: small-caps 14px times; color: red;">] (])</span> 02:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
::: Expect an answer similar to ] if this is suggested to the developers. ]<sup>(])</sup> 02:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
:I also disagree, as loathed as I am to leave alone "incorrect" spellings like "color" (Oh the pain it took to leave the u out!) we don't need to make redundant British verses American WPs. What next? Australian verses Hong Kong english? In fact I'd like to see the en.WP introduce policy that the lead paragraph of an article must be in simple terms in order to merge in the simple english WP. As that's another redundant project. --] 04:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

::Ladies and gentlemen, the vast majority of people on this planet who learned English as their first language are Americans. Can we agree to standardize (or standardise) on American spelling? The comments by ] are well taken. - ]

:::Quite righte, a colourfule ideae. Ie agree withe alle the above. Britishe or Americane ise fine. ;-) | ] <sup><font color="Tan">]</font> | <font color="Tan">]</font></sup> 15:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Can we please take Nancy Pelosi's picture down? It's been up there for days...

We could also make sure that everyone is using the same American dialect. You know, replace all instances of 'pail' with 'bucket,' etc. We could use some of that $0.9Mil we raised to hire a team of linguists to standardise the entirety of the Eng. wikipedia into the same dialect.--] 19:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

== Idea ==

This may be a stupid idea, but there could be perhaps say an 'ask page' or something where users could ask questions who's answers are a bit to complex or ambiguous for search sites. Also if you had pictures of say an animal you could see if other people could identify it. Yahoo has something like that but not quite. Maybe there is such a page i'm new to wikipedia so I wouldn't know, hopefully I posted this in an appropriate place. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]){{#if:03:35, January 9, 2007|&#32;03:35, January 9, 2007|}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:It's not a stupid idea at all. As a matter of, Misplaced Pages has two such pages already. You can ask questions about Misplaced Pages at ], and you can ask general knowledge questions at ]. I hope that answers your question. By the way, Welcome to Misplaced Pages! ] <sup>(])</sup> 03:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

== Nancy Pelosi Pic ==

Nothing against Nancy Pelosi, but could someone please replace her pic with something fresh? Merci! ] 04:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:What do you suggest? &mdash;] 04:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah Nancy Pelosi is getting annoying...you could change it to a laughing baby or something. ] 04:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

: Still desperate to get rid of Nancy ? Please be encouraged to update pages related to ]. , and we have ] standing by at WCommons. --] 16:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
:::Yea, its starting to get a bit old, especially with her story falling way down to the bottom. There have been US strikes in Somalia, that seems worthy of replacing Pelosi. Perhaps a picture of an ]. ~'''] (])''' 22:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

==U.S. Airstrikes in Somalia==
Just off the presses....something to get Nancy Pelosi's ugly face off ITN if anyone wants to run with it. . Cheers! &mdash;] 04:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I'djust love to say I have been a great fan of wikipedia and I encourage yall to keep on doin this site its so fun!!!!! :)

== Tired of seeing Nancy Pelosi? ==

Well guess what? So am I. I want another picture to be there. For the past 3 days I am stuck seeing her face. Please someone change to photo to another news article. thanks ] 05:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:Find a free photo then. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 05:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

::http://www.inthenews.co.uk/photo/oil-$7307$180.jpg <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 05:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

:::Is that applicable? and free? It comes from this news article: http://www.inthenews.co.uk/money/finance/news/international-affairs/belarus-shuts-down-oil-pipeline-$1038488.htm ] 05:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

::::It needs to be free as in liberty. This picture does not indicate its license; the copyright is owned by a news agency or a photography service, and without evidence of a free license, we cannot use it. The Pelosi portrait, for example, is in the ] because it is a work of the United States government. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 05:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

::: Here is government picture: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/images/pipeline.jpg <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 06:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

::::And seriously, don't all pipelines look the same? <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 06:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

:::::This looks like it's just a random pipeline, not especially relevant to this news item. This does not add any information; the Pelosi picture says "This is what this ''person'' looks like". What's worse, it may very well be entirely misleading; the pipeline could be metal and be supported by concrete or be in a totally different natural environment. The picture cannot be false. Anyway, the proper place to bring this up is ]. —]→]&nbsp;&bull; 06:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:Indeed, the Pelosi picture has become rather stale. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a viable alternative at the present time. &mdash;] 06:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:: Can't we find one of those green-and black night-vision images of u.s. airstrikes on southern somalia? There's gotta be one free, or a fair use screenshot we can snag.&mdash;] 06:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:::Firstly, to which ''ITN'' entry would that be relevant? Secondly, we only use free images in this section. &mdash;] 06:55, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
::::Well, a U.S. airstike in Somalia is worthy of inclusion in ITN. Surprised no one's added it yet. &mdash;] 07:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
:::::You've spamed the link to the news in a couple of places. But you haven't put it forward as an ITN candidate. It may be in the mass media and big news - but is there an substantial article on Misplaced Pages about it? --] 08:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::No, because I was busy getting drunk tonight. Now, see below. &mdash;] 10:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
::::::: Getting drunk? I approve ;) --] 10:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
'''See ]'''. The ITN line should read something like (not final): "An ] ] attacks suspected ] operatives entrenched in southern ]".

She's old news. That was Friday. This is Tuesday. Even the mention of her has moved so far down the page that it's separated from the photo. I suspect that any resistance to removing her photo may be based on "in your face" DailyKos politics, rather than legitimate copyright concerns about other photos. Can't we move the photo down to keep it with that mention? - ] 14:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
*And your suspicion is wrong. Find another free-licensed image for any one of the items. &mdash; <small>]] &bull; 2007-01-09 14:44Z</small>

It's interesting to see how a fake smile bores people quicker than any other picture.--] 15:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

: Still desperate to get rid of Nancy ? Please be encouraged to update pages related to ]. , and we have ] standing by at WCommons. --] 16:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

There's another option. You could suggest a few new news items, or just grow up and deal with Nancys picture. ] 20:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
: Huh ? ''"Just grow up"'' ? --] 23:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
::Anything. Please. The humanity. ~'''] (])''' 00:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
:::It's hardly a matter of maturity, it's a matter of stagnation of the main page's ITN picture. Though I agree that nothing has come to take its place, I as well am tired of seeing. Can't wait for the picture to change...'''''<font color="darkblue">]</font><font color="lightblue">]</font>''''' 00:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
:::Please someone, change it. It is annoying! ] 01:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
:: ~'''] (])''' 02:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
:::HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH THAT IS FUNNY. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA ] 02:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
:::Nice article man. I've updated Nancy Pelosi's page at Uncyclopedia, have a laugh eh? '''''<font color="darkblue">]</font><font color="lightblue">]</font>''''' 02:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

So Pelosi is attacking Somalia now? Can't we get a pic of the plane, for a change? --<b><font color="orange">] ] ]</font></b> 07:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

== 500,00 ==

Little goof: the ''']''' summary in Newest Articles has 500,00 instead of 500,000 (which is on the original page). Can't fix it myself... ]]] 13:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

: Fixed by ], thanks – ] 14:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

== Image of the day DAB ==

The link for Salamis on the image of the day for January 9 goes to a disambig page. Can we get that changed to either ] or ]? <font style="color:#1e90ff;font-weight:bold">]</font>\<sup><font style="color:black;">]</font></sup> 14:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
: Links to ] & ] have been added. Thanks for pointing this out, z4ns4tsu. Next time, please make use of ]. It's good for suggesting small tweaks on MainPage like that. Service is usually quicker there. Thanks. --] 16:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

== Idea ==

I know we ask a math question before allowing an account to be created, to protect from vandalbots and automated spam. But what if we asked a random math question every time before editing an article? This would prevent vandalbots from vandalizing at all. I know this is not the place for this---where do I go to sugesst this? ] 17:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
: You may want to go to ]. --] 18:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:] would be an appropriate forum, but I seriously doubt that this idea will garner much support. While an exception could be coded for properly flagged bots, this would inconvenience editors and reduce productivity to far too great an extent. &mdash;] 18:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

==Question==

Why is the Misplaced Pages logo on Russian Misplaced Pages all sparkly now? ] 17:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:Whatever it was, it's not there now. I don't see it, at least. ] 17:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
::I am thinking the same thing, It's still there . ] ] ] 19:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
:::Is it the anniversary of its creation? Or is it for ]? -- ''']''' 19:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
::::I have been looking and they recently celebrated 100,000 articles. but now they have about 130,000 articles. ] ] ] 19:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
* It looks like a Christmas-themed logo: (remember that over there, Christmas lands on January 7.) ]<sup>(])</sup> 07:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

== Deguerre Image ==
Isn't there a Deguerreotype image of Deguerre than can be used rather than a pencil drawing? Not sure about copyright issues, but there are a ton in google image search (http://www.acmi.net.au/AIC/daguerre_jemayall_1848.gif). And given his 1789 birth I can't imagine any of them aren't in the public domain. ] 19:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

:The image may not nessisarly be in the public domain, even if the man was born in 1789. Unless you are aboslutly sure that it will not be a copyvio, then don't upload it. ] 19:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

::Daguerre died in 1851, well over 70 years ago. Any of his works are in the public domain in the US (which is what matters for the English Misplaced Pages, as our servers are in Florida), no matter who tries to claim otherwise. —]<font color=green>]</font>] 21:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

::: Please consider submitting the pics to ]. We can use one of those pics next year. (Pls check the photographer's year of death for non-selfportraits.) Thanks. --] 23:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

== RSS feed for POTD ==

The RSS feed for POTD shows the following page: ]. Which does not exist. What's happened? --] <small><i>(])</i></small> 01:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
:The POTD system was changed recently, see ]. So it looks like the RSS feed was not updated yet. ] ] 02:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

== Angela gives the red card ==

Someone got a little huffy. Angela one of the smartest people i have ever seen not only by putting there picture on the internet for everyone to see and all her personal information. Someones desperate. Anyways thanks for the block for my despicable behavior and editing and showing how what you know, "Nancy pelosi is an idiot." gasp. Man, just relax everyone is way to uptight and needs to eat some fruit or something <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (]) 02:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:We eat lots of fruit every day! I eat like 5 apples, 3 bananas, 10 oranges, 100 grapes and 2 mangos. No, but seriously, we have rules here, so your comments and such are not really appreciated or tolerated on Misplaced Pages. ''']]''' 03:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

== Posting ==

I have already read the page on how to write an article. I need to knoew how to actually place an artucle on wikipedia.
Please don't tell me to look in the sandbox. that is completely useless. this is supposed to be an open encyclopedia. why are yu making so hard to post by NOT including the information.
Jay Barrow <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 03:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:Jay, one thing you can do is search for the item you wish to make an article on. When you see it says no article exists, click on the link that says "You can create this page or request it." Then you can make your article. =) ''']]''' 03:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)



==Pelosi==
Moved to ] --] 08:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

== minor ==

Shouldn't "Australia defeat England to win the 2006–2007 Ashes series..."

Read "Australia defeats (defeat+S)........." - ] 08:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
:Check out ], above. --<b><font color="orange">] ] ]</font></b> 08:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

==Gathland State Park==
The DYK on this park is incorrect - the article stated that this park hold the only memorial to war correspondents killed in combat in the world, but there is actually at least two other prominent memorials of this kind in the US - the OPC memorial center in New York City and the memorial at the Arlington National Cemetery. I've now corrected the article on this point ] 10:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

== skewed taxonomic diversity. ==

Can someone elaborate on what the phrase "skewed taxonomic diversity. " in the opening sentence means. There is no explanation of ''skewed'' in the ] or ] articles and this piece of jargon stands poorly in the opening of an article. ] 13:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:04, 16 January 2025

Wikimedia project page for Main Page discussion
↓↓Skip header
Welcome! This page is for discussing the contents of the English Misplaced Pages's Main Page.
For general questions unrelated to the Main Page, please visit the Teahouse or check the links below.
To add content to an article, edit that article's page.
Irrelevant posts on this page may be removed.
Click here to report errors on the Main Page.

If you have a question related to the Main Page, please search the talk page archives first to check if it has previously been addressed:


For questions about using and contributing to the English Misplaced Pages: To suggest content for a Main Page section:
Main Page and featured content
Main Page topics
Today's featured article
Featured articles
Did you know...
In the news
Current events portal
Selected anniversaries
Today's featured list
Featured lists
Picture of the day
Featured pictures
Featured topics
Page semi-protectedEditing of this page by new or unregistered users is currently disabled due to vandalism.
See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you cannot edit this page and you wish to make a change, you can request unprotection, log in, or create an account.
Archives: Sections of this page older than three days are automatically relocated to the newest archive.

001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019 020 021 022 023 024 025 026 027 028 029 030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 059 060 061 062 063 064 065 066 067 068 069 070 071 072 073 074 075 076 077 078 079 080 081 082 083 084 085 086 087 088 089 090 091 092 093 094 095 096 097 098 099 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208

Centralized discussion
Village pumps
policy
tech
proposals
idea lab
WMF
misc
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

Main Page error reports

Wikimedia project page for Main Page error reporting Shortcuts
National variations of the English language have been extensively discussed previously: Refer to the relevant style guide on national varieties of English and see a comparison of American and British English.

To report an error in content currently or imminently on the Main Page, use the appropriate section below.

Main Page toolbox
Yesterday
January 15 		Today
January 16, 2025 		Tomorrow
January 17
TFA TFA TFA
SA/OTD SA/OTD SA/OTD
POTD Main Page v. POTD Main Page v. POTD Main Page v.
POTD regular v. POTD regular v. POTD regular v.
  TFL (Friday)
In the news
candidates
discussion
admin instructions
Did you know
nominations
discussion
queue
BotErrors
Protected pages
Commons media protection
Associated
  • 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 18:12 on 16 January 2025) and is not adjusted to your local time zone.
  • Can you resolve the problem yourself? If the error lies primarily in the content of an article linked from the Main Page, fix the problem there before reporting it here. Text on the Main Page generally defers to the articles with bolded links. Upcoming content on the Main Page is usually only protected from editing beginning 24 hours before its scheduled appearance. Before that period, you can be bold and fix any issues yourself.
  • Do not use {{edit fully-protected}} on this page, which will not get a faster response. It is unnecessary, because this page is not protected, and causes display problems. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
  • No chit-chat. Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere, such as the talk page of the relevant article or project.
  • Respect other editors. Another user wrote the text you want changed, or reported an issue they see in something you wrote. Everyone's goal should be producing the best Main Page possible. The compressed time frame of the Main Page means sometimes action must be taken before there has been time for everyone to comment. Be civil to fellow users.
  • Reports are removed when resolved. Once an error has been addressed or determined not to be an error, or the item has been rotated off the Main Page, the report will be removed from this page. Check the revision history for a record of any discussion or action taken; no archives are kept.
Administrators: Clear all reports

Errors in the summary of the featured article

Please do not remove this invisible timestamp. See WT:ERRORS and WP:SUBSCRIBE. - Dank (push to talk) 01:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Today's FA

Tomorrow's FA

Day-after-tomorrow's FA

Errors with "In the news"

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Current DYK

Next DYK

  • ... that an Australian crocodile named Burt correctly predicted the 2018 FIFA World Cup final? Can we please not turn the main page into stupid tabloid journalism. We are an encyclopedia, not some outlet to repeat dumb publicity stunts for the gullible. Fram (talk) 11:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Yeah I'm sorry, but this DYK hook is ... not good. The crocodile didn't "correctly predict" anything, he bit one of two flags that had chicken wings attached to them. The one he bit just happened to be the one of the winning team, so a 50% chance. Notably, he got his previous "prediction" wrong! There are better hooks here - the crocodile was in Crocodile Dundee and was thought to be nearly 100 years old, for example. Black Kite (talk) 11:34, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
It's a lighthearted hook for a lighthearted topic, so I don't think it inappropriate to the subject matter - and I hardly think anybody is likely to be deceived into thinking a crocodile is actually clairvoyant. But if somebody wants to go to the trouble of replacing it, that's fine too. Gatoclass (talk) 13:01, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, I realise it's meant to be light-hearted, but is getting a single 50/50 chance "right" even a prediction? Now if it was Paul the Octopus, I'd concede the point. Also I'm unconvinced by From 2008, he lived at Crocosaurus Cove ... where he attempted to predict election results. Black Kite (talk) 13:14, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Well no, it's not a prediction, but again, I assume readers are smart enough to identify a non-literal reference when they see one. As for the article quote, I agree that is unencyclopaedic and could use an edit.
But as I indicated above, I am not particularly attached to the current hook and won't object if it's replaced. I really just wanted to make the point that I think there is a place for the occasional lighthearted hook where appropriate. Gatoclass (talk) 13:39, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
We already have the "quirky" hooks (which sometimes are quirky and not just cringey), adding more of the same seems like a bad idea. Fram (talk) 13:45, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Next-but-one DYK

  • ... that Soviet studies scholar Katerina Clark rode her bicycle "just about everywhere in the New Haven, Connecticut area, well into her 70s"? Is there really nothing more inspiring, important, exceptional, ... to say about this scholar than that she rode a bike well into her seventies, something utterly unremarkable? DYK hooks are supposed to be interesting. Fram (talk) 11:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Suggested alt:
ALT6: * ... that Katerina Clark wrote "a brave and intelligent study of the Soviet novel"? Gatoclass (talk) 12:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Please note that I have verified the above alt, but because I proposed it, somebody else will have to verify it. It's easy to do, it's the first line of this review. BTW I proposed a new alt because the other alts from the nomination page also suffer from the same rather trivial and tangential character as the bicycle one. Gatoclass (talk) 12:28, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
I find the original hook interesting. I get that riding a bike is more of a human interest thing than anything to do with her academic/professional life, but it's still interesting to me. Perhaps because I'm a cyclist and while I'm not yet "well into my 70s", that's not too far away and I hope I can do the same when I get there. RoySmith (talk) 15:15, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Heaps of people ride bicycles into their 70s. By definition, something that is commonplace is not interesting. Gatoclass (talk) 15:58, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Interesting is in the eye of the reader. RoySmith (talk) 16:05, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Up to a point, sure. But again, the commonplace by definition is uninteresting. That's why our guideline says a hook should highlight a fact that is unusual. Gatoclass (talk) 16:14, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
It is indeed unusual for people to be riding a bike "just about everywhere" in their 70's.

In the US, cycling falls sharply with increasing age. According to the 1995 NPTS, the bicycle’s modal split share is 3.3% among those ages 5-15, but falls to 1.0% for ages 16- 24, 0.5% for ages 25-39, 0.3% for ages 40-64, and just 0.2% for those 65 and over.

RoySmith (talk) 17:08, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
That might be true in the US, but not in Europe. For example, in the Netherlands the age group 65-70 cycles more than any other, and the 70+ age group are the biggest users of electronic bikes. See Fig 7 and associated text in . Modest Genius 17:29, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
I agree with you that the Netherlands is more enlightened (about most things) than the US, but the hook is talking about New Haven, Connecticut, which is in the US. RoySmith (talk) 17:38, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
That's not what I said. We cannot assume that all our readers are in the US. Many readers will see that blurb and not find it at all surprising (or interesting). If this is unusual behaviour in the US, the blurb should say so, to give sufficient context to those readers. Or pick a different blurb. Modest Genius 18:11, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

References

  1. John Puchera , Charles Komanoffb , Paul Schimekck. "Bicycling renaissance in North America? Recent trends and alternative policies to promote bicycling" (PDF). vtpi.org. Retrieved 16 January 2025.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Errors in "On this day"

Today's OTD

  • attacked the British's amphibious evacuation: the possessive reads oddly, and I think is ungrammatical: the more usual phrasing would be "attacked the British amphibious evacuation" or, even better, something like "attacked British troops being evacuated...".
Separately, not an error but a comment: we have five hooks here of which two are focused on England/Britain; one of the other two is focused on the United States; of the four anniversaries, two are Europeans and one a Canadian of European ancestry. Seems a bit narrow in focus, given that there are a lot of significant anniversaries of people and events today centred on the wider world? UndercoverClassicist 10:40, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Tomorrow's OTD

Day-after-tomorrow's OTD

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(January 17, tomorrow)

Monday's FL

(January 20)

Errors in the summary of the featured picture

Notice to administrators: When fixing POTD errors, please update the corresponding regular version (i.e. without "protected" in the page title) in addition to the Main Page version linked below.

Today's POTD

Tomorrow's POTD

General discussion

Shortcuts

Usability and discoverability

I would expect the main page of the encyclopedia to prominently feature both a table of contents and a search feature. This page has a lot of trivia, which is a nice secondary function, but no longer seems to serve its primary functions very well. It does have a search feature, but it's a small icon up at the top in a bar of icons, rather than being front and center and already open with a box to type in words (in the style of a search engine, like ).

It's a bit weird we visibly link to Misplaced Pages:Contents/Portals, but the only link to Misplaced Pages:Contents (which is important enough it's linked to from every page on the site) is hidden behind the pancake menu icon in the upper left. We do have templates like Misplaced Pages:Contents/TOC navbar that could be used directly on this page as a better gateway to actual articles, for those that are curious but don't have any particular query in mind or are looking for inspiration. Beland (talk) 20:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Agree about the trivia, but remember opinions here come from the trivia writers. Last time I looked at portal usage statistics, it looks like a few people click to see what they are, and most of them don't click anything further. Art LaPella (talk) 03:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
This appears to be an objection to the WP:SKIN, not the contents of Main Page itself. The default skins on desktop and mobile both have a large search box or icon right at the top of every page. The desktop skin also has a link to Misplaced Pages:Contents in the menu shown on every single page. If you don't like the way that requires opening the menu before that link is visible, I suggest you bring it up on an appropriate talk page for the skin (perhaps Misplaced Pages talk:Vector 2022) or at the village pump. Modest Genius 14:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Yes, I'm objecting to the fact that the primary functions of the main page are hidden in a menu and in an icon rather than being directly on - if not the most prominent things on - the page.
Wouldn't changing the skin change all pages? That seems like the wrong answer, since it wouldn't make sense to put the Contents listing on every page, nor would it make sense to have an open search bar on every page. Unlike the main page, I would expect the primary means of navigation to be clicking on links to related articles, as opposed to browsing through topics. (Search is sort of intermediate on those pages, so an icon seems like a good compromise.) -- Beland (talk) 21:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
I see no reason why we can't have in the top box "Welcome to Misplaced Pages" a visually predominant search bar. Doesn't touch the skin. Masem (t) 22:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
I have whipped up a search box at Misplaced Pages:Main Page/sandbox. How does that look? -- Beland (talk) 01:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
I like your idea but your design makes the page header (including the recently added editor count) take up 30% of content height on my display, with about 50% of that header wasted grey emptiness. Some smarter (responsive) design will be needed. Bazza 7 (talk) 10:07, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
How about moving the "Other areas of Misplaced Pages" into that box to fill some of that space?--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Is that list considered more or less important than the featured content and news sections? -- Beland (talk) 16:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
What is the size of your display? Desktop or mobile? -- Beland (talk) 16:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
@Beland: large tablet, laptop and phone; it's the first which was problematic, but that's not the point. Good design will accommodate varying display sizes and orientation so as to maximise usage of space and readability. Bazza 7 (talk) 19:28, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm familiar with responsive design; I just wasn't seeing what you were describing and needed to know how to replicate it. I do see what you are saying when I view the site in landscape orientation; my desktop monitor and phone are both portrait. I will try a flex container layout which will make better use of the space. -- Beland (talk) 01:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Can you describe what you would expect in a table of contents for the site? I'm struggling to see how it would work. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Above, I suggested using Misplaced Pages:Contents/TOC navbar. -- Beland (talk) 16:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Probably similar to the old layout that had the list of major portals at the top? That's kind of a table of contents. I think as close as you could get, anyway. ApLundell (talk) 20:00, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
That raises an interesting question: the old layout links to portals like Portal:Mathematics, but the modern navbar links to contents pages like Misplaced Pages:Contents/Mathematics and logic. I'm assuming the contents pages are more appropriate than the portal pages? IIRC there was an attempt to drop portals from the project entirely (partly because they weren't being maintained?), and perhaps they were removed from the main page for some reason related to that? -- Beland (talk) 01:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Birthday

Since it is Misplaced Pages's birthday, shouldn't we add that to the "On this day" page? SuperJames888 (talk) 19:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

It's a bit late to suggest that, don't you think? It's now the 16th of January in some countries. MadGuy7023 (talk) 19:47, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Selected anniversaries/January 15 lists Misplaced Pages's anniversary as ineligible (in the collapsed staging area) because the Misplaced Pages article is outdated and its inclusion would be navel-gazing. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:33, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Category: