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 185 | ← | Archive 188 | Archive 189 | Archive 190 | Archive 191 | Archive 192 | → | Archive 195 |
Why are there no pictures of this non-endangered epicly dabs* mouse? 171.116.121.84 ( talk) 07:06, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
There could/should be an introductory narrative description (in this case what does the animal look like and does, where it is found, and similar), and another narrative aimed at those wanting an overview of the specialist texts. Jackiespeel ( talk) 08:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
I think the first "On this day" event would be better if we changed "one of the largest ships in the world of its time" to "one of the largest ships in the world at the time". Absolutelypuremilk ( talk) 10:28, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
And who thought it was a great idea to include the Palme d'Or? I really think it isn't an event worthy being featured when there are much more important events occurring around the world. Beatitudinem ( talk) 00:38, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
This user has a history of trolling this talk page to prove some kind of WP:POINT or another about Main Page content. Suggest closing this thread down and giving out a warning. Ribbet32 ( talk) 00:43, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
I think 'many people' will understand why I changed the word in question (but do not object to G-c-t Lane appearing on the MP). 86.191.125.157 ( talk) 19:36, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
It isn't impossible that I'm placing this comment in the wrong place, but I did wish to record my thanks to all of those editors who have manned the machicolations for the last 22 hours. A much appreciated service which deserves acknowledgement. Only another two hours to go. KJP1 ( talk) 20:42, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello. May I talk for a moment with the Admin of Wikipedia. The Admin or whoever is in charge. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsungx635 ( talk • contribs) 19:27, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Well, I'd like to edit a certain article but I can't because the editing option doesn't appear. Could someone help me out with this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsungx635 ( talk • contribs) 19:55, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Well, that guy is wrong when saying that. The article has to have first volume cover and a plot section at least. There are more stuff to add, but at least those two are needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsungx635 ( talk • contribs) 20:08, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
No mention of the fact that ON THIS DAY (50 YEARS AGO, PRECISELY) various Israeli (IDF) aircraft and seacraft continuously attacked (1000s of .50 cal rounds, hundreds of rockets, several torpedoes, and napalm) a US naval ship (the USS Liberty) killing 34 American sailors and wounding approximately 200?
How does this not get mentioned on wikipedia (on the 50th anniversary at that?) I can only conclude that it is because senior wikipedia editors are complicit to one degree or another in an ongoing conspiracy (which it is safe to say would be rather zionist in nature) to protect Israel (and zionist interests) from all critique.
I'm sure that these ERROR CORRECTING (or OVERSIGHT REMEDYING) comments will be vanished soon (as it seems even "talk" pages on wikipedia are being SANITZED...it's all becoming monolithically Orwellian, and you people reading/deleting/remaining silent to comments such as these are the guilty parties. Reap what you sow...NEO-FEUDALISM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.183.232.174 ( talk • contribs)
I have various answers for you:
Cheers -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 09:40, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
Also, as tragic as this was, it does not seem to have had any wider effects on the relationship between the US and Israel, so I fail to see how it is more deseeving of mention in On This Day than any of the many other incidents of friendly fire deaths. -- Khajidha ( talk) 15:03, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
Has somebody checked the pageviews recently?
I take a wild guess and say that entities that have been formed to protect citizens and/or entities that formed to generate profit are at it. This needs to be investigated.
Also what happened on 31 May?
-- Fixuture ( talk) 00:59, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
You are not being clear with this remark - and what do you mean by 'entities...'?
At a guess 'most' entries on the MP do not generate much comment on this talk page; and there are probably far more comments on 'absences due to space constraints' and 'statistical flukes as to coverage' (whether or not relating to how different areas of Wikipedia are being actively developed) than on 'why this article (on a topic that is considered discussion-worthy)' or undue influence. Jackiespeel ( talk) 09:47, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello The Wikipedia I like having the banners about fair use but maybe there could be more banners. I can still read the articles after all. How about begging for money all the time? 118.210.129.29 ( talk) 01:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
In the German wikipedia we will run this article through the did you know section. I kindly ask everyone to improve on this article and to nominate it in the Englisch Wikipedia for did you know. It is a very helpful and important project which might help our kids. thanks. -- 87.79.217.151 ( talk) 19:21, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Today's featured picture is a 24 MB gif (of the Mandelbrot sequence). There are people who access this site who are on minimal, restricted, or expensive bandwidth. It's really inconsiderate to slam them with such a huge file on the home page. Please consider using less resource intensive images in future. Watman ( talk) 08:22, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
how does the page update from day to day without much edit history? do you edit templates on the page and then purge the main page? The garmine (talk) 14:37, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Main Page has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting to copy from this version in my sandbox to Main Page ( diff). This is part of the change in my previous message. Should I also sync this to Wikipedia:Main Page/sandbox?
Changes: This edit closes the
WP:LISTGAP in the top "Welcome" box. Also switches to tableless layout, for more flexibility with TemplateStyles (soon!), maybe even a mobile version. CSS3 properties like columns
would be more elegant, but I stuck to old techniques like position:absolute
to avoid breaking old IE.
Testing: In Chrome, Firefox, and IE8+, a few pixels shifted here and there, browser dependent. Bullets disappear in IE7 for some reason, but there's enough spacing that it still looks OK. Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 20:34, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
<table>
for layout and white-space:nowrap
. Shrink the viewport and you'll get horizontal scrollbar at 780 to 900px or so in Vector (font/browser dependent). My version wants a bit more width, especially on the low end; scrollbars show up at 880 to 920 or so. I was going to wait until TemplateStyles to work on a fully mobile friendly design, but if you've got something — flexbox with a fallback sounds awesome! — I'd be okay with that.
Matt Fitzpatrick (
talk)
02:50, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Administrator note If there are no more comments or potential problems I will make the change in 24 hours — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk)
10:56, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
An historic mosque in Mosul was destroyed on 21 June. It was a very important historical monument (12th century CE). It should be in the "In the news" section.-- الدبوني ( talk) 00:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
I am wondering why Prodigy is not in this section? His impact on Hip Hop and rap music, specifically the unique 90s NYC style is immeasurable. Please add him to the list here on the front page. We don't want to seem biased or prejudiced with this omission. 73.85.207.171 ( talk) 23:34, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
{{ Mprotected2}} and {{ M-cropped}} have been nominated for deletion. These two templates are, or were, associated with the maintenance of the main page. -- John of Reading ( talk) 05:52, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure this is the right place to ask, but does anybody know why on the pageviews graph on top of this page there is a period between July and August 2016 with three times the number of visits to the page compared to the rest of the last year? Thank you! -- Ita140188 ( talk) 03:36, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
For reference, this is what that period looks like more in detail: [1]-- Ita140188 ( talk) 03:42, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Main Page has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
@ David Levy, Floquenbeam, MSGJ, TheDJ, and Xaosflux: Continuing discussion from archive here.
Re-requesting stalled edit, from this version of WP:Main Page/sandbox to Main Page ( diff). TheDJ raised a good point about the fixed width layout, and I agree that a responsive layout would be better, for multiple reasons stated at T138622 "migrate away from legacy Main page special casing". The current version is already a fixed width layout, though, because it's a table. The new version is no less responsive, but removes the layout table, so a responsive version should be easier to do. Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 18:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Will just mention the 50th anniversary of the ATM today - it was in the news, but no mention on the source list of anniversaries. Jackiespeel ( talk) 21:52, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I know very little about the sport of cricket, so please take this into account when evaluating my observation. Ireland and Afghanistan were awarded test status on 6/22/17. Surprised it still is one the featured news items, given the seriousness of the other four items currently highlighted. Thanks. RaqiwasSushi ( talk) 01:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
We do our news stories in the order in which they appeared. When each new story appears, the bottom one (the oldest) drops off. Our "ITN" section is very misleading as we cannot reflect the biggest/most important news in the world that day. This is a perennial problem. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 11:01, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Since there in no blurb in the news section and Nyqvist is a recent death, why is he pictured?
A similar thing happened about two months ago and the person's pic was removed because there was no justification for their pic to be in the news section.
Since that was so, then Nyqvist's pic needs to be removed as well. 2600:8800:787:F500:C23F:D5FF:FEC5:89B6 ( talk) 06:04, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Who writes this stuff? While it is quite believable, and supported in the article itself, the expectation is one draws this conclusion from the article, rather than needing it spoon fed to them on the front page. In doing so, it smacks of POV and seems as if it exists to placate the personal feelings of certain editors and readers. In an article proper, it is not POV if it is supported, and that is perfectly well and good; to have it stated directly to you in a blurb for "On This Day" rather seems more a clever way for certain folks with certain opinions on certain other folks to circumvent the system. I don't think this sort of thing should repeat itself. Jersey John ( talk) 03:41, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
That is all. Airbornemihir ( talk) 18:38, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Is the ITN section of the front page broken? The most recent story hasn't changed in over a week. I find that hard to believe so I figured it was a technical issue. 2600:387:9:5:0:0:0:57 ( talk) 11:42, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
I think DYK is circling the drain, and may have recently jumped the shark; the articles seem like they were randomly-chosen and a lot of the blurbs are trivia and/or other cruft. Why can't we replace it with "today's good article", 7-days-a-week TFL, The Signpost, TAFI, RD separated from ITN, centralized discussion, or something else entirely? KMF ( talk) 16:20, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
The DYK criteria should be altered so that *all* good articles that have not previously appeared are eligible to appear as DYK items, not just the ones promoted within the last week. This would raise the quality and interestingness of the section. It would also provide a "reward" for GA-creators, which doesn't currently exist (excluding self-satisfaction). Of course that would just be a change in eligibility not a blank check, the other DYK criteria would still need to be met. 106.68.128.209 ( talk) 13:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Three forms of transport shown on one day!
(To allow the bots to archive the previous discussion while leaving something here.) 31.49.115.211 ( talk) 10:29, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
I think George A. Romero should be added to the "Recent deaths" box, as he was a notable figure who died on the 16th, just two days ago. The most recent passing shown in that box is Martin Landau, who died on the 15th. – Matthew - ( talk) 12:09, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Natalie Wood was born 20 July 1938. She was one of the most popular actresses of the mid-20th century. I strongly believe her birthday should be listed on the main page. DavidSteinle ( talk) 14:06, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi all
I've just added this image: [2] to the OTD template for tomorrow, having protected it, but it now occurs to me that although it is public domain in the US it may not be eligible for main page use due to the "This image might not be in the public domain outside of the United States". Does anybody know the answer to that? Thanks — Amakuru ( talk) 08:56, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi, the 1967 Detroit riot happened 50 years ago today, it should be an article on the main page of Wikipedia. Thank you IQ125 ( talk) 22:42, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
... is a 'Main Page One Year to the Anniversary Article Polish and Brush-Up Club' which is actively seeking relevant articles. Jackiespeel ( talk) 16:20, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps there should be a currency-themed main page rather than just a couple of entries.
When 'The Proverbial Anonymous Wikipedian' has/have cleared all other backlogs, (inclusive gender pronoun, singular and plural forms) will whizz round Wikipedia and generate themed main pages; while the equivalent(s) looking after the news will find some relevant entries for ITN. 89.197.114.132 ( talk) 15:11, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Is this appropriate for the main page of Wikipedia? Seems more like an advertisement.
Bryan MacKinnon ( talk) 13:27, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
It occurs to me that this wiki is slow in confirmed deaths. For example, Jeanne Moreau:
That's 18 hrs? I'd wish the process was shorter. Just to keep WP a leading source. - DePiep ( talk) 01:37, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
I noticed the main page contains several single-column layout tables. Switching them to divs should use a bit less bandwidth, improve browser performance, and make future mobile migration with TemplateStyles easier, i.e. T138622.
I did just a little testing; Chromium, Firefox, IE7, JAWS over IE8. Is this okay to promote to the Main Page sandbox for wider testing? Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 23:14, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:In the news/image has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please sync Template:In the news/image/sandbox to Template:In the news/image.
<div class="thumbcaption" style="padding: 0.25em 0; word-wrap: break-word; text-align: {{{caption align}}};">
role="figure"
as an accessibility hint, since the text refers to it as "(pictured)"Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 05:53, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Main Page has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please sync Wikipedia:Main Page/sandbox to Main Page. This edit replaces one-column layout tables with visually similar divs.
Not quite pixel perfect. Table cellpadding can have browser differences, while CSS padding is highly standardized. I don't think I can avoid a pixel off in one browser or another.
I left the two-column layout table alone for now, since changing that to divs would require some work to avoid breaking IE 6 and 7. Would support going full tableless, though. Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 17:19, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Is wikipedia finally dead? Home [sic] come August 13th pages aren't appearing across multiple wikis? 72.48.98.163 ( talk) 00:16, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Why is there no mention of Melania Trump's birther views on her page, nor any mention her plagiarism in her speech at the RNC in 2016?
How does Wikipedia decide what should go on a page, when there is an obvious error.
What is the remedy? The person that owns the page is clearly a Melania Trump fan - can some outside parties at Wikipedia review the page, and improve it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.224.32.138 ( talk • contribs)
Is the article good enough for the bell's silencing to be included? Jackiespeel ( talk) 18:33, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
The four names listed below "Recent Deaths" include Franklin Cleckley, someone who died a week ago. Dick Gregory should be substituted. He is by far the most notable (if not famous) of those whose deaths wikpedia has noted in the past two days. 2602:304:CDA0:9220:FC64:2FAD:C223:D907 ( talk) 02:42, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello everyone. I am taking a Computer Science class which requires me to complete a couple of online projects. This particular project consist of me joining and being active on several social media websites. I have been active so far by commenting on pictures, updating profiles, adding people, and screenshotting my activity. The digital life in Columbus is not as updated as other digital lives. Columbus does not have all the most recent updated equipment in todays society. The digital life is still quite simple and understandable. I feel the upcoming generation has a better digital life than my generation which causes a slight problem for my generation. This problem causes my generation to actually have to learn the new software rather than already having that knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolporter ( talk • contribs) 16:44, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
I find myself rather puzzled with the Wikipedia main page. As the featured article it highlights a hurricane that happened years ago. And "in the news" two sporting events are categorized as being of higher importance than the clearly more catastrophic and ongoing news story of Hurricane Harvey. The image is even of a boxer who took part in a fight widely regarded to be an exhibition monetary stunt. Have we gone quite mad? 2600:387:9:5:0:0:0:68 ( talk) 13:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
...should be for the quirky/relatively unknown topics, not for something 'many people know' (even if they are not Whovians). 89.197.114.132 ( talk) 15:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
For the "On this day" - section
Sweden left from left-hand traffic to right-hand traffic, a huge and historic project on 3 September 1967. Some ten years earlier did approximately 90% of the voters say NO to this change, in a referendum. But it was still carried out. Boeing720 ( talk) 00:14, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm just curious. Why is WP:TFP (picture OTD) not showing in (my) mobile view? Would be so much nicer! Any past discussions? - DePiep ( talk) 23:12, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Can someone explain to me why KATMAKROFAN keeps insisting that Plated (meal kits), which is currently on the main page should be tagged. I may be too close to the article, but I don't understand the complaints.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:59, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Please correct "chanecellor" typo on front page. JMK ( talk) 18:47, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Um... why are we using such a profoundly bad image of Merkel? If you want a similarly closely copped one then here: File:Angela Merkel Juli 2010 - 3zu4 (cropped).jpg. But that is all around objectively a terrible picture. GMG talk 17:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
The main page at it: looks a lot better than this 11-year-old thing. KMF ( talk) 20:17, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
is Wikipedia losing it or something, the main page should have been changed by now. It's past 12
OK, this is backward looking now, but we still have some issues to resolve.
I responded to the requests for updates on the eve of Yom Kippur, and pointed out that the references there covered all the ground in question. For whatever reason, my responses were ignored, and Yom Kippur was removed from the Main Page on September 30.
So we have a couple of problems that need to be addressed.
Time (UTC) day before holiday | People going off-wiki |
---|---|
05:00 | Australia (Eastern) |
12:00 | Israel |
13:00 | Western Europe |
14:00 | UK |
19:00 | US/Canada (Eastern) |
22:00 | US/Canada (Pacific) |
I don't see that there's really any problem specific to Jewish holidays. I understand that religious practices means observant Jewish people may go completely offline and in any case may not be able to work on articles from the eve. But the reality is for plenty of observances, people don't really have the time or desire to edit wikipedia on the day of the observamce. I'd also note for observances primarily in one country, it's easily possible that just before midnight UTC is not even a time people may be awake. For example, India is UTC+05:30 so if the problems are encountered at 19:00 UTC (5 hours before), there's a fair chance many people will already be sleeping at 0:30 local time and won't be up until at least after midnight UTC. Again I understand that these people may technically be able to edit wikipedia after this, to at least get it up later in the day. But again just because there's nothing explicitly forbidding them from editing wikipedia, doesn't mean it's realisticly possible they will find the time or have the desire. (For example, I'd note that for various reasons incredibly important observances may not be public holidays so work may get in the way.)
In fact, even if the problems are pointed out 24 hours before, depending on the nature of the specific observance, the normal preparations etc, it's easily possible no one will have any time even with that much warning. (Incidentally, I'd also note that AFAIK, the norm is to remove articles already on OTD for the day if quality issues are uncovered later, so it's not like midnight UTC is some magic time anyway.) And the nature of the world, the internet and the spread of English speakers with the time, knowledge and desire to improve en.wikipeida means that for some stuff, the people who are likely to deal with the problem may very well me one or two people who could be only holiday, sick, whatever even for something incredibly important. In other words with any observance (or for that matter event) even important ones, timing issues could always mean that problems are only spotted after a time when no one is likely to be around to deal with it. These problems may be a bit more likely with Jewish holidays than with some other holidays but definitely similar issues can apply to any observance.
As howcheng has said, the best solution would seem to be to be for those that care to familiarise themselves with the quality requirements expected for the main page, and ensure the article meets them well before hand when they do have time, whatever the observance. This won't completely prevent someone later noticing a problem which requires removal of the article from OTD, it will greatly reduce the chance of it happening. In other words rather than simply responding to tags as others add them, being proactive than reactive. I make no comment on the quality of the articles involved, but if Howcheng's suggestion above that whole sections and large parts of other sections were unsourced it seems to me this is something which should have been noticed by anyone taking a proper look.
If we really do want to change practices, e.g. to guarantee an article is featured if there are no problems 24 hours before (or whatever) or to allow articles which are "not perfect but the quality is reasonable" even if they don't meet the normal main page quality requirements for every other section on the main page, I'm assuming we at least all agree that this will apply to all observances. But I just don't see why we need it. Ultimately it's always going to happen that incredibly important observances are excluded simply because there's no volunteer around willing to work on them. (Since some of the examples I recall, we actually had quite a bit of notice but the articles we so bad I don't think anyone would ever allowed them.)
So let's just keep our standards, everyone involved try their best to ensure articles are up to scratch or if they aren't this is noted with as much time as possible, and accept sometimes important stuff isn't going to be on OTD for quality reasons.
P.S. One issue I didn't touch on is someone coming along and ruining an article after someone has ensured it is up to scratch. But in that case I don't see protection is needed. I'd hope if there is something weird someone else would notice and revert to the great version. In any case, do we actually have an example were an OTD article developed major new problems (as opposed to existing problems someone noticed), in a few days time between someone getting it up to scratch for OTD, and it appearing?
Nil Einne ( talk) 12:44, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
The Nobel Community awarded the Nobel prize in medicine and Physics yesterday and today respectively. I don't know how to go about this, but I think it probably should be reflected In the news — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.112.36.203 ( talk • contribs)
I honestly don't understand this. The Confusion (album) that is on the main page today have honestly gotten less than a thousand views this month. Today's view is only very slightly higher than the other days. Is there a problem somewhat or somewhere. The featured article for yesterday The Founding Ceremony of the Nationgot close to 60k views. Any explanations please?
Under the In the News section, there is this item:
"In the United States, 59 people are killed and 489 others are injured in a mass shooting at a concert near Las Vegas."
What I get from listening to the Sheriff's briefings, 58 people were killed (murdered), 1 died by his own hand, and (the last I remember) 527 were injured. There are people in ICU among the injured any many will require more surgeries.
By the way, I thought that the shooting happened within the city limits, but I don't really know the geography. Thank you for your time, Wordreader ( talk) 15:17, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Underwater diving is the practice of descending below the water's surface to interact with the environment. Humans are not biologically adapted for deep diving, and must use special equipment to extend the depth and duration of their dives.
I believe the DYK proposal discussed here deserves wider community input, as it would put multiple instances of the "N" word on the main page. bd2412 T 02:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
... that The Rolling Stones are a British rock band? Okay, you probably did...
*cue J. Jonah Jameson laughing in Spider-Man 2* - Zakawer ( talk) 12:01, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
As you know, the "adoption program' is to connect new users with experienced users to help new users (like me). Unfortunately, I believe that this program is dead. I registered for adoption about 2-3 weeks ago. Of course, I might just be impatient, but if you check the adoption page, yo will see the same people sitting there day after day with only more people coming. Older users tend to tell new users to see the adoption page. When they apply to be adopted, nothing happens. We should raise awareness about the adoption program by placing an "adoption notice" on the Main Page, a page that everyone sees, encouraging people to adopt new users. Thank you for taking the time to read this request and I'm sure a lot of people would agree with me. Once again, thank you and I hope you consider my idea to be enacted. WarriorFISH ( talk) 11:06, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Am curious as to why the 'entry' about Hurricane Nate and the Central America deaths has JUST 'NOW' appeared instead of right after it happened nearly a week ago. 2600:8800:786:A300:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D ( talk) 06:42, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
I am astonished to say the least that there is no mention whatsoever about the killing of more than 270 persons in Somalia. I feel that the editorial line (or editors) in wikipedia are becoming terrifyingly biased. When very recently less than 60 persons were assassinated in the United States, the news section of wikipedia swiftly reported on the topic. But last Saturday's bomb in Somalia's capital, which ended with the life of almost 300 people, seems not be worth to mention to wikipedia editors.
(laugh) I think I was clear about most of these things in the OP and second major post. I replied to everything which did not reiterate one of the standard ITN clichés (already mentioned in those posts). In light of this specific topic, I do find it fascinating that in the one post which attempted to see ITN more broadly, the list consisted of "news, weather and many other things" ... especially considering ITN's recent focus on weather-as-disaster. For whatever it is worth, I have tossed out a few ideas in immediate reply to Jayron, intermediate in this thread. I do not think I am important enough to have the final word in any discussion, and therefore will not TTFN on that note -- I simply mention, that is all. I also think it is worthwhile repeating that while one person can identify a systemic issue, one person cannot by themself solve that issue. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 ( talk) 08:58, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
I imagine this talk page is maintained by some bot or other. I wonder if it'd be possible to include a link to WP:ITN/C in the "In the news" section since many of the objections raised here are really about ITN/C (and since no one appears to be reading the enormous orange infobox at the top of the page). -- CosmicAdventure ( talk) 12:19, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Taken just about 2 years to grow by 500,000 articles. We've just about got there, congrats everybody, though sadly the percentage of great articles are still very low. We're getting better gradually though, more articles seem to be sourced when you hit random article these days. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:40, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
I think a suggestion box on the main page for new articles would be an opportunity for readers to get engaged and also to have constructive input when they come here looking for an article that we do not have. Nocturnalnow ( talk) 23:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
<div id="mp-dyk" style="padding:0.1em 0.6em 0.5em;>{{Did you know}}</div>
Needs to be changed to
<div id="mp-dyk" style="padding:0.1em 0.6em 0.5em;">{{Did you know}}</div>
(Changed portion is bolded)-
To ping
me add {{ping|
Force Radical}} OR [[
User:Force Radical]]
10:01, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Done Optimist on the run ( talk) 07:34, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I've noticed over many years the majority, maybe even the vast majority, of 'From today's featured article' relate to UK or US topics. There are, of course, other English-speaking countries - Canada, Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa, to name but a few - so might it be possible to get a more representative spread of articles in this slot? For the record, I'm British. Thanks. 31.52.163.95 ( talk) 14:34, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
I apologise for the delay. I reiterate a couple of things here, simply because I really don't think most people actually saw the specific suggestion (one single reply?) -- not recommendation, not even at the level of proposal. For it to make sense, I also have to quickly summarise identification of issue, and it also seems only fair that I quote that single reply. If future responses continue along the same clichés, I will assume there is no community interest in trying to achieve true ITN neutrality by at least considering the existing systemic biases, and I won't mention this again.
First, the original, QFT:
"It is one of the interesting peculiarities about an all-volunteer ground-level workforce in the first-language English world these days -- aiming for a neutral POV, but nonetheless failing to accomplish it through sheer neglect of some subjects and not others -- and equally through sheer arguing down of some articles and not others on the sole basis of setting different bars -- since no one tells a volunteer workforce what they must do. This is one of the key differences between Wikipedia and a standard encyclopaedia."
In short:
The standard clichéd responses to pointing out anything such as this are as follows:
1. A challenge to edit the articles in question myself.
2. Insistence that ITN articles should be both ITN-appropriate and high quality articles.
3. ITN is not a news ticker.
4. You are demanding we abandon the whole notion of community consensus and just post what you like.
These clichés having been addressed, I go on to the suggestions. The first two ideas have parallels in other parts of WP, e.g. administrator-applied limits, identifying IPs which seem to only exist to promote a single editing POV. No such limits currently exist on those commenting in ITN -- or possibly they are not enforced, which comes out to the same thing. The third and fourth ideas are proactive possibilities.
1. Create and enforce the same *hard* guidelines for all ITN postings -- with administrators actively pointing out to editors where their comments indicate that those guidelines are not being equally applied across all articles.
2. Actively identify those ITN-active editors who consistently apply different bars to different articles and who never, ever alter their votes even after their original criteria for rejecting an article have been fully addressed.
3. When considering whether or not to post an ITN article, ITN-oriented admins could place a different weight on the votes of early commentators who never return to the vote discussion after the article has been improved.
4. ITN-oriented admins could actively bring extremely low comment proposals to the top of the ITN pile three times (to echo R3R) and actively encourage additional comments, pointing out what changes have been made.
Something similar to #4 exists in the current reiteration of DYK. I raise the possibility because I have noticed that quite a few ITN proposals outside the high-eyeball memes die simply because very few people comment on them. In such cases, even when a few editors are actively improving the articles to meet the current objections, those proposals still die due to a combination of lack of interest and early voters not returning to re-assess the article's current condition. This was the case for the recent Nobel non-postings, which, Internet-ages ago, sparked my current part in this.
Again, as always, it is entirely up to the community what actions its editors and administrators choose to take. If future responses take the same clichéd directions, clearly this is what the talking part of the community wants and I won't raise this issue again. I reposted this much simply because only one person had actually responded to these suggestions -- or, indeed, at all after I had posted them one and a half weeks after the initial post. It seems only fair to include the single answer I received to this, which is quoted in its entirety below. It was in response to that answer that I added cliché #4 and its rebuttal to the beginning of this post. It is my strong opinion that binary thinking is for computers, not for human beings. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 ( talk) 11:38, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
150 years ago Marie Curie was born! BasileusAutokratorPL ( talk) 11:51, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Furthermore, if the person is featured (bold item) as a regular blurb on any day, they may not be chosen for birth/death listings.Exceptions are made when the day in question is lacking a selection of decent articles (i.e., only reuse it if we're desperate). — howcheng { chat} 23:05, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
And how many days of 'everybody agreeing that several the MP and its links are truly wonderful' will mark the start of the apocalypse? 17:03, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
I am one of the main authors of Presque Isle State Park and had no idea it was even nominated for TFA. While I am glad to see it so honored, the photo chosen for the TFA blurb on the Main Page (a snowy parking lot in a forest File:Presque_Isle_State_Park_in_the_Winter.jpg) does not do a great job of conveying what is special and unique about the park. Pennsylvania has 121 state parks, but only two of them are on its Lake Erie coastline. Presque Isle State Park (the name means "almost an island" or "peninsula" in French) is surrounded by water and almost all of the attractions in the park are water related, but the picture conveys nothing of this. Ignoring maps and template images, there are 12 photos in the article, 8 of which show the water (and a 9th shows the most picturesque lighthouse). Of the other three photos, one is the Tom Ridge Environmental Center (on the mainland, at the entrance to the park), one is a cerulean warbler (which was photographed in Canada), and the last is the snowy parking lot picture currently on the main page. Could we please pick a more representative photo from one of the others used in the article? Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:13, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Amazing what you learn with Wikipedia. Before today, if you'd asked me who Josephine Butler was, I'd have said she was an erotic dancer, famed for being clad only in bananas. I don't think I could have been much further from the truth if I tried. Optimist on the run ( talk) 13:01, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Shouldn't Bud Moore be added to the 'recent deaths' section? Daisy134 ( talk) 13:41, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Suggest using this talk space for directing general discussion that comes in. This is because its visible from the Main Page, and if people aren't just interested in the Main Page or in Wikipedia in general, they are interested in finding other talk avenues like WP:Village Pump and other more topically specific places. At least spruce up its direction and access to the main talk channels because they aren't visually well separated from the Main Page stuff. Kiipanraken ( talk) 03:51, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
I urgently need help with mobbing in German Wikipedia! Can anybody provide some assistance with this issue? I will have to quit for today but I'll be back tomorrow. Hoping for support I remain with my best wishes-- Herfrid ( talk) 22:52, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Main page has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add the {{ Main Page topics}} template to the bottom of the main page. It obviously belongs on the main page. 2601:2C1:C280:3EE0:8D50:F5F3:A1EC:7855 ( talk) 04:44, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Remove Pai's face from the front page. Thank you.
This will make it easier for users to hide it using their userContent.css
or equivalent. (Because: it's a sensitive topic.) For example:
‹div id="recent-deaths"› ... ‹/div›
-- Evgeni Sergeev ( talk) 12:17, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
I have started a thread in WP:VPR about possibly changing the balance of Main Page columns. Please take a look, if you'd like. Regards, Alex Shih ( talk) 17:03, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
We've had two video game articles within eight days of each other as today's featured article on the main page. Please! How can anybody say there isn't a bias or proclivity towards video game articles on the main page? The vast majority of readers do not care about this sort of content. 174.64.100.70 ( talk) 01:44, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
What's the problem with video games anyways? There are people who don't find...say, tropical storms or TV shows or military units interesting (all common, recent TfAs), but nobody gets up in arms as much as the anti-video-game people (with the exception of the anti-Americans, possibly). ansh 666 02:13, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
And the archive bot can update this page. Jackiespeel ( talk) 23:06, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
2017–18 Iranian protests should be added to the home page.-- 2601:C4:C001:289E:9957:9065:F6EE:9381 ( talk) 21:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Nice to see him featured on his birthday (I think?) Good job, FA folks. Airbornemihir ( talk) 18:35, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
That's been on the "In the news" for over a week now. Really nothing more important happened in this world? For example the Iranian protests get only a footnote. Seriously? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.2.217.128 ( talk • contribs) 15:24, 9 January 2018 UTC (UTC)
Wikipedia 'went live' 17 years ago yesterday - surely there should have been some mention on the MP (or at least a discussion here)? Jackiespeel ( talk) 19:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
The language in the current article of the day, "he saw action [in place]" is military jargon for combat, but in reality could mean a wide variety of things. Generally in cases where there is overwhelming force (this is the British Empire putting down rebellions by Arabs in this case), there is a high likelihood of professional jargon and attested bravado infused in the jargon and in the reports of military operations. In other words the reports tend to be written in a way which exaggerates the nobility of deeds, the British in this case, and contains little from the other point of view. Its a vanity topic which produces vanity articles. - Dictatos ( talk) 03:16, 20 January 2018 (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 185 | ← | Archive 188 | Archive 189 | Archive 190 | Archive 191 | Archive 192 | → | Archive 195 |
Why are there no pictures of this non-endangered epicly dabs* mouse? 171.116.121.84 ( talk) 07:06, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
There could/should be an introductory narrative description (in this case what does the animal look like and does, where it is found, and similar), and another narrative aimed at those wanting an overview of the specialist texts. Jackiespeel ( talk) 08:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
I think the first "On this day" event would be better if we changed "one of the largest ships in the world of its time" to "one of the largest ships in the world at the time". Absolutelypuremilk ( talk) 10:28, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
And who thought it was a great idea to include the Palme d'Or? I really think it isn't an event worthy being featured when there are much more important events occurring around the world. Beatitudinem ( talk) 00:38, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
This user has a history of trolling this talk page to prove some kind of WP:POINT or another about Main Page content. Suggest closing this thread down and giving out a warning. Ribbet32 ( talk) 00:43, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
I think 'many people' will understand why I changed the word in question (but do not object to G-c-t Lane appearing on the MP). 86.191.125.157 ( talk) 19:36, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
It isn't impossible that I'm placing this comment in the wrong place, but I did wish to record my thanks to all of those editors who have manned the machicolations for the last 22 hours. A much appreciated service which deserves acknowledgement. Only another two hours to go. KJP1 ( talk) 20:42, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hello. May I talk for a moment with the Admin of Wikipedia. The Admin or whoever is in charge. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsungx635 ( talk • contribs) 19:27, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Well, I'd like to edit a certain article but I can't because the editing option doesn't appear. Could someone help me out with this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsungx635 ( talk • contribs) 19:55, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Well, that guy is wrong when saying that. The article has to have first volume cover and a plot section at least. There are more stuff to add, but at least those two are needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsungx635 ( talk • contribs) 20:08, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
No mention of the fact that ON THIS DAY (50 YEARS AGO, PRECISELY) various Israeli (IDF) aircraft and seacraft continuously attacked (1000s of .50 cal rounds, hundreds of rockets, several torpedoes, and napalm) a US naval ship (the USS Liberty) killing 34 American sailors and wounding approximately 200?
How does this not get mentioned on wikipedia (on the 50th anniversary at that?) I can only conclude that it is because senior wikipedia editors are complicit to one degree or another in an ongoing conspiracy (which it is safe to say would be rather zionist in nature) to protect Israel (and zionist interests) from all critique.
I'm sure that these ERROR CORRECTING (or OVERSIGHT REMEDYING) comments will be vanished soon (as it seems even "talk" pages on wikipedia are being SANITZED...it's all becoming monolithically Orwellian, and you people reading/deleting/remaining silent to comments such as these are the guilty parties. Reap what you sow...NEO-FEUDALISM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.183.232.174 ( talk • contribs)
I have various answers for you:
Cheers -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 09:40, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
Also, as tragic as this was, it does not seem to have had any wider effects on the relationship between the US and Israel, so I fail to see how it is more deseeving of mention in On This Day than any of the many other incidents of friendly fire deaths. -- Khajidha ( talk) 15:03, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
Has somebody checked the pageviews recently?
I take a wild guess and say that entities that have been formed to protect citizens and/or entities that formed to generate profit are at it. This needs to be investigated.
Also what happened on 31 May?
-- Fixuture ( talk) 00:59, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
You are not being clear with this remark - and what do you mean by 'entities...'?
At a guess 'most' entries on the MP do not generate much comment on this talk page; and there are probably far more comments on 'absences due to space constraints' and 'statistical flukes as to coverage' (whether or not relating to how different areas of Wikipedia are being actively developed) than on 'why this article (on a topic that is considered discussion-worthy)' or undue influence. Jackiespeel ( talk) 09:47, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello The Wikipedia I like having the banners about fair use but maybe there could be more banners. I can still read the articles after all. How about begging for money all the time? 118.210.129.29 ( talk) 01:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
In the German wikipedia we will run this article through the did you know section. I kindly ask everyone to improve on this article and to nominate it in the Englisch Wikipedia for did you know. It is a very helpful and important project which might help our kids. thanks. -- 87.79.217.151 ( talk) 19:21, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Today's featured picture is a 24 MB gif (of the Mandelbrot sequence). There are people who access this site who are on minimal, restricted, or expensive bandwidth. It's really inconsiderate to slam them with such a huge file on the home page. Please consider using less resource intensive images in future. Watman ( talk) 08:22, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
how does the page update from day to day without much edit history? do you edit templates on the page and then purge the main page? The garmine (talk) 14:37, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Main Page has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting to copy from this version in my sandbox to Main Page ( diff). This is part of the change in my previous message. Should I also sync this to Wikipedia:Main Page/sandbox?
Changes: This edit closes the
WP:LISTGAP in the top "Welcome" box. Also switches to tableless layout, for more flexibility with TemplateStyles (soon!), maybe even a mobile version. CSS3 properties like columns
would be more elegant, but I stuck to old techniques like position:absolute
to avoid breaking old IE.
Testing: In Chrome, Firefox, and IE8+, a few pixels shifted here and there, browser dependent. Bullets disappear in IE7 for some reason, but there's enough spacing that it still looks OK. Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 20:34, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
<table>
for layout and white-space:nowrap
. Shrink the viewport and you'll get horizontal scrollbar at 780 to 900px or so in Vector (font/browser dependent). My version wants a bit more width, especially on the low end; scrollbars show up at 880 to 920 or so. I was going to wait until TemplateStyles to work on a fully mobile friendly design, but if you've got something — flexbox with a fallback sounds awesome! — I'd be okay with that.
Matt Fitzpatrick (
talk)
02:50, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Administrator note If there are no more comments or potential problems I will make the change in 24 hours — Martin (
MSGJ ·
talk)
10:56, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
An historic mosque in Mosul was destroyed on 21 June. It was a very important historical monument (12th century CE). It should be in the "In the news" section.-- الدبوني ( talk) 00:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
I am wondering why Prodigy is not in this section? His impact on Hip Hop and rap music, specifically the unique 90s NYC style is immeasurable. Please add him to the list here on the front page. We don't want to seem biased or prejudiced with this omission. 73.85.207.171 ( talk) 23:34, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
{{ Mprotected2}} and {{ M-cropped}} have been nominated for deletion. These two templates are, or were, associated with the maintenance of the main page. -- John of Reading ( talk) 05:52, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure this is the right place to ask, but does anybody know why on the pageviews graph on top of this page there is a period between July and August 2016 with three times the number of visits to the page compared to the rest of the last year? Thank you! -- Ita140188 ( talk) 03:36, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
For reference, this is what that period looks like more in detail: [1]-- Ita140188 ( talk) 03:42, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Main Page has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
@ David Levy, Floquenbeam, MSGJ, TheDJ, and Xaosflux: Continuing discussion from archive here.
Re-requesting stalled edit, from this version of WP:Main Page/sandbox to Main Page ( diff). TheDJ raised a good point about the fixed width layout, and I agree that a responsive layout would be better, for multiple reasons stated at T138622 "migrate away from legacy Main page special casing". The current version is already a fixed width layout, though, because it's a table. The new version is no less responsive, but removes the layout table, so a responsive version should be easier to do. Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 18:16, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Will just mention the 50th anniversary of the ATM today - it was in the news, but no mention on the source list of anniversaries. Jackiespeel ( talk) 21:52, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I know very little about the sport of cricket, so please take this into account when evaluating my observation. Ireland and Afghanistan were awarded test status on 6/22/17. Surprised it still is one the featured news items, given the seriousness of the other four items currently highlighted. Thanks. RaqiwasSushi ( talk) 01:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
We do our news stories in the order in which they appeared. When each new story appears, the bottom one (the oldest) drops off. Our "ITN" section is very misleading as we cannot reflect the biggest/most important news in the world that day. This is a perennial problem. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 11:01, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Since there in no blurb in the news section and Nyqvist is a recent death, why is he pictured?
A similar thing happened about two months ago and the person's pic was removed because there was no justification for their pic to be in the news section.
Since that was so, then Nyqvist's pic needs to be removed as well. 2600:8800:787:F500:C23F:D5FF:FEC5:89B6 ( talk) 06:04, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Who writes this stuff? While it is quite believable, and supported in the article itself, the expectation is one draws this conclusion from the article, rather than needing it spoon fed to them on the front page. In doing so, it smacks of POV and seems as if it exists to placate the personal feelings of certain editors and readers. In an article proper, it is not POV if it is supported, and that is perfectly well and good; to have it stated directly to you in a blurb for "On This Day" rather seems more a clever way for certain folks with certain opinions on certain other folks to circumvent the system. I don't think this sort of thing should repeat itself. Jersey John ( talk) 03:41, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
That is all. Airbornemihir ( talk) 18:38, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Is the ITN section of the front page broken? The most recent story hasn't changed in over a week. I find that hard to believe so I figured it was a technical issue. 2600:387:9:5:0:0:0:57 ( talk) 11:42, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
I think DYK is circling the drain, and may have recently jumped the shark; the articles seem like they were randomly-chosen and a lot of the blurbs are trivia and/or other cruft. Why can't we replace it with "today's good article", 7-days-a-week TFL, The Signpost, TAFI, RD separated from ITN, centralized discussion, or something else entirely? KMF ( talk) 16:20, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
The DYK criteria should be altered so that *all* good articles that have not previously appeared are eligible to appear as DYK items, not just the ones promoted within the last week. This would raise the quality and interestingness of the section. It would also provide a "reward" for GA-creators, which doesn't currently exist (excluding self-satisfaction). Of course that would just be a change in eligibility not a blank check, the other DYK criteria would still need to be met. 106.68.128.209 ( talk) 13:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Three forms of transport shown on one day!
(To allow the bots to archive the previous discussion while leaving something here.) 31.49.115.211 ( talk) 10:29, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
I think George A. Romero should be added to the "Recent deaths" box, as he was a notable figure who died on the 16th, just two days ago. The most recent passing shown in that box is Martin Landau, who died on the 15th. – Matthew - ( talk) 12:09, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Natalie Wood was born 20 July 1938. She was one of the most popular actresses of the mid-20th century. I strongly believe her birthday should be listed on the main page. DavidSteinle ( talk) 14:06, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi all
I've just added this image: [2] to the OTD template for tomorrow, having protected it, but it now occurs to me that although it is public domain in the US it may not be eligible for main page use due to the "This image might not be in the public domain outside of the United States". Does anybody know the answer to that? Thanks — Amakuru ( talk) 08:56, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Hi, the 1967 Detroit riot happened 50 years ago today, it should be an article on the main page of Wikipedia. Thank you IQ125 ( talk) 22:42, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
... is a 'Main Page One Year to the Anniversary Article Polish and Brush-Up Club' which is actively seeking relevant articles. Jackiespeel ( talk) 16:20, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Perhaps there should be a currency-themed main page rather than just a couple of entries.
When 'The Proverbial Anonymous Wikipedian' has/have cleared all other backlogs, (inclusive gender pronoun, singular and plural forms) will whizz round Wikipedia and generate themed main pages; while the equivalent(s) looking after the news will find some relevant entries for ITN. 89.197.114.132 ( talk) 15:11, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Is this appropriate for the main page of Wikipedia? Seems more like an advertisement.
Bryan MacKinnon ( talk) 13:27, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
It occurs to me that this wiki is slow in confirmed deaths. For example, Jeanne Moreau:
That's 18 hrs? I'd wish the process was shorter. Just to keep WP a leading source. - DePiep ( talk) 01:37, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
I noticed the main page contains several single-column layout tables. Switching them to divs should use a bit less bandwidth, improve browser performance, and make future mobile migration with TemplateStyles easier, i.e. T138622.
I did just a little testing; Chromium, Firefox, IE7, JAWS over IE8. Is this okay to promote to the Main Page sandbox for wider testing? Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 23:14, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:In the news/image has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please sync Template:In the news/image/sandbox to Template:In the news/image.
<div class="thumbcaption" style="padding: 0.25em 0; word-wrap: break-word; text-align: {{{caption align}}};">
role="figure"
as an accessibility hint, since the text refers to it as "(pictured)"Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 05:53, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Main Page has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please sync Wikipedia:Main Page/sandbox to Main Page. This edit replaces one-column layout tables with visually similar divs.
Not quite pixel perfect. Table cellpadding can have browser differences, while CSS padding is highly standardized. I don't think I can avoid a pixel off in one browser or another.
I left the two-column layout table alone for now, since changing that to divs would require some work to avoid breaking IE 6 and 7. Would support going full tableless, though. Matt Fitzpatrick ( talk) 17:19, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Is wikipedia finally dead? Home [sic] come August 13th pages aren't appearing across multiple wikis? 72.48.98.163 ( talk) 00:16, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Why is there no mention of Melania Trump's birther views on her page, nor any mention her plagiarism in her speech at the RNC in 2016?
How does Wikipedia decide what should go on a page, when there is an obvious error.
What is the remedy? The person that owns the page is clearly a Melania Trump fan - can some outside parties at Wikipedia review the page, and improve it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.224.32.138 ( talk • contribs)
Is the article good enough for the bell's silencing to be included? Jackiespeel ( talk) 18:33, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
The four names listed below "Recent Deaths" include Franklin Cleckley, someone who died a week ago. Dick Gregory should be substituted. He is by far the most notable (if not famous) of those whose deaths wikpedia has noted in the past two days. 2602:304:CDA0:9220:FC64:2FAD:C223:D907 ( talk) 02:42, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello everyone. I am taking a Computer Science class which requires me to complete a couple of online projects. This particular project consist of me joining and being active on several social media websites. I have been active so far by commenting on pictures, updating profiles, adding people, and screenshotting my activity. The digital life in Columbus is not as updated as other digital lives. Columbus does not have all the most recent updated equipment in todays society. The digital life is still quite simple and understandable. I feel the upcoming generation has a better digital life than my generation which causes a slight problem for my generation. This problem causes my generation to actually have to learn the new software rather than already having that knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carolporter ( talk • contribs) 16:44, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
I find myself rather puzzled with the Wikipedia main page. As the featured article it highlights a hurricane that happened years ago. And "in the news" two sporting events are categorized as being of higher importance than the clearly more catastrophic and ongoing news story of Hurricane Harvey. The image is even of a boxer who took part in a fight widely regarded to be an exhibition monetary stunt. Have we gone quite mad? 2600:387:9:5:0:0:0:68 ( talk) 13:44, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
...should be for the quirky/relatively unknown topics, not for something 'many people know' (even if they are not Whovians). 89.197.114.132 ( talk) 15:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
For the "On this day" - section
Sweden left from left-hand traffic to right-hand traffic, a huge and historic project on 3 September 1967. Some ten years earlier did approximately 90% of the voters say NO to this change, in a referendum. But it was still carried out. Boeing720 ( talk) 00:14, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm just curious. Why is WP:TFP (picture OTD) not showing in (my) mobile view? Would be so much nicer! Any past discussions? - DePiep ( talk) 23:12, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Can someone explain to me why KATMAKROFAN keeps insisting that Plated (meal kits), which is currently on the main page should be tagged. I may be too close to the article, but I don't understand the complaints.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:59, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Please correct "chanecellor" typo on front page. JMK ( talk) 18:47, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Um... why are we using such a profoundly bad image of Merkel? If you want a similarly closely copped one then here: File:Angela Merkel Juli 2010 - 3zu4 (cropped).jpg. But that is all around objectively a terrible picture. GMG talk 17:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
The main page at it: looks a lot better than this 11-year-old thing. KMF ( talk) 20:17, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
is Wikipedia losing it or something, the main page should have been changed by now. It's past 12
OK, this is backward looking now, but we still have some issues to resolve.
I responded to the requests for updates on the eve of Yom Kippur, and pointed out that the references there covered all the ground in question. For whatever reason, my responses were ignored, and Yom Kippur was removed from the Main Page on September 30.
So we have a couple of problems that need to be addressed.
Time (UTC) day before holiday | People going off-wiki |
---|---|
05:00 | Australia (Eastern) |
12:00 | Israel |
13:00 | Western Europe |
14:00 | UK |
19:00 | US/Canada (Eastern) |
22:00 | US/Canada (Pacific) |
I don't see that there's really any problem specific to Jewish holidays. I understand that religious practices means observant Jewish people may go completely offline and in any case may not be able to work on articles from the eve. But the reality is for plenty of observances, people don't really have the time or desire to edit wikipedia on the day of the observamce. I'd also note for observances primarily in one country, it's easily possible that just before midnight UTC is not even a time people may be awake. For example, India is UTC+05:30 so if the problems are encountered at 19:00 UTC (5 hours before), there's a fair chance many people will already be sleeping at 0:30 local time and won't be up until at least after midnight UTC. Again I understand that these people may technically be able to edit wikipedia after this, to at least get it up later in the day. But again just because there's nothing explicitly forbidding them from editing wikipedia, doesn't mean it's realisticly possible they will find the time or have the desire. (For example, I'd note that for various reasons incredibly important observances may not be public holidays so work may get in the way.)
In fact, even if the problems are pointed out 24 hours before, depending on the nature of the specific observance, the normal preparations etc, it's easily possible no one will have any time even with that much warning. (Incidentally, I'd also note that AFAIK, the norm is to remove articles already on OTD for the day if quality issues are uncovered later, so it's not like midnight UTC is some magic time anyway.) And the nature of the world, the internet and the spread of English speakers with the time, knowledge and desire to improve en.wikipeida means that for some stuff, the people who are likely to deal with the problem may very well me one or two people who could be only holiday, sick, whatever even for something incredibly important. In other words with any observance (or for that matter event) even important ones, timing issues could always mean that problems are only spotted after a time when no one is likely to be around to deal with it. These problems may be a bit more likely with Jewish holidays than with some other holidays but definitely similar issues can apply to any observance.
As howcheng has said, the best solution would seem to be to be for those that care to familiarise themselves with the quality requirements expected for the main page, and ensure the article meets them well before hand when they do have time, whatever the observance. This won't completely prevent someone later noticing a problem which requires removal of the article from OTD, it will greatly reduce the chance of it happening. In other words rather than simply responding to tags as others add them, being proactive than reactive. I make no comment on the quality of the articles involved, but if Howcheng's suggestion above that whole sections and large parts of other sections were unsourced it seems to me this is something which should have been noticed by anyone taking a proper look.
If we really do want to change practices, e.g. to guarantee an article is featured if there are no problems 24 hours before (or whatever) or to allow articles which are "not perfect but the quality is reasonable" even if they don't meet the normal main page quality requirements for every other section on the main page, I'm assuming we at least all agree that this will apply to all observances. But I just don't see why we need it. Ultimately it's always going to happen that incredibly important observances are excluded simply because there's no volunteer around willing to work on them. (Since some of the examples I recall, we actually had quite a bit of notice but the articles we so bad I don't think anyone would ever allowed them.)
So let's just keep our standards, everyone involved try their best to ensure articles are up to scratch or if they aren't this is noted with as much time as possible, and accept sometimes important stuff isn't going to be on OTD for quality reasons.
P.S. One issue I didn't touch on is someone coming along and ruining an article after someone has ensured it is up to scratch. But in that case I don't see protection is needed. I'd hope if there is something weird someone else would notice and revert to the great version. In any case, do we actually have an example were an OTD article developed major new problems (as opposed to existing problems someone noticed), in a few days time between someone getting it up to scratch for OTD, and it appearing?
Nil Einne ( talk) 12:44, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
The Nobel Community awarded the Nobel prize in medicine and Physics yesterday and today respectively. I don't know how to go about this, but I think it probably should be reflected In the news — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.112.36.203 ( talk • contribs)
I honestly don't understand this. The Confusion (album) that is on the main page today have honestly gotten less than a thousand views this month. Today's view is only very slightly higher than the other days. Is there a problem somewhat or somewhere. The featured article for yesterday The Founding Ceremony of the Nationgot close to 60k views. Any explanations please?
Under the In the News section, there is this item:
"In the United States, 59 people are killed and 489 others are injured in a mass shooting at a concert near Las Vegas."
What I get from listening to the Sheriff's briefings, 58 people were killed (murdered), 1 died by his own hand, and (the last I remember) 527 were injured. There are people in ICU among the injured any many will require more surgeries.
By the way, I thought that the shooting happened within the city limits, but I don't really know the geography. Thank you for your time, Wordreader ( talk) 15:17, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Underwater diving is the practice of descending below the water's surface to interact with the environment. Humans are not biologically adapted for deep diving, and must use special equipment to extend the depth and duration of their dives.
I believe the DYK proposal discussed here deserves wider community input, as it would put multiple instances of the "N" word on the main page. bd2412 T 02:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
... that The Rolling Stones are a British rock band? Okay, you probably did...
*cue J. Jonah Jameson laughing in Spider-Man 2* - Zakawer ( talk) 12:01, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
As you know, the "adoption program' is to connect new users with experienced users to help new users (like me). Unfortunately, I believe that this program is dead. I registered for adoption about 2-3 weeks ago. Of course, I might just be impatient, but if you check the adoption page, yo will see the same people sitting there day after day with only more people coming. Older users tend to tell new users to see the adoption page. When they apply to be adopted, nothing happens. We should raise awareness about the adoption program by placing an "adoption notice" on the Main Page, a page that everyone sees, encouraging people to adopt new users. Thank you for taking the time to read this request and I'm sure a lot of people would agree with me. Once again, thank you and I hope you consider my idea to be enacted. WarriorFISH ( talk) 11:06, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Am curious as to why the 'entry' about Hurricane Nate and the Central America deaths has JUST 'NOW' appeared instead of right after it happened nearly a week ago. 2600:8800:786:A300:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D ( talk) 06:42, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
I am astonished to say the least that there is no mention whatsoever about the killing of more than 270 persons in Somalia. I feel that the editorial line (or editors) in wikipedia are becoming terrifyingly biased. When very recently less than 60 persons were assassinated in the United States, the news section of wikipedia swiftly reported on the topic. But last Saturday's bomb in Somalia's capital, which ended with the life of almost 300 people, seems not be worth to mention to wikipedia editors.
(laugh) I think I was clear about most of these things in the OP and second major post. I replied to everything which did not reiterate one of the standard ITN clichés (already mentioned in those posts). In light of this specific topic, I do find it fascinating that in the one post which attempted to see ITN more broadly, the list consisted of "news, weather and many other things" ... especially considering ITN's recent focus on weather-as-disaster. For whatever it is worth, I have tossed out a few ideas in immediate reply to Jayron, intermediate in this thread. I do not think I am important enough to have the final word in any discussion, and therefore will not TTFN on that note -- I simply mention, that is all. I also think it is worthwhile repeating that while one person can identify a systemic issue, one person cannot by themself solve that issue. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 ( talk) 08:58, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
I imagine this talk page is maintained by some bot or other. I wonder if it'd be possible to include a link to WP:ITN/C in the "In the news" section since many of the objections raised here are really about ITN/C (and since no one appears to be reading the enormous orange infobox at the top of the page). -- CosmicAdventure ( talk) 12:19, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Taken just about 2 years to grow by 500,000 articles. We've just about got there, congrats everybody, though sadly the percentage of great articles are still very low. We're getting better gradually though, more articles seem to be sourced when you hit random article these days. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:40, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
I think a suggestion box on the main page for new articles would be an opportunity for readers to get engaged and also to have constructive input when they come here looking for an article that we do not have. Nocturnalnow ( talk) 23:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
<div id="mp-dyk" style="padding:0.1em 0.6em 0.5em;>{{Did you know}}</div>
Needs to be changed to
<div id="mp-dyk" style="padding:0.1em 0.6em 0.5em;">{{Did you know}}</div>
(Changed portion is bolded)-
To ping
me add {{ping|
Force Radical}} OR [[
User:Force Radical]]
10:01, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Done Optimist on the run ( talk) 07:34, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I've noticed over many years the majority, maybe even the vast majority, of 'From today's featured article' relate to UK or US topics. There are, of course, other English-speaking countries - Canada, Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa, to name but a few - so might it be possible to get a more representative spread of articles in this slot? For the record, I'm British. Thanks. 31.52.163.95 ( talk) 14:34, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
I apologise for the delay. I reiterate a couple of things here, simply because I really don't think most people actually saw the specific suggestion (one single reply?) -- not recommendation, not even at the level of proposal. For it to make sense, I also have to quickly summarise identification of issue, and it also seems only fair that I quote that single reply. If future responses continue along the same clichés, I will assume there is no community interest in trying to achieve true ITN neutrality by at least considering the existing systemic biases, and I won't mention this again.
First, the original, QFT:
"It is one of the interesting peculiarities about an all-volunteer ground-level workforce in the first-language English world these days -- aiming for a neutral POV, but nonetheless failing to accomplish it through sheer neglect of some subjects and not others -- and equally through sheer arguing down of some articles and not others on the sole basis of setting different bars -- since no one tells a volunteer workforce what they must do. This is one of the key differences between Wikipedia and a standard encyclopaedia."
In short:
The standard clichéd responses to pointing out anything such as this are as follows:
1. A challenge to edit the articles in question myself.
2. Insistence that ITN articles should be both ITN-appropriate and high quality articles.
3. ITN is not a news ticker.
4. You are demanding we abandon the whole notion of community consensus and just post what you like.
These clichés having been addressed, I go on to the suggestions. The first two ideas have parallels in other parts of WP, e.g. administrator-applied limits, identifying IPs which seem to only exist to promote a single editing POV. No such limits currently exist on those commenting in ITN -- or possibly they are not enforced, which comes out to the same thing. The third and fourth ideas are proactive possibilities.
1. Create and enforce the same *hard* guidelines for all ITN postings -- with administrators actively pointing out to editors where their comments indicate that those guidelines are not being equally applied across all articles.
2. Actively identify those ITN-active editors who consistently apply different bars to different articles and who never, ever alter their votes even after their original criteria for rejecting an article have been fully addressed.
3. When considering whether or not to post an ITN article, ITN-oriented admins could place a different weight on the votes of early commentators who never return to the vote discussion after the article has been improved.
4. ITN-oriented admins could actively bring extremely low comment proposals to the top of the ITN pile three times (to echo R3R) and actively encourage additional comments, pointing out what changes have been made.
Something similar to #4 exists in the current reiteration of DYK. I raise the possibility because I have noticed that quite a few ITN proposals outside the high-eyeball memes die simply because very few people comment on them. In such cases, even when a few editors are actively improving the articles to meet the current objections, those proposals still die due to a combination of lack of interest and early voters not returning to re-assess the article's current condition. This was the case for the recent Nobel non-postings, which, Internet-ages ago, sparked my current part in this.
Again, as always, it is entirely up to the community what actions its editors and administrators choose to take. If future responses take the same clichéd directions, clearly this is what the talking part of the community wants and I won't raise this issue again. I reposted this much simply because only one person had actually responded to these suggestions -- or, indeed, at all after I had posted them one and a half weeks after the initial post. It seems only fair to include the single answer I received to this, which is quoted in its entirety below. It was in response to that answer that I added cliché #4 and its rebuttal to the beginning of this post. It is my strong opinion that binary thinking is for computers, not for human beings. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 ( talk) 11:38, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
150 years ago Marie Curie was born! BasileusAutokratorPL ( talk) 11:51, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Furthermore, if the person is featured (bold item) as a regular blurb on any day, they may not be chosen for birth/death listings.Exceptions are made when the day in question is lacking a selection of decent articles (i.e., only reuse it if we're desperate). — howcheng { chat} 23:05, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
And how many days of 'everybody agreeing that several the MP and its links are truly wonderful' will mark the start of the apocalypse? 17:03, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
I am one of the main authors of Presque Isle State Park and had no idea it was even nominated for TFA. While I am glad to see it so honored, the photo chosen for the TFA blurb on the Main Page (a snowy parking lot in a forest File:Presque_Isle_State_Park_in_the_Winter.jpg) does not do a great job of conveying what is special and unique about the park. Pennsylvania has 121 state parks, but only two of them are on its Lake Erie coastline. Presque Isle State Park (the name means "almost an island" or "peninsula" in French) is surrounded by water and almost all of the attractions in the park are water related, but the picture conveys nothing of this. Ignoring maps and template images, there are 12 photos in the article, 8 of which show the water (and a 9th shows the most picturesque lighthouse). Of the other three photos, one is the Tom Ridge Environmental Center (on the mainland, at the entrance to the park), one is a cerulean warbler (which was photographed in Canada), and the last is the snowy parking lot picture currently on the main page. Could we please pick a more representative photo from one of the others used in the article? Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:13, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Amazing what you learn with Wikipedia. Before today, if you'd asked me who Josephine Butler was, I'd have said she was an erotic dancer, famed for being clad only in bananas. I don't think I could have been much further from the truth if I tried. Optimist on the run ( talk) 13:01, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Shouldn't Bud Moore be added to the 'recent deaths' section? Daisy134 ( talk) 13:41, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Suggest using this talk space for directing general discussion that comes in. This is because its visible from the Main Page, and if people aren't just interested in the Main Page or in Wikipedia in general, they are interested in finding other talk avenues like WP:Village Pump and other more topically specific places. At least spruce up its direction and access to the main talk channels because they aren't visually well separated from the Main Page stuff. Kiipanraken ( talk) 03:51, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
I urgently need help with mobbing in German Wikipedia! Can anybody provide some assistance with this issue? I will have to quit for today but I'll be back tomorrow. Hoping for support I remain with my best wishes-- Herfrid ( talk) 22:52, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Main page has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add the {{ Main Page topics}} template to the bottom of the main page. It obviously belongs on the main page. 2601:2C1:C280:3EE0:8D50:F5F3:A1EC:7855 ( talk) 04:44, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Remove Pai's face from the front page. Thank you.
This will make it easier for users to hide it using their userContent.css
or equivalent. (Because: it's a sensitive topic.) For example:
‹div id="recent-deaths"› ... ‹/div›
-- Evgeni Sergeev ( talk) 12:17, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
I have started a thread in WP:VPR about possibly changing the balance of Main Page columns. Please take a look, if you'd like. Regards, Alex Shih ( talk) 17:03, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
We've had two video game articles within eight days of each other as today's featured article on the main page. Please! How can anybody say there isn't a bias or proclivity towards video game articles on the main page? The vast majority of readers do not care about this sort of content. 174.64.100.70 ( talk) 01:44, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
What's the problem with video games anyways? There are people who don't find...say, tropical storms or TV shows or military units interesting (all common, recent TfAs), but nobody gets up in arms as much as the anti-video-game people (with the exception of the anti-Americans, possibly). ansh 666 02:13, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
And the archive bot can update this page. Jackiespeel ( talk) 23:06, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
2017–18 Iranian protests should be added to the home page.-- 2601:C4:C001:289E:9957:9065:F6EE:9381 ( talk) 21:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Nice to see him featured on his birthday (I think?) Good job, FA folks. Airbornemihir ( talk) 18:35, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
That's been on the "In the news" for over a week now. Really nothing more important happened in this world? For example the Iranian protests get only a footnote. Seriously? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.2.217.128 ( talk • contribs) 15:24, 9 January 2018 UTC (UTC)
Wikipedia 'went live' 17 years ago yesterday - surely there should have been some mention on the MP (or at least a discussion here)? Jackiespeel ( talk) 19:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
The language in the current article of the day, "he saw action [in place]" is military jargon for combat, but in reality could mean a wide variety of things. Generally in cases where there is overwhelming force (this is the British Empire putting down rebellions by Arabs in this case), there is a high likelihood of professional jargon and attested bravado infused in the jargon and in the reports of military operations. In other words the reports tend to be written in a way which exaggerates the nobility of deeds, the British in this case, and contains little from the other point of view. Its a vanity topic which produces vanity articles. - Dictatos ( talk) 03:16, 20 January 2018 (UTC)