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 180 | ← | Archive 185 | Archive 186 | Archive 187 | Archive 188 | Archive 189 | Archive 190 |
I know this will get shot down and will generate little to any concurrence with my view, but I find it extremely illogical putting up a note on the main page saying that today (Dec. 23) is Festivus, when next to nobody, I dare imagine (anyone got any hard statistics?), celebrates or observes this day, especially since its source is from an American sitcom that's been off the air for almost two decades. Anyway. Just my two cents. ( LancasterII ( talk) 16:47, 23 December 2015 (UTC))
Okay, there's a chance everyone will think I'm a tool for even asking, but I've exhausted every other option, with zero success. I asked around for help writing a bot to ping me when the TFA section at ERRORS is edited, and I argued the case at meta:2015 Community Wishlist Survey for watchable sections. I also asked for help at WP:BOTREQ#Pinging when a "task" section is edited, where the advice was given to break off the TFA section as a separate page and transclude it to either WT:MAIN or ERRORS, so that it can be watchlisted separately. That's what I'd like to do. I hesitate to ask; I'm concerned that people will misinterpret this as a request to distance TFA from other Main Page goings-on. Not true; I'd like a notice at ERRORS that anyone watchlisting is encouraged to also watchlist the transcluded TFA page. I've learned a lot from ERRORS, and I plan to keep on learning. All I'm saying is that it would be nice not to have to check all the ERRORS lines in my watchlist, all day long. - Dank ( push to talk) 22:37, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
[2] Looks like an error. sst✈ discuss 09:59, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
"The first recorded performance of the play King Lear" sounds like it was recorded with a tape recorder. It should be worded "The first known performance of the play King Lear". Sundayclose ( talk) 23:18, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! -- AKlapper (WMF) ( talk) 21:47, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
How dare Wikipedia put such unholy heresy on the front page! Have you no shame? Witchcraft is not needed in such a joyous occasion! I say we boycott this website! GamerPro64 00:17, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia is an amazing resource. However it is deeply flawed in that searching for information is highly restrictive in that you need to KNOW what you're searching for, type the word in, and click search. For people that want to learn as much as possible in the most intuitive format the main page needs to be enhanced to include a globe and a slider bar (or bars). The user will be able to navigate the globe to any position and then use the slider bar to navigate through time which will allow Wikipedia articles to appear and disappear according to the time frames that they are relevant for. Further filtering can be provided such as just to include music history, wars, etc. Now that Wikipedia has grown to this level this enhancement will give it a much needed boost. 63.224.126.130 ( talk) 20:53, 28 December 2015 (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.
This should be on the main page. As far as the world of rock is concerned, this guy was a god. Compared to Sadhana Shivdasani who? This is far more notable and main page worthy. Spacecowboy420 ( talk) 09:04, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
Thank you! First time I've looked at how the main page works. Spacecowboy420 ( talk) 09:21, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
I'd like to get some feedback on " paid off" in the TFA section at WP:ERRORS (there or here). It's today's TFA. - Dank ( push to talk) 14:36, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
For visitors with a German IP address, the campaign text is ungrammatical for (at least) the last two campaign days. It says "1 day days" or "0 day days" when it should say just "1 day" or "0 days". Perhaps it's just a missing slash. (There seem to be several alternative texts, so it is not always easy to reproduce this bug. I saw it yesterday. When it reappeared today, I made a screenshot. This is the full text: "Dear readers: I hope we’re not disturbing you. It is that time of year when we ask for your support. To protect our independence, we'll never run ads. We're sustained by donations averaging about €20. Now we are asking you in Germany to help out. If everyone currently reading this were to contribute a small amount, our fundraising campaign would be over in an hour. Our fundraising appeal is displayed over 7 million times a day, but currently only 421.327 people have donated. Today only 0 day days are left to reach our goal. So if you find Wikipedia useful, please take a minute out of your day this Thursday to donate and give something back to Wikipedia. Thank you!") -- 217.226.80.235 ( talk) 11:40, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi, there was a bomb explosion in Istanbul, Turkey where 10+ people died and 15+ people are injured, mostly tourists. We should update the news page to add this event.
OnurRC ( talk) 12:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC) Onur
Anita Krajnc case received 11974 hits [3], how to get it on the main page? It is a DYK article. Yogesh Khandke ( talk) 04:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Making the Privacy Policy link more prominent on our main page. Nocturnalnow ( talk) 03:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Putting an RFC on this matter was suggested at Jimbo's talk page. Some discussion is there concerning this idea. Nocturnalnow ( talk) 03:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Indonesia Terror Attack has been listed.13:14, 14 January 2016 (UTC) 180.252.247.39 ( talk)
How do I become an editor for the good. To help fix articles that were vandalized.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ndogswim ( talk • contribs)
2016 has arrived! Is the draft still 2015 redesign or is it now 2016? -TheNewbster — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.223.186.77 ( talk) 20:00, 1 January 2016
Perhaps for future WP birthdays there could be a 're-creation of the original WP main page'/links to the first articles created. Jackiespeel ( talk) 11:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Though this is not the first I've seen of it, I think The Negro Motorist Green Book is an exceptionally interesting and important article to feature, and quite well written - it is not often, alas, that I feel like Wikipedia's choice of TFA really leaves people going away different than when they came. And in general, no matter how many times we are reminded, it seems impossible to really expect the banality of evil and, more appropriate to this case, the absurdity of heroism. Wnt ( talk) 02:37, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
"#" redirects here. For the number sign, see number sign. Philmonte101 😊😄😞 ( talk) 21:59, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
seen by millions who likely aren't searching for "#".It's just not that common of a search term. (Though -- does anyone have statistics for that?) Eman235/ talk 23:57, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Moved to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Mohéli. Smurrayinchester 14:57, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
The japanese version of Wikipedia has now more than 1,000,000 artciles. Congratulations -- Thomas Wozniak ( talk) 21:27, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi how can find place to chat about interesting articles and pages, and also art and personal publishing projects regarding this site? also user page here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakecardwell ( talk • contribs)
A current DYK item seems to be a deceipt that just seems akin to a lie. The DYK is "... that the steeple of the Readington Reformed Church was blown over by a cyclone on January 3, 1913, and restored one hundred years later?" There were numerous tall steeples of churches in Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, etc. that have been destroyed by hurricanes and never rebuilt, because the vulnerability became clear. This DYK seems interesting in giving a restoration of such a tall steeple (perhaps built stronger somehow?). But no, the recent picture shows a shortish steeple. That is a apparently a replacement of the short steeple that was put in place 100 years earlier. The DYK is misleading, not in any clever way. I think the DYK item ought to be removed. -- do ncr am 09:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Can someone please fix the view counter? It has been stuck on the 21st for a few days now. Thanks. Johnsmith2116 ( talk) 03:30, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Over the past few days I've noticed that when I visit WP:ERRORS it often contains content that has yet to appear on the transclusion here. Is that a problem at my end or at Wikipedia's, is it just affecting me, and what can be done to address it? -- Dweller ( talk) 09:11, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi I have created this page /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:2016_main_page_redesign_proposal for the main page 2016 redesign. Paladox ( talk) 16:12, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi could we open a public vote with a deadline for Wikipedia:Main Page (2016 redesign) since it has been a while since the last redesign and it dosernt seem to be working by doing it this way so if we get the public to vote with a deadline. ref /info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Main_Page_(2015_redesign)#When_is_this_going_to_be_released.3F
Maybe we could do a wikivoyage style voting since it got many users to create a new logo lets do that for a main page. Paladox ( talk) 16:33, 26 January 2016 (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.
In the news, it says
Tsai Ing-wen (pictured) is elected the first female President of Taiwan
However,
Tsai Ing-wen (pictured) is elected the first female President of Republic of China.
Taiwan is name of its administration area, however, the name of the position is President of Republic of China. This is just like we should not call the leader of ISIS as the leader of North Syria. Even though its administration power is only in North Syria.
Raintwoto 20:25, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
See also in the Chinese Wikipedia
Raintwoto 20:29, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Why not use "President of the Republic of China (Taiwan)"? This makes it clear, but also uses the correct term of address. Using "Taiwan" on the news page, but redirecting to the properly titled article President of the Republic of China, could be interpreted as a political statement by Wikipedia or its editors. LadyIslay ( talk) 22:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Is someone changing the format of the Main Page as we speak? Because currently when I load the main page, it's only showing Today's featured article and In the news sections- tried it on 2 devices. Kind of annoying as I have an article on the DYK section that doesn't appear to be viewable. Joseph2302 ( talk) 18:15, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Great picture and caption. I like the explanatory contextual intro, which is needed. When showing this photograph, I would suggest it would be very helpful to lead the second paragraph with when the photo was taken, and by whom. I'm guessing this photo was taken by troops who liberated the camp. But maybe it was taken by the Germans during operations. I think it is important to know.
The Germans apparently covered their tracks a lot with the Holocaust. How does this evidence fit in? Thank you. As mentioned, great photo etc. Billyshiverstick ( talk) 19:54, 27 January 2016 (UTC) PS: I couldn't find a tag for who posted the picture. That would have been handy, so I could leave this note on your talk page, and you'd get a note. cheers Ben
I would say it is the rapid spread of Zika fever (the infection in humans) rather than the virus itself that is causing the greatest concern. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 14:41, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Can we reduce the number of Upanishand DYKs being posted on Main Page? We've had around 5 Upanishad DYKs in the past 10 days or so, and many more are currently on the nominations page. Posting them so frequently makes people, who are unfamiliar with the DYK system, think Wikipedia is advocating a particular religion. I'd like to see religion-related DYKs be scrapped altogether. 45.125.181.62 ( talk) 11:24, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Just a heads-up, eight TFA's from October 2015 to February 2016 have been video game related. That's a little under two per month, if we are concerned about topic diversity and systemic bias.-- WaltCip ( talk) 17:33, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Hey, defensiveness and criticism of WaltCip really aren't called for here. I appreciate the explanation of why this condition exists and, apparently, will continue to exist, but I don't see that WaltCip criticized anyone or even complained. He just pointed out a potential problem that perhaps others weren't aware of. And by the way, it's a valid observation even in light of the explanation of why video games are so heavily represented. The reasons given only point to where the problem would have to be solved, if in fact it is a problem. Bryan Henderson (giraffedata) ( talk) 21:39, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
result=
See
Wikipedia:FAQ/Main Page#I think that the articles listed on the Main Page are awful and much more important articles should be there instead. Isn't the Main Page biased towards certain topics? What can be done about it?IP - I resent you calling my answer bogus (and it is 'a statement of fact and so cannot be insolent' besides).
What criteria would #you# use to define articles/fields that are suitably worthy to appear on the MP? What are you doing to improve articles in those fields? Jackiespeel ( talk) 16:38, 8 February 2016 (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.
Please don't kill me, but I fail to see what makes an American Football game so important that it merits a spot on "In the news". It doesn't even seem to be an international match that is reported. LucVerhelst ( talk) 08:29, 9 February 2016 (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.
Can we please finally get rid of the Superbowl player image? He's been staring at us for pretty much a whole week, is he going to be the new Morales? There are two perfectly nice images to use in the graviational waves article alone. It would be great to actually have the scientific data as the ITN image. Fgf10 ( talk) 14:11, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
7 days so far. Not quite pushing Lugo-ness but getting close.-- WaltCip ( talk) 13:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
He's going to be booted off soon by the Grammys which are in ITN/R. Nohomersryan ( talk) 13:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
The last comment on the MP was the now 'archived text' entry of 17 February. Is this a record length of general acceptance of what has appeared on the MP? (Allowing the bot to archive the previous section.) Jackiespeel ( talk) 10:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Is there a reason why the new-style Main Page design for logged-in users still does not appear for non-logged-in users? 81.152.224.85 ( talk) 03:14, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
We've celebrated this day in our little nation for the least 800 years. Not even a mention of it on en-Wikipedia. Please add. Llywelyn2000 ( talk) 11:58, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Are there any decorative pictures of daffodils perhaps? 193.132.104.10 ( talk) 14:52, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, is there a reason the album cover for Master is not displayed? Rob van vee 16:28, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
The main page obviously has a feminist bias and needs to be fixed.
Generally, I am in favour of '(at least) occasional themed Main Pages' Jackiespeel ( talk) 16:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Is it my imagination or have there been quite a number of American coin TFAs over the past months? — AjaxSmack 01:24, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
New main page layout currently inflicted on logged in users only looks worse than the current one. Feels like change for change sake. Current one is far from perfect. Neither looks like a modern, responsive, rich experience like users have come to expect. Switching the headings to a serif font ... LOL ... made it worse. The fact is, web design by community consensus is doomed to fail. You'll need the foundation to impose something by fiat. Seriously, the mobile site looks better. -- 107.77.232.41 ( talk) 21:49, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
20:41, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
18:59, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Could I get an admin to change the picture shown in todays TFA (added without consultation) to the image that was proposed in the TFA blurb (:File:Sarcoscypha coccinea 74716.jpg). Thanks, Sasata ( talk) 16:28, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
That's completely unwarranted. I can't speak for anyone other than myself, but I don't think Sasata is suggesting that he has any kind of special authority.
That said, you did make use of your special authority in making a change (without offering any explanation, which could rub salt into the wound) using your admin powers.
Had you done this before the blurb appeared on the MP, it could have been discussed/reverted as appropriate, but because you did it while the image was on the MP, Sasata, who does not have admin powers, was left unable to change the image back- no matter how inappropriate the edit.
Did you not think, especially given that the image was not used in the article, that it may be inappropriate in some way?
Is this a first? (I also don't think it should be bulleted, but whatever) Nohomersryan ( talk) 16:45, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
For future reference, a discussion about this version of DYK. Bencherlite Talk 22:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Now there's another DYK correction. I really hope this doesn't become a regular thing. If it must happen again, I think the word "We" should be avoided, just as for an article. Instead, it would be better to say something like "It was previously reported, but...." and avoid first person. Jonathunder ( talk) 21:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Lee Sedol is not "one of the best Go players", he is the best Go player and I would add the information that this event is a milestone in the development of artificial intelligence. Greets from Germany -- 93.215.150.222 ( talk) 16:43, 16 March 2016 (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.
So this is the kind of language we're allowing in articles featured on the Main Page, now, are we? in both nuckelavee and Sea Mither. You fail, Wikipedia. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 07:20, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
I have started an RfC at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#RFC: Corrections on Main Page?. Fram ( talk) 10:47, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
What happened the 2015 redesign version of the main page? → The Pancake of Heaven! ( T • C • E) 13:16, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
14:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)April 1 is April Fools, and perhaps nobody does not know it. The main page's DYK section appears to be fooling the readers on John Cena and other things. Isn't it that we should know and apply the limits between where and when to make jokes and not? Ain't funny jokes on the Main Page please. 49.148.79.46 ( talk) 13:23, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
I agree. It's fine if the hooks are funny, but some of them are quite questionable!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The way I see it is that there were some funny hooks suggested however many people kept interfering with reviews that had already been passed. The Royal C ( talk) 15:24, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for stating the obvious i.e. that I'm entitled to my opinion.
There should be some interpretation of the hook under which it's a true statement, but it need not be the obvious one,
and it's even OK if it's a bit strained.
Nothing wrong with the original hook (for April Fools, anyway)
And David Levy's fussing below shows his misunderstanding of "legal nomenclature" (though that's not what this is) -- in in rem cases the object at issue is, itself, indeed "being sued"
I'm not a lawyer either, but I've been a technical consultant in scores of exactly this kind of case, and I know what I'm talking about.
The concern that readers might actually think that a dinosaur is expected to show up and argue in court, or retain an attorney to argue for him (or her, I guess), is absurd.
We were going to have ...that the United States sued a Tyrannosaurus for being an illegal immigrant?
But people kept popping their opinions in
and argued against the original hook which was based on the precedence of a hook that was similarly titled
and we ended up with something of lesser quality.
And even when I tried at a last minute to get a slightly better hook on there
it was removed for the same reason of people enforcing their opinions on it.
That was where the problem was on AFD this year, it was the Too Many Cooks analogy.
So do you think that around a week before AFD, when hooks have been held for months,
that it is helpful to have people expressing what they thought would be right, not based on WP policy but on personal opinions
and despite it being cleared and approved in accordance with the policies.
I'm also inclined to agree that this year was not handled well. The featured picture was good, the featured list seemed like a fun one (though I can't say I know or, dare I admit, care much about baseball) but much of DYK is/was puerile and the TFA blurb, as discussed above, was deceptive. Josh Milburn ( talk) 18:49, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
21:02, 1 April 2016 (UTC)-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
21:57, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Somewhere along the way, the goal of crafting hooks that are ambiguously worded but 100% true and fully compliant with out normal editorial standards (apart from the aforementioned ambiguity) seems to have been forgotten. Flat-out lies and all-caps exclamations (in Wikipedia's voice) are unacceptable, as is demanding that others participate in the April foolery if they wish to prevent a recurrence of this embarrassing nonsense next year. — David Levy 07:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
If we want people to take this product seriously, we have to stop trying to be funny once a year. There are too many really good comedians out there.-- Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 13:29, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
I must express my disappointment with this blurb, which presents a historical hoax as the truth. I regret ignoring its development (which I assumed would occur in accordance with the longstanding consensus that our April Fools' Day material should contain claims that are 100% factual despite seeming implausible, not the inverse) and accept responsibility for failing to speak up sooner.
It's especially unfortunate that we're making light of a situation that resulted in a large number of deaths.
The actual series of events is strange and interesting, making the article an ideal choice for the 1 April TFA. I'm baffled as to why it's been placed behind a layer of deception that downplays these qualities. — David Levy 00:07, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
I think it's worth noting that in my unreferenced opinion, we found it really difficult to find an appropriate article for April 1's TFA this year. For next year, I'd suggest we choose an appropriate article asap and work it up to FA in time, rather than scrabbling around for something in the last couple of months. I'd be happy to help with this. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 08:56, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
It is still too easy to believe the blurb. Many will not read the article, will only read the blurb, and will not realise that MacGregor was a confidence trickster. That should be put in the blurb, plus the fact that the 'Poyais' was a fiction. At the moment, the blurb was and still is violating WP:NPOV (I too should have realised this earlier and participated in the earlier discussion). Carcharoth ( talk) 12:53, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Just saw this, as I'm one of many people who watch TFA processes, but not everything on Main Page talk. I guess my first question is: does anyone believe that anything here in the current thread has relevance to any day of the year other than April 1? If TFA, and discussions about TFA, only fail one day a year, then I can think of some quick fixes that will have no negative effects on the process as a whole. If some bigger issues are looming here, I'd like to know about it. - Dank (
push to talk) 13:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The statement that "Many have tried to emulate the policies he initiated as leader of Poyais, but few have come close to matching his success" is completely true. If we agree that Gregor MacGregor's "policies" were those of a con man, many people have indeed tried to emulate them and not been able to match MacGregor's success, let alone his ability to get away with it even after he was caught, and end up being buried as a hero, with the President of his adopted country walking in his funeral. The sentence is more than a little facetious, but it's also absolutely true. Jsc1973 ( talk) 18:25, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
If we agree that Gregor MacGregor's "policies" were those of a con man
Okay, it's off the Main Page of course, and there's no reply so far to my question about whether there are indications of problems with TFA that go beyond April 1, which is a relief. My fellow TFA coords and I are largely agreed about what to do about April 1, so I'll move over to the discussion that's just getting started over at WT:TFAR to get more input from TFA participants. Brian has a specific proposal, I think. - Dank ( push to talk) 12:22, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Each year there are also a number of items appearing on the Main Page which generate much discussion on various grounds (not to be read while consuming drink of choice and biscuits, children etc). There are probably also 'a number' which are not to various readers' tastes on a range of grounds.
But - the Main Page changes so the problem goes.
The questions are - how can entries on the MP be presented in such a way that they puzzle and intrigue people enough to read the articles and how puzzling can the hooks be? Jackiespeel ( talk) 09:32, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Of this. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech/Server_switch_2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.204.222.200 ( talk • contribs) 05:27, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
So I saw in the "In The News" section that the Prime Minister of Iceland had resigned. I'm just curious as to why it was changed to "steps aside". Uvinno ( talk) 18:31, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Discussions like this belong at WP:ERRORS. The small group of editors and admins who look after Main Page will see it [faster]. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 09:42, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
why sinhala new year not on the list("On this day")
"Planned Parenthood was conceived 100 years ago" really? Thanks for making my day.-- 131.156.156.255 ( talk) 14:14, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
The addition of an audio file to the Für Elise blurb for April 27 was a nice touch – thanks! Sca ( talk) 14:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Any chance of getting a link to Antidisestablishmentarianism in the Welsh bishop DYK? Greenshed ( talk) 21:57, 27 April 2016 (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 am surprised that the Main Page makes no mention of today's 90th birthday (21st April) of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, who is Head of State of sixteen Commonwealth countries. Clearly the 90th birthday of such an eminent person as Her Majesty deserves a mention, and I am completely perplexed as to why it is not mentioned. Ds1994 ( talk) 18:01, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm trying to figure out a concrete relationship between George II and Elizabeth II's birthday. Let's see... If there was a king named George, then the queen named Elizabeth must have a birthday in April. Eureka!-- Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 01:32, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I think the birthday was mentioned through 'the usual news channels' so people would have been aware of it anyway.
As a compromise - perhaps a 'UK royal related entry of some sort' on the MP for such dates - and getting the article up to standard for April 2026. Jackiespeel ( talk) 14:28, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I assume wishing other people long life (and other benefits) is within WP guidelines. Jackiespeel ( talk) 09:17, 24 April 2016 (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.
It wasn't taken from East-Prussia. It was an city ruled by the Leage of Nations and some other protectors before it became a part of Lithuania. Much like Danzig (Gdansk) it wasn't a part of the German Realm anymore after 1919. Gerard von Hebel ( talk) 00:44, 8 May 2016 (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.
Kindly remove the false "Nakba Day" propaganda. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:fd0b:ca00:9b5:2ee7:91f3:f3b9 ( talk) 19:15, 15 May 2016
I cant edit this home page. just wanted to let you know it cant be edited for some reason. maybe a serve glitch? - Prateek Kaushik. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prateek M. Kaushik ( talk • contribs) 20:44, May 15, 2016 (UTC)
Hello, EgyptAir flight 804 which missing today. 05:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC) CPAT ( talk)
-- Leon ( talk) 19:35, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Very interesting today, even the DYK which has been pretty weak lately, well done everyone. 106.68.196.157 ( talk) 06:20, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
23 May 2016 Syrian bombings, also this article should be improved upon.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Beejsterb ( talk • contribs)
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.
The main page is the first place people see when they come to Wikipedia. It should not have profanity. Please fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.176.197.226 ( talk • contribs)
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 don't have a particular opinion on the topic at hand, but I disagree with the closure of the discussion. While the item in question is indeed off the main page, and it is true the general topic of censorship on Wikipedia is best discussed elsewhere, a substantial portion of the discussion above was about "censorship" on the Main Page - particularly, if the Main Page should or should not have a different standard of "self-censorship"/"editorial judgement" than Wikipedia as a whole. Closure of the discussion strikes me as premature. As WP:CENSORMAIN and WP:NOTCENSORED apparently conflict (?) and there are a number of users in the thread that support CENSORMAIN (and those who apparently oppose it), it appears that there isn't a consensus on how "censorship"/"editorial judgement" should be treated on the Main Page. Closing the discussion at this point thus appears to have the effect of quashing whatever consensus building was being attempted. -- 160.129.138.186 ( talk) 17:07, 26 May 2016 (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.
Please immediately remove this statement (which is not even in the featured article, that says "a large group of whom were teenagers" and lacks a citation). This type of statement sounds like WWII revisionism that likes to portray Germans at the end of WWII as victims (in this case children forced to fight and die against vastly better equipped Western armies). Monopoly31121993 ( talk) 14:58, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
utilizing cadres from divisions disbanded on the eastern front and filled out with recruits conscripted in November 1943 (recruits born in 1926). Even in the US army, which had much stricter rules on underage recruitment and longer training periods before active service, the average age of a GI taking part in the Normandy landings was only 21. ‑ Iridescent 15:13, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Moved to WP:ERRORS. - Dank ( push to talk) 18:47, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
You are invited to comment on the RfC: Should the criteria for "recent deaths" listings on the "In the news" section of the main page be changed?. Thryduulf ( talk) 12:43, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
From today's (that's 8 June 2016) featured article Paul McCartney: "the top-selling band of all time." Since time hasn't yet come to an end, no one can know that. What is meant is "the top-selling band so far." 86.132.222.245 ( talk) 16:02, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
The Penguins won the Stanley Cup after the Orlando shooting; therefore its blurb should be above the Orlando shooting in the tradition NPOV way we've handled events that are newsworthy. Newest on the top, regardless of which is more "newsy" than the next... Please correct that. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 18:41, 13 June 2016 (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 feel given the impact and coverage of the story it would be more appropriate to have a picture of Jo Cox rather than Sidney Crosby, which has been up a few days and is for a story about to fall off the main page. yorkshiresky ( talk) 14:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Maybe it would be good to include that Cleveland won their first ever championship in the news item mentioning their win? 71.183.244.136 ( talk) 23:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Is it customary to promote an article on the front page twice in as many days? Mortara case was just the front page Featured Article yesterday. Now it is being promoted in OTD. Just wondering. - Ad Orientem ( talk) 03:02, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
The History page for this page starts with (that is, the most recent change listed is)
Oh, really? -- Thnidu ( talk) 00:45, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
The Mobile version of the Main Page is displaying the full version instead of the usual mobile version. Did someone break something?? - Samuel Wiki ( talk) 13:47, 24 June 2016 (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.
Hi everyone. I'm a basque wikipedian and I just saw on the panel "Wikipedia languages" that Basque Wikipedia (Euskara) is listed on the "More than 50,000 articles" section. I'm congratulated to tell you that yesterday Basque Wikipedia completed its 250.000 article so I think it should be now on the "More than 250,000 articles" section. Thanks. Euskaldunaa ( talk) 11:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
On the Main Page's leftmost side, between "Print/export" and "Languages", it has an "In other projects" section listing almost all of Wikipedia's sister projects, except for MediaWiki and Wiktionary. (However, those two are included at the bottom of the Main Page under "Wikipedia's sister projects", with all the others.)
I think I understand why MediaWiki is not listed on the left panel's "In other projects", but why is Wiktionary not listed there, even though it also has a " Main Page"?
Just curious, I'm not really suggesting any changes. Thank you:) Zeniff ( talk) 07:56, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
10:55, 24 June 2016 (UTC)At the moment, the DYK queues (the sets prepared to go to the Main Page, which are automatically put on the Mai nPage by a bot) are fully protected. This was done years ago, since with only semi-protection it was way too easy for a vandal to vandalize the main page by timing an edit to the queues just right.
We have on the one hand a shortage of admins willing to fill the queues, and on the other hand a relatively new protection level called Template Protection. This is still a very restricted level (not many editors have it), but it is open to experienced, trusted non-admins and will be hard to reach for vandals. As the queues are template pages, the proposal has been discussed (a little bit) at WT:DYK to lower the protection of the queues to Template Editor level. This proposal is for Template:Did you know/Queue/1 to Template:Did you know/Queue/6, but explicitly not for Template:Did you know, which must stay at admin-only level. ~The template editor right would then be granted (through normal processes) to a handful of DYK regulars.
Can everybody live with this, or is a formal RfC needed? Fram ( talk) 06:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Please feature the news about the death of Italian actor Carlo Pedersoli (Bud Spencer) on the main page. He was an extremely popular actor in many countries throughout Europe (Italy, Germany, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, etc.) It's just disturbing that a person who had created so many cult movies, does not even get a one line notice on the Main Page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.107.64.22 ( talk • contribs) 08:37, 28 June 2016
Pedersoli/Spencer also an Olympic athlete Billbambam ( talk) 18:20, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Time for our yearly discussion :) Before november, on our current main page's 10th birthday, or at least before the year is out, I would like to introduce the new Main Page ( talk). There have been many discussions, but no concrete plans as of yet. So I plan to take action myself. While I am not that good at organizing discussions or RfCs, I do want input, so I am asking the community for a consult.
I will say this upfront: There will be a new Main Page this year. There can no longer be a question if the Main Page needs to be renewed; past RfC have made that clear. I have looked at them and tried to best implement their outcome. I have repeatedly asked for improvements, and while I have had some valuable input, most discussion revolved around process instead. So I will have none of that.
So this is the final round. There is no "if", only "how". There is no process, only progress. This is your final change to vent your ideas. I will try to work them in as best I can. Some pointers though: Forget process, forget the old page; Wikilawyering and comparing old stuff are the surest ways to grind any progress to a halt, so I will basically ignore such. The Main Page is basically just the same as an article, which happens to be a lot more visible. I can understand any restraint for change, but also know that the current page design is becomeing a laughing stock fo web designers.
In light of this, I invite anyone to step up as moderator. I would like to discuss on the new page's
talk page, or on
Draft talk:Main Page for that matter. You can read the background for the new design there, and adress any specifics that come to mind. I also propose to add a permanent link the discussion page, so it does not die out again. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
20:13, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
19:07, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
19:38, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
20:19, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Please, someone tell me what to do to make ANY progress at all! I have tried everything! What else can I do? Yet another RFC? What good is that? We've had them, but no one is acting on them. Reading through all the replies, it is clear to me no one wants change whatsoever. Process is only abused to stall, and no one seems willing to even participate. So here it is: I WANT ACTION!. Whatever it is! If there is no genuine step forward to change anything, I will delete the whole proposal and let the main page rot in HTML hell where it will remain the laughing stock of the web until the end of time. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
10:59, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
15:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
WANT ACTION!as much as you like, but just because you want something doesn't anyone else does; all you're going to get if you edit-war to try to unilaterally change Wikipedia's most-viewed page without anything remotely approaching a consensus (and the only way you'll see it live for more than a couple of minutes will be by persistent editwarring, since any change you make unilaterally will be immediately reverted) is at best a desysopping, and at worst a community ban. Has it genuinely not occurred to you that there's a reason you've been unable to gain any significant support for your proposal and are having to resort to threats and bluster? ‑ Iridescent 15:33, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
The claim "There have been many discussions, but no concrete plans as of yet" appears to be factually incorrect. I have had a concrete plan at User:Guy Macon/Simple Main Page since 2013. What I lack is any way to get anyone who has the power to change the main page to consider it. I could get a thousand or so signatures on a petition to get it considered, but I have no confidence that that the result would reach anyone who has the power to change the main page.
I have also proposed that we replace the current main page with User:Guy Macon/Simple Main Page for 1% (randomly chosen) of our visitors for a week, followed by 10% of our visitors for a week if there are no obvious problems. The statistics on that would give us a solid answer to the question "does all of this DYK, OTD, etc. material really need to clutter the main page, or would having it as subpages linked from the main page work just as well?" -- Guy Macon ( talk) 10:57, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
15:39, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
15:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)This weekend, I will be moving the page to
Draft:Main Page and adapt the gadget. I'm also thinking about putting up a message on top of this talk page to alert people to its existence, and propose a link on
WP:CENT. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
16:01, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm just noting here that Wikipedia:2016 main page redesign proposal exists. It currently has one draft subpage that could possibly be considered in regards to this proposal ( Wikipedia:2016 main page redesign proposal/draft/JKDw.) Steel1943 ( talk) 05:53, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
10:59, 4 July 2016 (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 180 | ← | Archive 185 | Archive 186 | Archive 187 | Archive 188 | Archive 189 | Archive 190 |
I know this will get shot down and will generate little to any concurrence with my view, but I find it extremely illogical putting up a note on the main page saying that today (Dec. 23) is Festivus, when next to nobody, I dare imagine (anyone got any hard statistics?), celebrates or observes this day, especially since its source is from an American sitcom that's been off the air for almost two decades. Anyway. Just my two cents. ( LancasterII ( talk) 16:47, 23 December 2015 (UTC))
Okay, there's a chance everyone will think I'm a tool for even asking, but I've exhausted every other option, with zero success. I asked around for help writing a bot to ping me when the TFA section at ERRORS is edited, and I argued the case at meta:2015 Community Wishlist Survey for watchable sections. I also asked for help at WP:BOTREQ#Pinging when a "task" section is edited, where the advice was given to break off the TFA section as a separate page and transclude it to either WT:MAIN or ERRORS, so that it can be watchlisted separately. That's what I'd like to do. I hesitate to ask; I'm concerned that people will misinterpret this as a request to distance TFA from other Main Page goings-on. Not true; I'd like a notice at ERRORS that anyone watchlisting is encouraged to also watchlist the transcluded TFA page. I've learned a lot from ERRORS, and I plan to keep on learning. All I'm saying is that it would be nice not to have to check all the ERRORS lines in my watchlist, all day long. - Dank ( push to talk) 22:37, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
[2] Looks like an error. sst✈ discuss 09:59, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
"The first recorded performance of the play King Lear" sounds like it was recorded with a tape recorder. It should be worded "The first known performance of the play King Lear". Sundayclose ( talk) 23:18, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! -- AKlapper (WMF) ( talk) 21:47, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
How dare Wikipedia put such unholy heresy on the front page! Have you no shame? Witchcraft is not needed in such a joyous occasion! I say we boycott this website! GamerPro64 00:17, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia is an amazing resource. However it is deeply flawed in that searching for information is highly restrictive in that you need to KNOW what you're searching for, type the word in, and click search. For people that want to learn as much as possible in the most intuitive format the main page needs to be enhanced to include a globe and a slider bar (or bars). The user will be able to navigate the globe to any position and then use the slider bar to navigate through time which will allow Wikipedia articles to appear and disappear according to the time frames that they are relevant for. Further filtering can be provided such as just to include music history, wars, etc. Now that Wikipedia has grown to this level this enhancement will give it a much needed boost. 63.224.126.130 ( talk) 20:53, 28 December 2015 (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.
This should be on the main page. As far as the world of rock is concerned, this guy was a god. Compared to Sadhana Shivdasani who? This is far more notable and main page worthy. Spacecowboy420 ( talk) 09:04, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
Thank you! First time I've looked at how the main page works. Spacecowboy420 ( talk) 09:21, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
I'd like to get some feedback on " paid off" in the TFA section at WP:ERRORS (there or here). It's today's TFA. - Dank ( push to talk) 14:36, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
For visitors with a German IP address, the campaign text is ungrammatical for (at least) the last two campaign days. It says "1 day days" or "0 day days" when it should say just "1 day" or "0 days". Perhaps it's just a missing slash. (There seem to be several alternative texts, so it is not always easy to reproduce this bug. I saw it yesterday. When it reappeared today, I made a screenshot. This is the full text: "Dear readers: I hope we’re not disturbing you. It is that time of year when we ask for your support. To protect our independence, we'll never run ads. We're sustained by donations averaging about €20. Now we are asking you in Germany to help out. If everyone currently reading this were to contribute a small amount, our fundraising campaign would be over in an hour. Our fundraising appeal is displayed over 7 million times a day, but currently only 421.327 people have donated. Today only 0 day days are left to reach our goal. So if you find Wikipedia useful, please take a minute out of your day this Thursday to donate and give something back to Wikipedia. Thank you!") -- 217.226.80.235 ( talk) 11:40, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi, there was a bomb explosion in Istanbul, Turkey where 10+ people died and 15+ people are injured, mostly tourists. We should update the news page to add this event.
OnurRC ( talk) 12:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC) Onur
Anita Krajnc case received 11974 hits [3], how to get it on the main page? It is a DYK article. Yogesh Khandke ( talk) 04:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Making the Privacy Policy link more prominent on our main page. Nocturnalnow ( talk) 03:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Putting an RFC on this matter was suggested at Jimbo's talk page. Some discussion is there concerning this idea. Nocturnalnow ( talk) 03:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Indonesia Terror Attack has been listed.13:14, 14 January 2016 (UTC) 180.252.247.39 ( talk)
How do I become an editor for the good. To help fix articles that were vandalized.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ndogswim ( talk • contribs)
2016 has arrived! Is the draft still 2015 redesign or is it now 2016? -TheNewbster — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.223.186.77 ( talk) 20:00, 1 January 2016
Perhaps for future WP birthdays there could be a 're-creation of the original WP main page'/links to the first articles created. Jackiespeel ( talk) 11:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Though this is not the first I've seen of it, I think The Negro Motorist Green Book is an exceptionally interesting and important article to feature, and quite well written - it is not often, alas, that I feel like Wikipedia's choice of TFA really leaves people going away different than when they came. And in general, no matter how many times we are reminded, it seems impossible to really expect the banality of evil and, more appropriate to this case, the absurdity of heroism. Wnt ( talk) 02:37, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
"#" redirects here. For the number sign, see number sign. Philmonte101 😊😄😞 ( talk) 21:59, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
seen by millions who likely aren't searching for "#".It's just not that common of a search term. (Though -- does anyone have statistics for that?) Eman235/ talk 23:57, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Moved to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Mohéli. Smurrayinchester 14:57, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
The japanese version of Wikipedia has now more than 1,000,000 artciles. Congratulations -- Thomas Wozniak ( talk) 21:27, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi how can find place to chat about interesting articles and pages, and also art and personal publishing projects regarding this site? also user page here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakecardwell ( talk • contribs)
A current DYK item seems to be a deceipt that just seems akin to a lie. The DYK is "... that the steeple of the Readington Reformed Church was blown over by a cyclone on January 3, 1913, and restored one hundred years later?" There were numerous tall steeples of churches in Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, etc. that have been destroyed by hurricanes and never rebuilt, because the vulnerability became clear. This DYK seems interesting in giving a restoration of such a tall steeple (perhaps built stronger somehow?). But no, the recent picture shows a shortish steeple. That is a apparently a replacement of the short steeple that was put in place 100 years earlier. The DYK is misleading, not in any clever way. I think the DYK item ought to be removed. -- do ncr am 09:28, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Can someone please fix the view counter? It has been stuck on the 21st for a few days now. Thanks. Johnsmith2116 ( talk) 03:30, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Over the past few days I've noticed that when I visit WP:ERRORS it often contains content that has yet to appear on the transclusion here. Is that a problem at my end or at Wikipedia's, is it just affecting me, and what can be done to address it? -- Dweller ( talk) 09:11, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi I have created this page /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:2016_main_page_redesign_proposal for the main page 2016 redesign. Paladox ( talk) 16:12, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi could we open a public vote with a deadline for Wikipedia:Main Page (2016 redesign) since it has been a while since the last redesign and it dosernt seem to be working by doing it this way so if we get the public to vote with a deadline. ref /info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Main_Page_(2015_redesign)#When_is_this_going_to_be_released.3F
Maybe we could do a wikivoyage style voting since it got many users to create a new logo lets do that for a main page. Paladox ( talk) 16:33, 26 January 2016 (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.
In the news, it says
Tsai Ing-wen (pictured) is elected the first female President of Taiwan
However,
Tsai Ing-wen (pictured) is elected the first female President of Republic of China.
Taiwan is name of its administration area, however, the name of the position is President of Republic of China. This is just like we should not call the leader of ISIS as the leader of North Syria. Even though its administration power is only in North Syria.
Raintwoto 20:25, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
See also in the Chinese Wikipedia
Raintwoto 20:29, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Why not use "President of the Republic of China (Taiwan)"? This makes it clear, but also uses the correct term of address. Using "Taiwan" on the news page, but redirecting to the properly titled article President of the Republic of China, could be interpreted as a political statement by Wikipedia or its editors. LadyIslay ( talk) 22:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Is someone changing the format of the Main Page as we speak? Because currently when I load the main page, it's only showing Today's featured article and In the news sections- tried it on 2 devices. Kind of annoying as I have an article on the DYK section that doesn't appear to be viewable. Joseph2302 ( talk) 18:15, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Great picture and caption. I like the explanatory contextual intro, which is needed. When showing this photograph, I would suggest it would be very helpful to lead the second paragraph with when the photo was taken, and by whom. I'm guessing this photo was taken by troops who liberated the camp. But maybe it was taken by the Germans during operations. I think it is important to know.
The Germans apparently covered their tracks a lot with the Holocaust. How does this evidence fit in? Thank you. As mentioned, great photo etc. Billyshiverstick ( talk) 19:54, 27 January 2016 (UTC) PS: I couldn't find a tag for who posted the picture. That would have been handy, so I could leave this note on your talk page, and you'd get a note. cheers Ben
I would say it is the rapid spread of Zika fever (the infection in humans) rather than the virus itself that is causing the greatest concern. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 14:41, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Can we reduce the number of Upanishand DYKs being posted on Main Page? We've had around 5 Upanishad DYKs in the past 10 days or so, and many more are currently on the nominations page. Posting them so frequently makes people, who are unfamiliar with the DYK system, think Wikipedia is advocating a particular religion. I'd like to see religion-related DYKs be scrapped altogether. 45.125.181.62 ( talk) 11:24, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Just a heads-up, eight TFA's from October 2015 to February 2016 have been video game related. That's a little under two per month, if we are concerned about topic diversity and systemic bias.-- WaltCip ( talk) 17:33, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Hey, defensiveness and criticism of WaltCip really aren't called for here. I appreciate the explanation of why this condition exists and, apparently, will continue to exist, but I don't see that WaltCip criticized anyone or even complained. He just pointed out a potential problem that perhaps others weren't aware of. And by the way, it's a valid observation even in light of the explanation of why video games are so heavily represented. The reasons given only point to where the problem would have to be solved, if in fact it is a problem. Bryan Henderson (giraffedata) ( talk) 21:39, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
result=
See
Wikipedia:FAQ/Main Page#I think that the articles listed on the Main Page are awful and much more important articles should be there instead. Isn't the Main Page biased towards certain topics? What can be done about it?IP - I resent you calling my answer bogus (and it is 'a statement of fact and so cannot be insolent' besides).
What criteria would #you# use to define articles/fields that are suitably worthy to appear on the MP? What are you doing to improve articles in those fields? Jackiespeel ( talk) 16:38, 8 February 2016 (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.
Please don't kill me, but I fail to see what makes an American Football game so important that it merits a spot on "In the news". It doesn't even seem to be an international match that is reported. LucVerhelst ( talk) 08:29, 9 February 2016 (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.
Can we please finally get rid of the Superbowl player image? He's been staring at us for pretty much a whole week, is he going to be the new Morales? There are two perfectly nice images to use in the graviational waves article alone. It would be great to actually have the scientific data as the ITN image. Fgf10 ( talk) 14:11, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
7 days so far. Not quite pushing Lugo-ness but getting close.-- WaltCip ( talk) 13:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
He's going to be booted off soon by the Grammys which are in ITN/R. Nohomersryan ( talk) 13:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
The last comment on the MP was the now 'archived text' entry of 17 February. Is this a record length of general acceptance of what has appeared on the MP? (Allowing the bot to archive the previous section.) Jackiespeel ( talk) 10:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Is there a reason why the new-style Main Page design for logged-in users still does not appear for non-logged-in users? 81.152.224.85 ( talk) 03:14, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
We've celebrated this day in our little nation for the least 800 years. Not even a mention of it on en-Wikipedia. Please add. Llywelyn2000 ( talk) 11:58, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Are there any decorative pictures of daffodils perhaps? 193.132.104.10 ( talk) 14:52, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, is there a reason the album cover for Master is not displayed? Rob van vee 16:28, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
The main page obviously has a feminist bias and needs to be fixed.
Generally, I am in favour of '(at least) occasional themed Main Pages' Jackiespeel ( talk) 16:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Is it my imagination or have there been quite a number of American coin TFAs over the past months? — AjaxSmack 01:24, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
New main page layout currently inflicted on logged in users only looks worse than the current one. Feels like change for change sake. Current one is far from perfect. Neither looks like a modern, responsive, rich experience like users have come to expect. Switching the headings to a serif font ... LOL ... made it worse. The fact is, web design by community consensus is doomed to fail. You'll need the foundation to impose something by fiat. Seriously, the mobile site looks better. -- 107.77.232.41 ( talk) 21:49, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
20:41, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
18:59, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Could I get an admin to change the picture shown in todays TFA (added without consultation) to the image that was proposed in the TFA blurb (:File:Sarcoscypha coccinea 74716.jpg). Thanks, Sasata ( talk) 16:28, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
That's completely unwarranted. I can't speak for anyone other than myself, but I don't think Sasata is suggesting that he has any kind of special authority.
That said, you did make use of your special authority in making a change (without offering any explanation, which could rub salt into the wound) using your admin powers.
Had you done this before the blurb appeared on the MP, it could have been discussed/reverted as appropriate, but because you did it while the image was on the MP, Sasata, who does not have admin powers, was left unable to change the image back- no matter how inappropriate the edit.
Did you not think, especially given that the image was not used in the article, that it may be inappropriate in some way?
Is this a first? (I also don't think it should be bulleted, but whatever) Nohomersryan ( talk) 16:45, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
For future reference, a discussion about this version of DYK. Bencherlite Talk 22:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Now there's another DYK correction. I really hope this doesn't become a regular thing. If it must happen again, I think the word "We" should be avoided, just as for an article. Instead, it would be better to say something like "It was previously reported, but...." and avoid first person. Jonathunder ( talk) 21:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Lee Sedol is not "one of the best Go players", he is the best Go player and I would add the information that this event is a milestone in the development of artificial intelligence. Greets from Germany -- 93.215.150.222 ( talk) 16:43, 16 March 2016 (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.
So this is the kind of language we're allowing in articles featured on the Main Page, now, are we? in both nuckelavee and Sea Mither. You fail, Wikipedia. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 07:20, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
I have started an RfC at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#RFC: Corrections on Main Page?. Fram ( talk) 10:47, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
What happened the 2015 redesign version of the main page? → The Pancake of Heaven! ( T • C • E) 13:16, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
14:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)April 1 is April Fools, and perhaps nobody does not know it. The main page's DYK section appears to be fooling the readers on John Cena and other things. Isn't it that we should know and apply the limits between where and when to make jokes and not? Ain't funny jokes on the Main Page please. 49.148.79.46 ( talk) 13:23, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
I agree. It's fine if the hooks are funny, but some of them are quite questionable!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The way I see it is that there were some funny hooks suggested however many people kept interfering with reviews that had already been passed. The Royal C ( talk) 15:24, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for stating the obvious i.e. that I'm entitled to my opinion.
There should be some interpretation of the hook under which it's a true statement, but it need not be the obvious one,
and it's even OK if it's a bit strained.
Nothing wrong with the original hook (for April Fools, anyway)
And David Levy's fussing below shows his misunderstanding of "legal nomenclature" (though that's not what this is) -- in in rem cases the object at issue is, itself, indeed "being sued"
I'm not a lawyer either, but I've been a technical consultant in scores of exactly this kind of case, and I know what I'm talking about.
The concern that readers might actually think that a dinosaur is expected to show up and argue in court, or retain an attorney to argue for him (or her, I guess), is absurd.
We were going to have ...that the United States sued a Tyrannosaurus for being an illegal immigrant?
But people kept popping their opinions in
and argued against the original hook which was based on the precedence of a hook that was similarly titled
and we ended up with something of lesser quality.
And even when I tried at a last minute to get a slightly better hook on there
it was removed for the same reason of people enforcing their opinions on it.
That was where the problem was on AFD this year, it was the Too Many Cooks analogy.
So do you think that around a week before AFD, when hooks have been held for months,
that it is helpful to have people expressing what they thought would be right, not based on WP policy but on personal opinions
and despite it being cleared and approved in accordance with the policies.
I'm also inclined to agree that this year was not handled well. The featured picture was good, the featured list seemed like a fun one (though I can't say I know or, dare I admit, care much about baseball) but much of DYK is/was puerile and the TFA blurb, as discussed above, was deceptive. Josh Milburn ( talk) 18:49, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
21:02, 1 April 2016 (UTC)-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
21:57, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Somewhere along the way, the goal of crafting hooks that are ambiguously worded but 100% true and fully compliant with out normal editorial standards (apart from the aforementioned ambiguity) seems to have been forgotten. Flat-out lies and all-caps exclamations (in Wikipedia's voice) are unacceptable, as is demanding that others participate in the April foolery if they wish to prevent a recurrence of this embarrassing nonsense next year. — David Levy 07:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
If we want people to take this product seriously, we have to stop trying to be funny once a year. There are too many really good comedians out there.-- Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 13:29, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
I must express my disappointment with this blurb, which presents a historical hoax as the truth. I regret ignoring its development (which I assumed would occur in accordance with the longstanding consensus that our April Fools' Day material should contain claims that are 100% factual despite seeming implausible, not the inverse) and accept responsibility for failing to speak up sooner.
It's especially unfortunate that we're making light of a situation that resulted in a large number of deaths.
The actual series of events is strange and interesting, making the article an ideal choice for the 1 April TFA. I'm baffled as to why it's been placed behind a layer of deception that downplays these qualities. — David Levy 00:07, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
I think it's worth noting that in my unreferenced opinion, we found it really difficult to find an appropriate article for April 1's TFA this year. For next year, I'd suggest we choose an appropriate article asap and work it up to FA in time, rather than scrabbling around for something in the last couple of months. I'd be happy to help with this. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 08:56, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
It is still too easy to believe the blurb. Many will not read the article, will only read the blurb, and will not realise that MacGregor was a confidence trickster. That should be put in the blurb, plus the fact that the 'Poyais' was a fiction. At the moment, the blurb was and still is violating WP:NPOV (I too should have realised this earlier and participated in the earlier discussion). Carcharoth ( talk) 12:53, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Just saw this, as I'm one of many people who watch TFA processes, but not everything on Main Page talk. I guess my first question is: does anyone believe that anything here in the current thread has relevance to any day of the year other than April 1? If TFA, and discussions about TFA, only fail one day a year, then I can think of some quick fixes that will have no negative effects on the process as a whole. If some bigger issues are looming here, I'd like to know about it. - Dank (
push to talk) 13:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The statement that "Many have tried to emulate the policies he initiated as leader of Poyais, but few have come close to matching his success" is completely true. If we agree that Gregor MacGregor's "policies" were those of a con man, many people have indeed tried to emulate them and not been able to match MacGregor's success, let alone his ability to get away with it even after he was caught, and end up being buried as a hero, with the President of his adopted country walking in his funeral. The sentence is more than a little facetious, but it's also absolutely true. Jsc1973 ( talk) 18:25, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
If we agree that Gregor MacGregor's "policies" were those of a con man
Okay, it's off the Main Page of course, and there's no reply so far to my question about whether there are indications of problems with TFA that go beyond April 1, which is a relief. My fellow TFA coords and I are largely agreed about what to do about April 1, so I'll move over to the discussion that's just getting started over at WT:TFAR to get more input from TFA participants. Brian has a specific proposal, I think. - Dank ( push to talk) 12:22, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Each year there are also a number of items appearing on the Main Page which generate much discussion on various grounds (not to be read while consuming drink of choice and biscuits, children etc). There are probably also 'a number' which are not to various readers' tastes on a range of grounds.
But - the Main Page changes so the problem goes.
The questions are - how can entries on the MP be presented in such a way that they puzzle and intrigue people enough to read the articles and how puzzling can the hooks be? Jackiespeel ( talk) 09:32, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Of this. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech/Server_switch_2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.204.222.200 ( talk • contribs) 05:27, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
So I saw in the "In The News" section that the Prime Minister of Iceland had resigned. I'm just curious as to why it was changed to "steps aside". Uvinno ( talk) 18:31, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Discussions like this belong at WP:ERRORS. The small group of editors and admins who look after Main Page will see it [faster]. -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 09:42, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
why sinhala new year not on the list("On this day")
"Planned Parenthood was conceived 100 years ago" really? Thanks for making my day.-- 131.156.156.255 ( talk) 14:14, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
The addition of an audio file to the Für Elise blurb for April 27 was a nice touch – thanks! Sca ( talk) 14:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Any chance of getting a link to Antidisestablishmentarianism in the Welsh bishop DYK? Greenshed ( talk) 21:57, 27 April 2016 (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 am surprised that the Main Page makes no mention of today's 90th birthday (21st April) of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, who is Head of State of sixteen Commonwealth countries. Clearly the 90th birthday of such an eminent person as Her Majesty deserves a mention, and I am completely perplexed as to why it is not mentioned. Ds1994 ( talk) 18:01, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm trying to figure out a concrete relationship between George II and Elizabeth II's birthday. Let's see... If there was a king named George, then the queen named Elizabeth must have a birthday in April. Eureka!-- Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 01:32, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I think the birthday was mentioned through 'the usual news channels' so people would have been aware of it anyway.
As a compromise - perhaps a 'UK royal related entry of some sort' on the MP for such dates - and getting the article up to standard for April 2026. Jackiespeel ( talk) 14:28, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I assume wishing other people long life (and other benefits) is within WP guidelines. Jackiespeel ( talk) 09:17, 24 April 2016 (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.
It wasn't taken from East-Prussia. It was an city ruled by the Leage of Nations and some other protectors before it became a part of Lithuania. Much like Danzig (Gdansk) it wasn't a part of the German Realm anymore after 1919. Gerard von Hebel ( talk) 00:44, 8 May 2016 (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.
Kindly remove the false "Nakba Day" propaganda. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:fd0b:ca00:9b5:2ee7:91f3:f3b9 ( talk) 19:15, 15 May 2016
I cant edit this home page. just wanted to let you know it cant be edited for some reason. maybe a serve glitch? - Prateek Kaushik. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prateek M. Kaushik ( talk • contribs) 20:44, May 15, 2016 (UTC)
Hello, EgyptAir flight 804 which missing today. 05:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC) CPAT ( talk)
-- Leon ( talk) 19:35, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Very interesting today, even the DYK which has been pretty weak lately, well done everyone. 106.68.196.157 ( talk) 06:20, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
23 May 2016 Syrian bombings, also this article should be improved upon.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Beejsterb ( talk • contribs)
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.
The main page is the first place people see when they come to Wikipedia. It should not have profanity. Please fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.176.197.226 ( talk • contribs)
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 don't have a particular opinion on the topic at hand, but I disagree with the closure of the discussion. While the item in question is indeed off the main page, and it is true the general topic of censorship on Wikipedia is best discussed elsewhere, a substantial portion of the discussion above was about "censorship" on the Main Page - particularly, if the Main Page should or should not have a different standard of "self-censorship"/"editorial judgement" than Wikipedia as a whole. Closure of the discussion strikes me as premature. As WP:CENSORMAIN and WP:NOTCENSORED apparently conflict (?) and there are a number of users in the thread that support CENSORMAIN (and those who apparently oppose it), it appears that there isn't a consensus on how "censorship"/"editorial judgement" should be treated on the Main Page. Closing the discussion at this point thus appears to have the effect of quashing whatever consensus building was being attempted. -- 160.129.138.186 ( talk) 17:07, 26 May 2016 (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.
Please immediately remove this statement (which is not even in the featured article, that says "a large group of whom were teenagers" and lacks a citation). This type of statement sounds like WWII revisionism that likes to portray Germans at the end of WWII as victims (in this case children forced to fight and die against vastly better equipped Western armies). Monopoly31121993 ( talk) 14:58, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
utilizing cadres from divisions disbanded on the eastern front and filled out with recruits conscripted in November 1943 (recruits born in 1926). Even in the US army, which had much stricter rules on underage recruitment and longer training periods before active service, the average age of a GI taking part in the Normandy landings was only 21. ‑ Iridescent 15:13, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Moved to WP:ERRORS. - Dank ( push to talk) 18:47, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
You are invited to comment on the RfC: Should the criteria for "recent deaths" listings on the "In the news" section of the main page be changed?. Thryduulf ( talk) 12:43, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
From today's (that's 8 June 2016) featured article Paul McCartney: "the top-selling band of all time." Since time hasn't yet come to an end, no one can know that. What is meant is "the top-selling band so far." 86.132.222.245 ( talk) 16:02, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
The Penguins won the Stanley Cup after the Orlando shooting; therefore its blurb should be above the Orlando shooting in the tradition NPOV way we've handled events that are newsworthy. Newest on the top, regardless of which is more "newsy" than the next... Please correct that. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 18:41, 13 June 2016 (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 feel given the impact and coverage of the story it would be more appropriate to have a picture of Jo Cox rather than Sidney Crosby, which has been up a few days and is for a story about to fall off the main page. yorkshiresky ( talk) 14:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Maybe it would be good to include that Cleveland won their first ever championship in the news item mentioning their win? 71.183.244.136 ( talk) 23:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Is it customary to promote an article on the front page twice in as many days? Mortara case was just the front page Featured Article yesterday. Now it is being promoted in OTD. Just wondering. - Ad Orientem ( talk) 03:02, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
The History page for this page starts with (that is, the most recent change listed is)
Oh, really? -- Thnidu ( talk) 00:45, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
The Mobile version of the Main Page is displaying the full version instead of the usual mobile version. Did someone break something?? - Samuel Wiki ( talk) 13:47, 24 June 2016 (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.
Hi everyone. I'm a basque wikipedian and I just saw on the panel "Wikipedia languages" that Basque Wikipedia (Euskara) is listed on the "More than 50,000 articles" section. I'm congratulated to tell you that yesterday Basque Wikipedia completed its 250.000 article so I think it should be now on the "More than 250,000 articles" section. Thanks. Euskaldunaa ( talk) 11:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
On the Main Page's leftmost side, between "Print/export" and "Languages", it has an "In other projects" section listing almost all of Wikipedia's sister projects, except for MediaWiki and Wiktionary. (However, those two are included at the bottom of the Main Page under "Wikipedia's sister projects", with all the others.)
I think I understand why MediaWiki is not listed on the left panel's "In other projects", but why is Wiktionary not listed there, even though it also has a " Main Page"?
Just curious, I'm not really suggesting any changes. Thank you:) Zeniff ( talk) 07:56, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
10:55, 24 June 2016 (UTC)At the moment, the DYK queues (the sets prepared to go to the Main Page, which are automatically put on the Mai nPage by a bot) are fully protected. This was done years ago, since with only semi-protection it was way too easy for a vandal to vandalize the main page by timing an edit to the queues just right.
We have on the one hand a shortage of admins willing to fill the queues, and on the other hand a relatively new protection level called Template Protection. This is still a very restricted level (not many editors have it), but it is open to experienced, trusted non-admins and will be hard to reach for vandals. As the queues are template pages, the proposal has been discussed (a little bit) at WT:DYK to lower the protection of the queues to Template Editor level. This proposal is for Template:Did you know/Queue/1 to Template:Did you know/Queue/6, but explicitly not for Template:Did you know, which must stay at admin-only level. ~The template editor right would then be granted (through normal processes) to a handful of DYK regulars.
Can everybody live with this, or is a formal RfC needed? Fram ( talk) 06:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Please feature the news about the death of Italian actor Carlo Pedersoli (Bud Spencer) on the main page. He was an extremely popular actor in many countries throughout Europe (Italy, Germany, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, etc.) It's just disturbing that a person who had created so many cult movies, does not even get a one line notice on the Main Page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.107.64.22 ( talk • contribs) 08:37, 28 June 2016
Pedersoli/Spencer also an Olympic athlete Billbambam ( talk) 18:20, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Time for our yearly discussion :) Before november, on our current main page's 10th birthday, or at least before the year is out, I would like to introduce the new Main Page ( talk). There have been many discussions, but no concrete plans as of yet. So I plan to take action myself. While I am not that good at organizing discussions or RfCs, I do want input, so I am asking the community for a consult.
I will say this upfront: There will be a new Main Page this year. There can no longer be a question if the Main Page needs to be renewed; past RfC have made that clear. I have looked at them and tried to best implement their outcome. I have repeatedly asked for improvements, and while I have had some valuable input, most discussion revolved around process instead. So I will have none of that.
So this is the final round. There is no "if", only "how". There is no process, only progress. This is your final change to vent your ideas. I will try to work them in as best I can. Some pointers though: Forget process, forget the old page; Wikilawyering and comparing old stuff are the surest ways to grind any progress to a halt, so I will basically ignore such. The Main Page is basically just the same as an article, which happens to be a lot more visible. I can understand any restraint for change, but also know that the current page design is becomeing a laughing stock fo web designers.
In light of this, I invite anyone to step up as moderator. I would like to discuss on the new page's
talk page, or on
Draft talk:Main Page for that matter. You can read the background for the new design there, and adress any specifics that come to mind. I also propose to add a permanent link the discussion page, so it does not die out again. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
20:13, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
19:07, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
19:38, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
20:19, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Please, someone tell me what to do to make ANY progress at all! I have tried everything! What else can I do? Yet another RFC? What good is that? We've had them, but no one is acting on them. Reading through all the replies, it is clear to me no one wants change whatsoever. Process is only abused to stall, and no one seems willing to even participate. So here it is: I WANT ACTION!. Whatever it is! If there is no genuine step forward to change anything, I will delete the whole proposal and let the main page rot in HTML hell where it will remain the laughing stock of the web until the end of time. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
10:59, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
15:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
WANT ACTION!as much as you like, but just because you want something doesn't anyone else does; all you're going to get if you edit-war to try to unilaterally change Wikipedia's most-viewed page without anything remotely approaching a consensus (and the only way you'll see it live for more than a couple of minutes will be by persistent editwarring, since any change you make unilaterally will be immediately reverted) is at best a desysopping, and at worst a community ban. Has it genuinely not occurred to you that there's a reason you've been unable to gain any significant support for your proposal and are having to resort to threats and bluster? ‑ Iridescent 15:33, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
The claim "There have been many discussions, but no concrete plans as of yet" appears to be factually incorrect. I have had a concrete plan at User:Guy Macon/Simple Main Page since 2013. What I lack is any way to get anyone who has the power to change the main page to consider it. I could get a thousand or so signatures on a petition to get it considered, but I have no confidence that that the result would reach anyone who has the power to change the main page.
I have also proposed that we replace the current main page with User:Guy Macon/Simple Main Page for 1% (randomly chosen) of our visitors for a week, followed by 10% of our visitors for a week if there are no obvious problems. The statistics on that would give us a solid answer to the question "does all of this DYK, OTD, etc. material really need to clutter the main page, or would having it as subpages linked from the main page work just as well?" -- Guy Macon ( talk) 10:57, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
15:39, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
15:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)This weekend, I will be moving the page to
Draft:Main Page and adapt the gadget. I'm also thinking about putting up a message on top of this talk page to alert people to its existence, and propose a link on
WP:CENT. -- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
16:01, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm just noting here that Wikipedia:2016 main page redesign proposal exists. It currently has one draft subpage that could possibly be considered in regards to this proposal ( Wikipedia:2016 main page redesign proposal/draft/JKDw.) Steel1943 ( talk) 05:53, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
10:59, 4 July 2016 (UTC)