This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 115 | ← | Archive 117 | Archive 118 | Archive 119 | Archive 120 | Archive 121 | → | Archive 125 |
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 |
I don't think that deserves to be in the "In the News" section. Lunar Eclipses occur all the time, and this is the firs time I've seen one on the main page. What about the partial Solar Eclipse that occurred a few weeks ago in the Southern Hemisphere? It wasn't up on the Main Page, so what makes this one any different? Nick Warren ( talk) 07:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Ì have a question about the box at the top of the page (apology's if this isn't the place for it). Why can't I seem to edit it? Who oversees it? 74.220.207.186 ( talk) 14:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
How long does it take from my starting being an editor (this week) to becoming an actual Wikipedia administrator? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tangola ( talk • contribs) 22:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I invite you all to comment on my proposed new main page layout at the village pump. A rough sketch of the new layout is available at User:Charles Stewart/Sandbox Charles Stewart ( talk) 07:02, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Has anyone else noticed the difference in line height on Today's Featured Article? The lines are so close together, I can hardly read it. My eyes keep skipping lines! — Jeremy 03:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Not actually a complaint, but I didn't recognize this talk page without some thread about bias. It seemed naked :) Raul654 ( talk) 05:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Should a link to Cuban presidential election, 2008 be added to the thing about Castro? – Zntrip 20:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
i wanted to see the oscars at my own time:( -- Leladax ( talk) 10:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC) (ps. at least link to them, don't say the winners) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leladax ( talk • contribs) 10:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
For what it's worth the headline "Coen film wins four Oscars" appears on the BBC's "Americas" page, though in small type. On CNN's "Entertainment page" there is a giant "'No Country' takes best picture" headline. APL ( talk) 23:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
(undent) Violask, I'm not sure what you mean, but there is clearly a great similarity between sports events and awards shows. In both cases, people for a variety of reason may be planning to watch a recorded versiom. re-run or delayed telecast and may not wish to know the results until they've done so. But it doesn't make much sense for us to limit what we say about these events for such people. For starters most news sites will say what the results are. And while wikipedia is not a news site, we do mention events that are of international interest with good encylopaedic coverage. As such, people planning to watch non-live coverage of an event need to be self aware that they should not check out news sites or wikipedia and if they are not, we can't help them. To take it to an extreme, I'm sure there must be a few people who record election coverage in their own countries because they are unable to watch it live and don't want to know what happened until they've watched it themselves. Should we not mention election results for these people either? In other words, if we are going to censor wikipedia for these people, where should we draw the line? And how long? Do we wait 12 hours? 24? 7 days? My point about fiction was that there is also similarity there. We had complaints about Lost spoilers for an episode which had already been broadcast in a number of countries. We had complaints (I'm not sure serious or not) about spoilers for some Shakespear play. The reality is, we are likely to have complaints for every single work of fiction and related FA (e.g. one on Darth Vader) featured on TFA. Where should we draw the line? 5 years after the release of the work of the fiction? 10? IMHO, the best thing is simply not to draw a line. In nearly all cases with TFAs we won't be giving spoilers in the first line or two, so we can hope that readers are smart enough to start reading the blurb from the beginning and if it covers something they probably don't want to know about, stop reading. Just as similarly as with ITN, we can hope that readers are smart enough to realise that given we cover events of international interest, we are going to reveal the results of these events and if they don't want to know them, don't read ITN Nil Einne ( talk) 01:32, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Once more, try not to take this as meaning imposing the Nazi Party to wikipedia. It was strictly about the main page and not internal pages that one would choose to visit. -- Leladax ( talk) 03:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
News isn't supposedly hidden for spoilers, right? That's why they're news. -- Howard the Duck 13:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
TO Nil Einne: What I'm saying is, there's a difference between waiting and watching a re-run and not being able to because of your tiem zone. He isn't saying he wants to watching it optionally later, he has not been able to watch it because his time zone has not reached that time yet. Remember, everybody is not watching the awards at the exact same time. - Viola sk8 1976 19:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I was just curious why there are ten backup Main Pages? Also, I was wondering why they all have cascading protection with the Main Page transcluded while the Main Page its self is protected? Maximillion Pegasus ( talk) 00:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
The interwiki link to Hebrew - [[he:עמוד ראשי]] in the source code - is currently alphabetized as "Hebrew" and thus appears before "Hrvatski". I suggest alphabetizing it as "Ivrit", thus moving it to right after "Italiano." This is conventional in numerous pages, which I can cite if anyone wants to see the evidence for themselves. Any administrator should feel free to make this uncontroversial change. Thank you. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 03:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I removed the watermark (as requested at the bottom of the original image's page - but I can't replace it because it's locked. To avoid further JPEG degradation, I saved the image in PNG format.
Could someone with appropriate privilages get the image where it needs to be - thanks!
SteveBaker ( talk) 04:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
If the copyright has expired, the image is in the public domain, and you can do whatever you want with it. They have no claims on the image, and any statements like that are simply wholly optional requests. Raul654 ( talk) 08:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't much care for the lead sentence "There was considerable Axis naval activity in Australian waters..." I note that is the title of the article and the lead sentence of the article follows the same format. But in my opinion articles should always start with the title as a means of getting the reader's attention and making the subject of the article clear from the outset. And this should apply a fortiori to the main page FA box. -- Richardrj talk email 11:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
[[Kriegsmarine|German]] and [[Imperial Japanese Navy|Japanese warships]]
not links to their respective governments and
warship. -
Harmil (
talk)
15:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
FA from two days ago being Ban Ki-moon and today Europa? Reeks of Moon-centricism to me - Halo ( talk) 20:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WIKIPEDIA'S OBVIOUS PRO-AUSTRALIA BIAS! [1] [2] [3] Ceiling Cat ( talk) 02:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Here is something for in the news. A reported 5.3 earthquake has hit Lincoinshire and was felt throughout much of England. Its epicentre was 8km west of Market Rasen. I didn't feel it down here on the south coast though. Unisouth ( talk) 07:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
How long is Raul Castro's picture going to stay there??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.94.199.9 ( talk) 13:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Castro was removed at 14:23, 29 February 2008 (UTC). howcheng { chat} 18:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
On the "on this day" section, under news the date is feb 29. 1 day in advance
Sahilm ( talk) 00:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I would like to take this time to redeem my past self for attacking the DYK's by saying that the Pot-de-fer article was, pardon the pun, explosively interesting. lol. Tourskin ( talk) 05:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't be news mentioning the massacre in Gaza ? i mean for crying out loud at lest 70 people died, among them a large number of children all within 36 hours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.6.113.191 ( talk) 18:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, your website is very informative and useful, I would like to share with you links, send all the questions on my e-mail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.47.100.22 ( talk) 19:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Its urgent that we mention the recent violence in Gaza on the main page. According to the BBC, its been the worst fighting since Israel withdrew from the Strip in 20005. At least 52 Palestinians were killed as well as two Israelis soldiers. Hamas also responded by firing 50 rockets at Israel. Of the Palestinian causalities eight were children and 16 were militants. Abbas referred to the attacks as "more than a holocaust" while Ehud Barak said "Hamas and those who fire rockets at Israel are responsible and they will pay the price". Khaled Meshaal (Hamas leader) also referred to the attacks as a holocaust. At least 91 Palestinians and three Israelis have been killed in the past four days. [4] -- Al Ameer son ( talk) 22:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Anyone care to comment on my new layout for the header? I made it because people just aren't following the link, so I moved the relevant links to the start of the each line. ☯ Ferdia O'Brien (T)/ (C) 13:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
How about a new header like this:
to the page where you arrive if you come to Wikipedia and click the link that says "discussion".
If you're here to:
please do so, and you will receive an informative answer or a link to the information you seek.
If anybody starts complaining that this is not the exactly right place to ask your (or anybody else's) question, feel free to frown upon them.
I wager that one would be more likely to work. Zocky | picture popups 05:46, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
(outdent)This is no charade. A talk page of any page is for its developement, nothing else, high profile or not. Instead of reversing the process were using, which I say again, has had a positive effect; now that the Main Page is in a class of its own after the Betacommandbot sega, I wonder how difficult it would be to add a "Help" tab to the top of the page beside discussion...
That being my main point here, I should also point out that the people who show up on this page and bite the newcomers are usually admonished for doing so. Also, the fact that the invalid posts end in a redirecting link is a plus, because it stops the invalid discussions being carried on here, which is the whole idea, if only a little late in the day. Also, yes, it sometimes takes a little more effort to create the links then to answer, but the repeat offenders are almost 0%, if not that.
I'm also going to sidestep that long-term user line for the reason I posted beforehand.
☯
Ferdia O'Brien
(T)/
(C)
01:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
re. "Adolf Hitler never thought much of ... despite its iconic status in the U.S." This is misleading as it is suggest that there its "iconic status" has some connection with Hitler's view. What is the connnection. Really it looks more like unnecessary pushing a reference to the USA, which is sadly all too common in Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.169.157 ( talk) 09:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't know why. 129.67.125.194 ( talk) 15:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks - I wasn't sure that this was an error in the usual sense; the news itself was still correct 129.67.125.194 ( talk) 15:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
DYK that the current first DYK says "that that" where it should say "that"? Wanderer57 ( talk) 04:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) Ummm, why would we place legitimate comments about the development of the Main Page on the Village Pump? ☯ Ferdia O'Brien (T)/ (C) 20:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Sometimes Wikipedia makes me think that I'm actually Sam Lowry, and the rest of my existence is just a dream. -- Elliskev 02:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
What's the fuss? WP:ERRORS is on the top of this page. It's impossible to miss it. -- Howard the Duck 04:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Is this such a big deal? I mean, when somebody misplaces a comment here, it takes about 45 seconds to direct them to the correct place, or 75 seconds to move it there. Even with three misplaced comments a day, it isn't a huge issue.
If we don't like having a huge talk page we could do it "Czech Wikipedia style". Take a look at
cs:Diskuse:Hlavní strana. There are only three threads, and keep in mind that the page isn't archived so the oldest one is from November. The low talk page activity is because each of the sections (Article of the week, DYK, ITN, picture of the week, OTD) has it's talk page to be discussed at, so the main talk page only contains stuff like, "Maybe we should use central Europe time instead of UTC on the Main Page". But I personally don't think this layout is good-when I want to see somebody's comment about the Main Page, I expect to be able to hit the "discussion link" and see all the criticism&praise in one place. I don't want to have to check out six talk pages or click through a disambiguation-I want to be able to see everything at a glance.
Puchiko (
Talk-
email)
19:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Your comment of the event of a convict rebellion in New South Wales should be rewritten to include the article Castle Hill convict rebellion Foofbun ( talk) 01:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I tried to add an article for Arthur Polson, a famous violin player, but as I searched Arthur Polson there were other options showing up in the Wiki Search. I need some help for making this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ridem92 ( talk • contribs) 19:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Since when has the community supported making admins into super-editors? The general view is that admins are janitors. Here we see admins being given a priviledged editing position. What community discussion took place to make this so? Wjhonson ( talk) 01:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
The community never agreed to create permanent full-protection for this sort of thing. In my opinion, it's a significant violation of our standard of trust to state that vandalism is an appropriate rationale for this. That same vandalism argument could be applied to all of Wikipedia, or all significant pages, or all pages with rampant vandalism. Wjhonson ( talk) 23:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Would http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/49/Corpse_of_Lucien_Lachance._Oblivion_2007-07-11.png/180px-Corpse_of_Lucien_Lachance._Oblivion_2007-07-11.png work for the FA (sorry if this is late). Tesfan ( talk) 19:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I've noticed this for some time: Is there any technical reason the "in the news" photo can't move in tandem with the brief it illustrates? As a former newspaper editor, I find it very odd that, for example, a mug of Medvedev is displayed next to a brief about McCain. This seems a fairly glaring fault, as readers will look at the pic & wonder why it's not McCain & who the heck it is.
Sca ( talk) 17:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey ppl where do i find info about this??
Probably worthy of putting a link on "In the News" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.197.41 ( talk) 02:02, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
In en.wikipedia there are two page about the english sailing team Team origin: TEAMORIGIN and Team Origin. Team Origin must be merged into TEAMORIGIN. -- Noname-en ( talk) 20:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Am i the only one who thinks there should be a random article generator that only generates featured articles? The random article link is great and im sure lots of people use it, but a seperate link that filters out only the high quality articles would be a great addition. Natterjack1 ( talk) 11:05, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, this is my first actual comment on wikipedia, so please forgive me if I post this in the wrong area/if it has already been discussed already. Basically, I was looking at the Wikipedia logo and I noticed how the edges of the globe has a white outline around it, possibly from the program used to make the transparency. I was wondering, why this has not been rectified and the edges of the globe alpha blended? In my opinion, this would be a very easy edit and would increase the overall aesthetic quality of the main Wikipedia logo.
Thanks, 78.148.97.236 ( talk) 10:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
The French Wikipedia has this fixed already. Might be worth combining it with fixing the typographical errors on the logo that are long-standing and haven't been fixed. - 62.172.143.205 ( talk) 20:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
How many times can one article be featured as the featured article?-- -¤÷(`[¤*M*¤]´)÷¤- 21:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
This is the second time that Plano Senior High School has been featured, by the way. -- Zader n et 08:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I would respectfully suggest swapping out the current picture for the first picture at Slavery in Ancient Greece as being both more representative of the subject and also more readily identifiable. (I.E. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stele_Mnesarete_Glyptothek_Munich_491_n1.jpg instead of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Black_slave_Louvre_Br361.jpg) Rorybowman ( talk) 00:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It says on the main page that the Kit Fox is endangered, but in the kit fox article it says "least concerned" Someone should make the two pages line up Mikeonatrike ( talk) 12:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
The Featured Article's blurb on the main page claims that Early Christians supported Greek slavery, but the only mention of Christianity in the article actually claims that they took credit for its downfall. May I ask, WTF? Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 08:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
How the hell is this newsworthy enough to be on wikipedia? 8 people? only 8? why are these 8 people so special? is it because they are jewish? what about entire tribes being wiped out in africa? or chinese slaves being worked to death in chinese mines? this stinks of racism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.159.2.32 ( talk) 01:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Umm, theres no actual article for prostitution ring. - Crunch Captain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crunch Captain ( talk • contribs) 20:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
You mean NCAA football coach? His record in the NFL is so bad that he quit after less than 1 season. Sarcasm on the main page? That's not too nice. Please remove this from DYK. (already posted at WP:ERRORS, but was ignored.) Thanks. -- 199.71.174.100 ( talk) 00:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Why does the news report of a fine for breach of European law use the American legal term "antitrust"? 11:30, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Very interesting. What does it tell us about the way the world works that they use American terminology rather than that of their own English-speaking members. 11:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.164.119 ( talk)
Nobody is "non-educated" because he doesn't speak England's english or english at all, and btw, it's 'uneducated'. -- Leladax ( talk) 02:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
There is no reason why 'non' can't be used with 'educated'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.242.42 ( talk) 12:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 115 | ← | Archive 117 | Archive 118 | Archive 119 | Archive 120 | Archive 121 | → | Archive 125 |
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 |
I don't think that deserves to be in the "In the News" section. Lunar Eclipses occur all the time, and this is the firs time I've seen one on the main page. What about the partial Solar Eclipse that occurred a few weeks ago in the Southern Hemisphere? It wasn't up on the Main Page, so what makes this one any different? Nick Warren ( talk) 07:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Ì have a question about the box at the top of the page (apology's if this isn't the place for it). Why can't I seem to edit it? Who oversees it? 74.220.207.186 ( talk) 14:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
How long does it take from my starting being an editor (this week) to becoming an actual Wikipedia administrator? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tangola ( talk • contribs) 22:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I invite you all to comment on my proposed new main page layout at the village pump. A rough sketch of the new layout is available at User:Charles Stewart/Sandbox Charles Stewart ( talk) 07:02, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Has anyone else noticed the difference in line height on Today's Featured Article? The lines are so close together, I can hardly read it. My eyes keep skipping lines! — Jeremy 03:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Not actually a complaint, but I didn't recognize this talk page without some thread about bias. It seemed naked :) Raul654 ( talk) 05:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Should a link to Cuban presidential election, 2008 be added to the thing about Castro? – Zntrip 20:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
i wanted to see the oscars at my own time:( -- Leladax ( talk) 10:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC) (ps. at least link to them, don't say the winners) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leladax ( talk • contribs) 10:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
For what it's worth the headline "Coen film wins four Oscars" appears on the BBC's "Americas" page, though in small type. On CNN's "Entertainment page" there is a giant "'No Country' takes best picture" headline. APL ( talk) 23:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
(undent) Violask, I'm not sure what you mean, but there is clearly a great similarity between sports events and awards shows. In both cases, people for a variety of reason may be planning to watch a recorded versiom. re-run or delayed telecast and may not wish to know the results until they've done so. But it doesn't make much sense for us to limit what we say about these events for such people. For starters most news sites will say what the results are. And while wikipedia is not a news site, we do mention events that are of international interest with good encylopaedic coverage. As such, people planning to watch non-live coverage of an event need to be self aware that they should not check out news sites or wikipedia and if they are not, we can't help them. To take it to an extreme, I'm sure there must be a few people who record election coverage in their own countries because they are unable to watch it live and don't want to know what happened until they've watched it themselves. Should we not mention election results for these people either? In other words, if we are going to censor wikipedia for these people, where should we draw the line? And how long? Do we wait 12 hours? 24? 7 days? My point about fiction was that there is also similarity there. We had complaints about Lost spoilers for an episode which had already been broadcast in a number of countries. We had complaints (I'm not sure serious or not) about spoilers for some Shakespear play. The reality is, we are likely to have complaints for every single work of fiction and related FA (e.g. one on Darth Vader) featured on TFA. Where should we draw the line? 5 years after the release of the work of the fiction? 10? IMHO, the best thing is simply not to draw a line. In nearly all cases with TFAs we won't be giving spoilers in the first line or two, so we can hope that readers are smart enough to start reading the blurb from the beginning and if it covers something they probably don't want to know about, stop reading. Just as similarly as with ITN, we can hope that readers are smart enough to realise that given we cover events of international interest, we are going to reveal the results of these events and if they don't want to know them, don't read ITN Nil Einne ( talk) 01:32, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Once more, try not to take this as meaning imposing the Nazi Party to wikipedia. It was strictly about the main page and not internal pages that one would choose to visit. -- Leladax ( talk) 03:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
News isn't supposedly hidden for spoilers, right? That's why they're news. -- Howard the Duck 13:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
TO Nil Einne: What I'm saying is, there's a difference between waiting and watching a re-run and not being able to because of your tiem zone. He isn't saying he wants to watching it optionally later, he has not been able to watch it because his time zone has not reached that time yet. Remember, everybody is not watching the awards at the exact same time. - Viola sk8 1976 19:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I was just curious why there are ten backup Main Pages? Also, I was wondering why they all have cascading protection with the Main Page transcluded while the Main Page its self is protected? Maximillion Pegasus ( talk) 00:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
The interwiki link to Hebrew - [[he:עמוד ראשי]] in the source code - is currently alphabetized as "Hebrew" and thus appears before "Hrvatski". I suggest alphabetizing it as "Ivrit", thus moving it to right after "Italiano." This is conventional in numerous pages, which I can cite if anyone wants to see the evidence for themselves. Any administrator should feel free to make this uncontroversial change. Thank you. Shalom ( Hello • Peace) 03:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I removed the watermark (as requested at the bottom of the original image's page - but I can't replace it because it's locked. To avoid further JPEG degradation, I saved the image in PNG format.
Could someone with appropriate privilages get the image where it needs to be - thanks!
SteveBaker ( talk) 04:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
If the copyright has expired, the image is in the public domain, and you can do whatever you want with it. They have no claims on the image, and any statements like that are simply wholly optional requests. Raul654 ( talk) 08:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I don't much care for the lead sentence "There was considerable Axis naval activity in Australian waters..." I note that is the title of the article and the lead sentence of the article follows the same format. But in my opinion articles should always start with the title as a means of getting the reader's attention and making the subject of the article clear from the outset. And this should apply a fortiori to the main page FA box. -- Richardrj talk email 11:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
[[Kriegsmarine|German]] and [[Imperial Japanese Navy|Japanese warships]]
not links to their respective governments and
warship. -
Harmil (
talk)
15:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
FA from two days ago being Ban Ki-moon and today Europa? Reeks of Moon-centricism to me - Halo ( talk) 20:37, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WIKIPEDIA'S OBVIOUS PRO-AUSTRALIA BIAS! [1] [2] [3] Ceiling Cat ( talk) 02:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Here is something for in the news. A reported 5.3 earthquake has hit Lincoinshire and was felt throughout much of England. Its epicentre was 8km west of Market Rasen. I didn't feel it down here on the south coast though. Unisouth ( talk) 07:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
How long is Raul Castro's picture going to stay there??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.94.199.9 ( talk) 13:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Castro was removed at 14:23, 29 February 2008 (UTC). howcheng { chat} 18:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
On the "on this day" section, under news the date is feb 29. 1 day in advance
Sahilm ( talk) 00:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I would like to take this time to redeem my past self for attacking the DYK's by saying that the Pot-de-fer article was, pardon the pun, explosively interesting. lol. Tourskin ( talk) 05:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Shouldn't be news mentioning the massacre in Gaza ? i mean for crying out loud at lest 70 people died, among them a large number of children all within 36 hours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.6.113.191 ( talk) 18:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, your website is very informative and useful, I would like to share with you links, send all the questions on my e-mail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.47.100.22 ( talk) 19:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Its urgent that we mention the recent violence in Gaza on the main page. According to the BBC, its been the worst fighting since Israel withdrew from the Strip in 20005. At least 52 Palestinians were killed as well as two Israelis soldiers. Hamas also responded by firing 50 rockets at Israel. Of the Palestinian causalities eight were children and 16 were militants. Abbas referred to the attacks as "more than a holocaust" while Ehud Barak said "Hamas and those who fire rockets at Israel are responsible and they will pay the price". Khaled Meshaal (Hamas leader) also referred to the attacks as a holocaust. At least 91 Palestinians and three Israelis have been killed in the past four days. [4] -- Al Ameer son ( talk) 22:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Anyone care to comment on my new layout for the header? I made it because people just aren't following the link, so I moved the relevant links to the start of the each line. ☯ Ferdia O'Brien (T)/ (C) 13:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
How about a new header like this:
to the page where you arrive if you come to Wikipedia and click the link that says "discussion".
If you're here to:
please do so, and you will receive an informative answer or a link to the information you seek.
If anybody starts complaining that this is not the exactly right place to ask your (or anybody else's) question, feel free to frown upon them.
I wager that one would be more likely to work. Zocky | picture popups 05:46, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
(outdent)This is no charade. A talk page of any page is for its developement, nothing else, high profile or not. Instead of reversing the process were using, which I say again, has had a positive effect; now that the Main Page is in a class of its own after the Betacommandbot sega, I wonder how difficult it would be to add a "Help" tab to the top of the page beside discussion...
That being my main point here, I should also point out that the people who show up on this page and bite the newcomers are usually admonished for doing so. Also, the fact that the invalid posts end in a redirecting link is a plus, because it stops the invalid discussions being carried on here, which is the whole idea, if only a little late in the day. Also, yes, it sometimes takes a little more effort to create the links then to answer, but the repeat offenders are almost 0%, if not that.
I'm also going to sidestep that long-term user line for the reason I posted beforehand.
☯
Ferdia O'Brien
(T)/
(C)
01:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
re. "Adolf Hitler never thought much of ... despite its iconic status in the U.S." This is misleading as it is suggest that there its "iconic status" has some connection with Hitler's view. What is the connnection. Really it looks more like unnecessary pushing a reference to the USA, which is sadly all too common in Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.169.157 ( talk) 09:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't know why. 129.67.125.194 ( talk) 15:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks - I wasn't sure that this was an error in the usual sense; the news itself was still correct 129.67.125.194 ( talk) 15:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
DYK that the current first DYK says "that that" where it should say "that"? Wanderer57 ( talk) 04:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) Ummm, why would we place legitimate comments about the development of the Main Page on the Village Pump? ☯ Ferdia O'Brien (T)/ (C) 20:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Sometimes Wikipedia makes me think that I'm actually Sam Lowry, and the rest of my existence is just a dream. -- Elliskev 02:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
What's the fuss? WP:ERRORS is on the top of this page. It's impossible to miss it. -- Howard the Duck 04:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Is this such a big deal? I mean, when somebody misplaces a comment here, it takes about 45 seconds to direct them to the correct place, or 75 seconds to move it there. Even with three misplaced comments a day, it isn't a huge issue.
If we don't like having a huge talk page we could do it "Czech Wikipedia style". Take a look at
cs:Diskuse:Hlavní strana. There are only three threads, and keep in mind that the page isn't archived so the oldest one is from November. The low talk page activity is because each of the sections (Article of the week, DYK, ITN, picture of the week, OTD) has it's talk page to be discussed at, so the main talk page only contains stuff like, "Maybe we should use central Europe time instead of UTC on the Main Page". But I personally don't think this layout is good-when I want to see somebody's comment about the Main Page, I expect to be able to hit the "discussion link" and see all the criticism&praise in one place. I don't want to have to check out six talk pages or click through a disambiguation-I want to be able to see everything at a glance.
Puchiko (
Talk-
email)
19:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Your comment of the event of a convict rebellion in New South Wales should be rewritten to include the article Castle Hill convict rebellion Foofbun ( talk) 01:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I tried to add an article for Arthur Polson, a famous violin player, but as I searched Arthur Polson there were other options showing up in the Wiki Search. I need some help for making this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ridem92 ( talk • contribs) 19:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Since when has the community supported making admins into super-editors? The general view is that admins are janitors. Here we see admins being given a priviledged editing position. What community discussion took place to make this so? Wjhonson ( talk) 01:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
The community never agreed to create permanent full-protection for this sort of thing. In my opinion, it's a significant violation of our standard of trust to state that vandalism is an appropriate rationale for this. That same vandalism argument could be applied to all of Wikipedia, or all significant pages, or all pages with rampant vandalism. Wjhonson ( talk) 23:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Would http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/49/Corpse_of_Lucien_Lachance._Oblivion_2007-07-11.png/180px-Corpse_of_Lucien_Lachance._Oblivion_2007-07-11.png work for the FA (sorry if this is late). Tesfan ( talk) 19:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I've noticed this for some time: Is there any technical reason the "in the news" photo can't move in tandem with the brief it illustrates? As a former newspaper editor, I find it very odd that, for example, a mug of Medvedev is displayed next to a brief about McCain. This seems a fairly glaring fault, as readers will look at the pic & wonder why it's not McCain & who the heck it is.
Sca ( talk) 17:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey ppl where do i find info about this??
Probably worthy of putting a link on "In the News" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.197.41 ( talk) 02:02, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
In en.wikipedia there are two page about the english sailing team Team origin: TEAMORIGIN and Team Origin. Team Origin must be merged into TEAMORIGIN. -- Noname-en ( talk) 20:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Am i the only one who thinks there should be a random article generator that only generates featured articles? The random article link is great and im sure lots of people use it, but a seperate link that filters out only the high quality articles would be a great addition. Natterjack1 ( talk) 11:05, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, this is my first actual comment on wikipedia, so please forgive me if I post this in the wrong area/if it has already been discussed already. Basically, I was looking at the Wikipedia logo and I noticed how the edges of the globe has a white outline around it, possibly from the program used to make the transparency. I was wondering, why this has not been rectified and the edges of the globe alpha blended? In my opinion, this would be a very easy edit and would increase the overall aesthetic quality of the main Wikipedia logo.
Thanks, 78.148.97.236 ( talk) 10:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
The French Wikipedia has this fixed already. Might be worth combining it with fixing the typographical errors on the logo that are long-standing and haven't been fixed. - 62.172.143.205 ( talk) 20:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
How many times can one article be featured as the featured article?-- -¤÷(`[¤*M*¤]´)÷¤- 21:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
This is the second time that Plano Senior High School has been featured, by the way. -- Zader n et 08:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I would respectfully suggest swapping out the current picture for the first picture at Slavery in Ancient Greece as being both more representative of the subject and also more readily identifiable. (I.E. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stele_Mnesarete_Glyptothek_Munich_491_n1.jpg instead of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Black_slave_Louvre_Br361.jpg) Rorybowman ( talk) 00:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
It says on the main page that the Kit Fox is endangered, but in the kit fox article it says "least concerned" Someone should make the two pages line up Mikeonatrike ( talk) 12:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
The Featured Article's blurb on the main page claims that Early Christians supported Greek slavery, but the only mention of Christianity in the article actually claims that they took credit for its downfall. May I ask, WTF? Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 08:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
How the hell is this newsworthy enough to be on wikipedia? 8 people? only 8? why are these 8 people so special? is it because they are jewish? what about entire tribes being wiped out in africa? or chinese slaves being worked to death in chinese mines? this stinks of racism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.159.2.32 ( talk) 01:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Umm, theres no actual article for prostitution ring. - Crunch Captain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crunch Captain ( talk • contribs) 20:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
You mean NCAA football coach? His record in the NFL is so bad that he quit after less than 1 season. Sarcasm on the main page? That's not too nice. Please remove this from DYK. (already posted at WP:ERRORS, but was ignored.) Thanks. -- 199.71.174.100 ( talk) 00:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Why does the news report of a fine for breach of European law use the American legal term "antitrust"? 11:30, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Very interesting. What does it tell us about the way the world works that they use American terminology rather than that of their own English-speaking members. 11:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.164.119 ( talk)
Nobody is "non-educated" because he doesn't speak England's english or english at all, and btw, it's 'uneducated'. -- Leladax ( talk) 02:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
There is no reason why 'non' can't be used with 'educated'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.242.42 ( talk) 12:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)