Talk:Main Page

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Main Page error reports[edit]

To report an error on today's or tomorrow's Main Page, please add it to the appropriate section below.

  • Where is the error? An exact quote of all or part of the text in question will help.
  • Offer a correction if possible.
  • References are helpful, especially when reporting an obscure factual or grammatical error.
  • Time zones: The current date and time is displayed in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC, currently 02:43 on 26 May 2019), not adjusted to your local time zone.
  • Do not use {{edit fully-protected}}, which will not give you a faster response, and in fact causes problems if used here. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
  • Done? Once an error has been fixed, or has rotated off the Main Page, or has been acknowledged as not an error, the error report will be removed from this page; please check the page's history for discussion and action taken.
  • No chit-chat: Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere.
  • Can you fix the issue yourself? If the error is with the content of an article linked from the main page, consider attempting to fix the problem rather than reporting it here.

Errors in the summary of the featured article[edit]

Today's TFA[edit]


David Levy, do you see any free images you like for this one? Current blurb length is 1002, plus the featured topic notice. - Dank (push to talk) 20:59, 22 May 2019 (UTC) Note that this is 3 days old - Dank (push to talk)

@Dank: I moved this to comment from here. I also have concerns with today's featured article. It was last reviewed on 24 September 2008. I'm not quite sure it meets our standards right now. –MJLTalk 01:18, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the report. I'm not involved in scheduling. You can edit the article to fix any problems you see, or you can ping the other TFA coords, or leave them a message at WT:TFA. You can also report specific problems with the Main Page blurb here. - Dank (push to talk) 01:43, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Tomorrow's TFA[edit]

Errors with In the news[edit]

  • The word "intention" should be removed from the May blurb. She did indeed resigned, but it has just not yet taken effect. ― Heb the best (talk) 12:01, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Her exact words were "... I will resign as leader of the Conservative and Unionist Party on Friday 7 June...": [1]. That's in two weeks' time. Perhaps something a little more than an "intention", but she has not yet resigned from anything. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:12, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I suggest "..., announces her resignation effective 7 June." --- Coffeeandcrumbs 13:28, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  • The current wording is accurate and fine. If a date's required, append "on 7 June". British English is unlikely to use the "<noun> effective <date>" construction (1.1). Bazza (talk) 13:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I tend to agree. The British English would more likely be "... her intention to resign, which would be effective from 7 June", which is much too verbose for a blurb. Just adding "on 7 June" would be the simplest way of making it clearer. Even then we'd have 20 words. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:19, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
There are a handful of admins who seem willing and able to change images on the Main Page, and at least one of those is only on mobile at the weekends. Thanks for the continual prompts to change the image, it has now been updated. Stephen 22:50, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Errors in On this day[edit]

Today's OTD[edit]

  • 1979During takeoff from O'Hare International Airport in Chicago, an engine detached from American Airlines Flight 191, causing a crash that killed a total of 273 people....
– In normal English syntax, an engine doesn't detach from a "flight," it detaches from an airplane. Suggested fix:
During takeoff from O'Hare International Airport in Chicago, an engine detached from an American Airlines DC-10, causing a crash that killed a total of 273 people...."
(The flight number is unimportant for this blurb.) – Sca (talk) 13:14, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Not at all, the flight number is the manner in which these aircraft are commonly identified. You don't talk about a Boeing 767-223ER crashing into the Twin Towers, you talk about American Airlines Flight 11. This is, categorically, not an error once again. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:32, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Kindly direct me to the rule that says encyclopediae must be written in language so ill-formed and illogical as to be functionally nonsensical. We are striving to communicate. I don't care what the hypothetical 'you' (the great unwashed) say, the phrase in question sounds like something from a bureaucratic report, and on its face does not make literal sense. – Sca (talk) 21:28, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't need to do that. It's just edit consensus. Your complaint is "noble" but irrelevant and hysterical ("functionally nonsensical"? Really?) I'm afraid. Once again, not an error. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:37, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Oh, and in case you didn't realise, the "total of" is because it killed two people on the ground, so it's necessary to ensure that pedants don't yell "only 271 people on the airplane"! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:42, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Tomorrow's OTD[edit]

Errors in Did you know...[edit]

Current DYK[edit]

Next DYK[edit]

Next-but-one DYK[edit]

Errors in the featured picture[edit]

Today's POTD[edit]

  • Suggest less awkward formulation: "where monuments commemorating the victories of the Russian Army were erected and regular parades and military exercises took place." Jmar67 (talk) 00:30, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Please sync the protected version with an improved blurb here. The suggestion above has already been incorporated there. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 16:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Tomorrow's POTD[edit]

Errors in the summary of the featured list[edit]

Friday's FL[edit]

Monday's FL[edit]

General discussion[edit]

Wallpaper or background.[edit]

It would be better if Wikipedia added a feature on which you can change the background feature or like the background color, and if anyone wants to get specific background wallpaper, they can pay a small price to do just that. Chunkyfungus123 (talk) 00:56, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Chunkyfungus123, I'm pretty sure you can do this for free with Help:User styles. Maybe ask at WP:VP/T for help. Eman235/talk 03:08, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 23 May 2019[edit]

Please add the RfD template to this page, ensuing that the date is 23 May, as I have already completed the nomination, located at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 May 23. Thanks! UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:06, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:45, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Where is Niki Lauda?[edit]

To my view he was notable enough that his death should be listed in the Main Page, 'Recent Deaths' or even get a post in the 'In the news' section. Why not?

Go-in (talk) 23:31, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

See here. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 23:56, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
As with the death mentioned a few sections above 'and many others which appear in the archives for this page' - there is only a certain amount of space on the Main Page, so value judgements (as to both the notability of the person and also the quality of the person's WP article) have to be made.
Even if the Main Page were the size of 'the largest TV to date' and all biographies were well written there would still be comments as to why wasn't a particular death/anniversary/ITN entry included. (When will the resignation be included on ITN?) Jackiespeel (talk) 10:32, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
See here.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:31, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
I seriously think the WP purists must come to their senses here! If a perceived lack of quality of an article prevents its inclusion, the Main Page will run the risk of being skewed. After all, isn't the WP Main Page for the public, not for the cognoscenti to get their quality requirements enforced? Notability must be the firat and only criterion! (Lauda is unimportant to me, it's the principle.) Go-in (talk) 09:19, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
No, article quality is the primary consideration. The main page shows the best of Wiki, not the most notable. Often the two are one and the same but not always. If there's a difference between the two - you could always fix it yourself. Chaheel Riens (talk) 10:00, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Serving the public is exactly why there are quality standards. It does not help the reader if we direct them to an article about something or someone significant but the article is unreferenced, woefully incomplete, or erroneous. --Khajidha (talk) 14:20, 25 May 2019 (UTC)