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 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
I was wondering when the English wikipedia will be converted to Unicode.
The major wikipedias in Japanese, German, French, Spanish, Chinese... are all encoded in UTF-8. I use the German wikipedia very often and the Japanese one occasionally and the Unicode encoding works very well, I've never detected a problem with it. Internet Explorer, Opera and Mozilla have complete Unicode support as well as all major operating systems and applications. So why is the English wikipedia still in ISO-8859-1?! Wikipedia is (in my opinion) the nicest multilingual environment on the internet. And UTF-8 is the future for multilingual text processing... so why don't we go ahead and do the conversion like the French wikipedia did. I don't know if there are still other wikipedias that use ISO-8859-1, but in the long run, using UTF-8 everywhere should be the way to go. This way, wikipedia would definitely be the largest seamless Unicode project on the web! Wouldn't that be cool? ;-)
Ben
The following organizational paradigm:
Featured article | In the news ---------------- | ------------- Anniversaries | Did you know?
has been used for a while, and I dont' really have a problem with it, but it seems slightly wrong. Featured Article and Did you know both introduce the reader to interesting info in Wikipedia. In the news and Anniversaries give the reader a little contact with the "real world". Should Anniversaries and Did you know be switched, to reflect these similarties, that is use this scheme:
Featured article | In the news ---------------- | ------------- Did you know? | Anniversaries
Just a thought — siro χ o 22:42, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
Makes enough sense to me, leave it how it is (: — siro χ o
Can someone explain me why the number of dead for the September 11 are shown on the mainpage while these of the Chile Coup and the Pinochet Regime are not ? Are dead Chileans not as much worth mentioning as dead US-citizens ? And why is the crucial information concerning the CIA missing ?
1973 - A military coup in Chile headed by General Augusto Pinochet and heavily supported by the CIA toppled the elected Socialist government of President Salvador Allende. During the Pinochet regime over 3000 people were killed or disappeared and many more were subject to torture.
I would be pleased if someone could exchange the current version with the one I have written.
Why is the nationality of the victims important?. Were all the victims of terrorist attacks killed on Sept. 11?. I think not. :)
Sept. 11, 1973 was a tragedy. Democracy was challenged by authoritarism and a policy of terror replaced it. What's more important... it was a "democratic" country who backed the coup (U.S). about 3000 were killed and tortured because of it. That is worth remembering.
I just looked at an archived version of the front page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&oldid=3076580) Any change that the months with featured articles could be listed as before?
I changed the wording on the front page back to 'free content' (which it used to say a long time ago) in response to an email from Richard Stallman about the issue. I would appreciate it if it could stay this way during a period of discussion about it, and if we must change it back, we can do so only after we really understand why. I feel pretty sure that there must have been some big huge discussion about this back when the change was made, but I'm currently unaware of the parameters of that discussion.
My position is pretty simple. "open content" makes even less sense than "open source" as a term, because with source code it is possible to publish a binary executable without publishing the code. With content, it's always open in that sense.
Additionally, while I think Stallman is right about the use of the word "free," I also think it's worth noting that most people don't care much about it, and most of those who do would prefer "free" to "open". I am open to contrary evidence on this.
Finally, there was recently a comment on the mailing list, a comment I referred to as "trollish," saying that we are not clear on what we mean by "free." I think that's silly, we are clear on what we mean by it, and our commitment to it has never wavered. Therefore, the softer term "open content" (which is prone to misunderstanding due to there being several non-free 'open content' licenses out there) should be avoided.
Jimbo Wales 16:14, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
A user, 2:13 AM, 11 October 2004
I love the way the language section looks now. It's much more intuitive and easy to see now that the font has changed to reflect the number of articles. This way the most popular ones will be seen first and so visitors will be catered to faster.
Very nice improvement overall. Though I think it could be better if the drop shadows were more pronounced under buttons, to the right and in other such places. -- Exigentsky
I want to thank Wikipedia's leadership for its broad and authoritative spectrum. Indeed, it has a considerable database, and is beyond most encyclopaedias I personally know such as Encarta. I used for long time Encarta, and when I discovered Wikipedia, I just stopped using Encarta, which, in my view, is quite poor, in comparison with Wikipedia.
Moreover, I like the fact that Wikipedia is a free encyclopaedia, and that it is open for everyone, such as a forum for discussions. I mean that it is trying to give an objective point of view, although this may not be always the case in particular articles, in my point of view. However, the fact that it is so much open and free is a breeze of fresh air, when we compare to Encarta. That is indeed the basis of a healthy society, and a vibrant democracy.
Therefore, I want to express my support for those who are in charge of Wikipedia, and hope that it will become even bigger, and even more dynamic.
I object to the currently chosen featured article. We do not permit references to genitalia in usernames, so why should this be permissible on the main page? --[[User:Eequor| η υωρ]] 05:12, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It's peculiar that I'm told to grow up when I haven't resorted to personal attacks to support my argument. --[[User:Eequor| η υωρ]] 06:58, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
While I do not find this article offensive personally, I have some reservations about feauring it on main page (and, by the way, the external links are frankly dreadful). What I do find offensive is the reaction of Eloquence and of Raul654 to any suggestion of an opinion not in accord with their own. In the context of an encyclopaedia, one might have hoped for a little more enlightenment. Filiocht 10:08, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
This is plainly ridiculous - Puritanical, even; I find all religion an offense to rationality and humanity, but that doesn't mean I uselessly whine when such topics are covered.
James F.
(talk)
I don't understand what is so offensive? Would those people who are offended please take a moment to explain what they find offensive about having this article on the main page? Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 10:42, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
To all of you are complaining, please note that future featured articles are listed on Wikipedia:Tomorrow's featured article, list your objections there, otherwise don't be surprised if something "objectionable" appears on the Main Page. Remember, just because something is objectionable dosen't mean you can't write a good article about it. Norm 12:20, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I won't comment on whether or not the article is too offensive for the main page -- I wasn't offended (as a Christian) by the article, and we had plenty of people from all backgrounds agree on the article when it was nominated for featured. I didn't envision at the time that it would hit the main page, but I personally have no issue with it. The article isn't particularly graphic (nor does it bear an image of the relic), so I can't say the disgust factor seems high to me, but that's pretty subjective. Anyhow, I have no idea why people are claiming the article is badly referenced -- there are two print references cited. Filiocht, have you consulted them and found them unsatisfactory? The article was put together largely by Ihcoyc, as I recall -- he's one of the most thorough, careful writers we have on religious topics, and I'd bet good money he used both references for most of the details of the work. I see no reason to doubt him. If we're going to demand that people only use sources we can all read for free on the web, I don't think we're adding much to the world, which is the point of Wikipedia, I do hope. That's my USD $0.02 -- Jwrosenzweig 23:20, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I found the Coca-Cola as a featured article a bit offensive, but I'm not sure why the Holy Prepuce as a featured article would be considered offensive. (I haven't read the articles themselves, only seen them on the main page.) Κσυπ Cyp 22:16, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC) — *lol* dab
Ivan is currently a Category 4 hurricane, per the 1 PM CDT (0600Z) National Hurricane Center advisory. Advisories are released roughly every 3 hours at 0600Z, 0900Z, 1200Z, etc. for main page editors. Link is here: http://www.nhc.noaa.gov. -- -Rob 18:42, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Can you guys add a section to the main page designed to help new users get started with their contributions? — Wikipedia Administrator 19:06, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Okay but can someone please help the whole "namespace" thing is confusing me! Wikipedia Administrator 19:14, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Talk to me about my user name on my talk page. I just want to know about the “NAMESPACE” thingy! Wikipedia Administrator 19:20, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
What's wrong with a username called "administrator"? Wikipedia Administrator 19:20, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hey the time is wrong, I only have 3:48 (that's 15:48) on my Mac, but this server has 19:48, that's 7:48 PM! And still no one's used my talk page to explain the whole user name thing. Wikipedia Administrator 19:49, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The second sentence of today's featured article Lawrence v. Texas says "the justices invalidated the criminal prohibition of homosexual sodomy in Texas". The prohibition wasn't criminal, was it? I'd Be Bold and put it to the test by removing the word "criminal", but as it's featured article today I thought I'd ask here first. Thoughts anyone? Moriori 00:29, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
Ok, wikipedia is possibly the coolest thing ever made, but the "search" box needs a major revamp.
Lessons from Interfaces 101:
Given the importance of the search capability I'm surprised that it has such a poor interface.-- Jawed
Please can we end all this 'dispute' tagging of articles, it's a vile one liner that just ruins Wikipedia. Can we not just sort these articles out - decide one way or another - then either delete or keep?
SimonMayer 19:21, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Why isn't the Paralympic games article mentioned on the main page... 2004_Summer_Paralympics and I quote "The Paralympic Summer Games are the second-largest sporting event in the world, after the Summer Olympic games". If this is true, it would pretty low to have a high amount of publicity for the 2004_Olympic_Games and not for the Paralympics... wouldn't that just be discrimination to those who are physically disabled... would it or wouldn't it ? squash 08:19, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)
Any chance there could be a space below that box? The tops of pages look squeezed. Rick K 00:20, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
Just thought I'd mention that Holy Prepuce has 23,000 page views this month, which makes it our 7th most popular article (after Hurricane_Ivan_(2004), Goatse, Sexual_slang, Goatse.cx, OS-tan, and Jennifer_Hawkins). That's almost 5x as many page views as featured articles normally get. So I guess some people must have found it interesting. →Raul654 08:11, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
I wonder what % of the day's vandalism does the featured article suffer? Filiocht 14:00, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I want to download this website template...where do I get it?
Search needs to be better and faster
Nice. where do i get translation?
Firefox dosnt work for wikis for some reason
shuaibao, editor
<style type="text/css" media="screen,projection">/* <![CDATA[*/@import"/style/monobook/main.css"; /*]]>*/</style> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="print" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/style/commonPrint.css"/>
A reporter and a librarian have written back to me to say "I went to wikipedia's site but couldn't find any ref to the press release!" and of course they're right. Added a banner, perhaps just for the next two days as initial word gets out. +sj + 18:18, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Will someone please modify the red background on the "1 million pages" announcement? It is a violent shade of red that is jangling my nerves.
Does anyone actually know what the one millionth article was? -- ScottyBoy900Q ∞ 23:04, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
On the Main Page, "visit our Community Portal " starts up the edit page. Ancheta Wis 23:59, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC) One clue is the color of the link. It looks orange, where the other links are blue. or purple.
What's wrong with that? it shouldn't behavor that way. -- Yacht (talk) 04:22, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)
There are regular complaints about low article ranks or slow updating of Google and other search engines. I've added a test section to the bottom of the page which may assist. It covers several issues:
Only time - probably several months - will give us sufficient feedback to know whether this is helping to solve the problem or not. Please feel free to adjust the cosmetics of it on this page.:) However, if you want to change the template itself, please create a new template. The one in use for the test was created for user pages and should not be modified for main page. Jamesday 10:28, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Google pays a lot of attention to the <alt> attributes on images.
Kevin Baas |
talk 16:12, 2004 Sep 21 (UTC)
Where is this? I can't find a link. -- user:zanimum
for the fundraising banner that appears at the top of every page i think it is wise to state that we wish to raise "US$50000" instead of the more ambiguous "$" - Krithin 11:27, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Wikimedia Fundrasing Drive. Help us raise $50,000 (U.S). See our fundraising page for details.
Is the Wikimedia foundation going to give a PC and Internet connection to everyone in the world that hasn't got one? Will $50,000 cover it? Asking for help is one thing, using drivel like this to do it is another entirely.
Filiocht 14:37, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I went to the link and found the silly disclaimer that the solicitation for donations is not a solicitation for donations. Good grief! ;Bear 19:06, 2004 Sep 21 (UTC)
I'm using IE-6.0 and I see a strange box just above the disclaimers with overlapping text/numbers? What's that?? Awolf002 20:52, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
display: none
Goplat 03:07, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Please tell me the full version of IE you're using - I'm interested in knowing which ones are actually respecting the 10% font size setting. Neither my version of IE6 nor my version of Firefox does. I've raised the percentage to something which might be readable but still small. Jamesday 09:45, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I suggest you create a special Template:Googlebait for this. Then, you would not need to include quite so many links. Also, Google is very dismissive about urls with lots of CGI-options (along the lines of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Newpages&limit=500&offset=500 ). So, in the interest of both the intended impact and the reduction of traffic, there should be redirects with shorter urls, for example Special:New_500 replacing the above. As it is now, the approach is excluded alone by the expected traffic of 5G/month it will generate (see above) dab 11:15, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It says "this is an example". Not sure why it says that but it could be taken as offensive, for example -- the terrorists made him an example. Remember that in some browsers the alt text comes up if you hover the mouse over the image.
It should just say "Picture of Eugene Armstrong, from CNN.com"
Can someone please fix this in respect for the deceased -- Main page not editable by Joe average user. Thanks.
Please change the color of that bar. When I see the orange, my first thought is 'Oh! I have messages' which is obviously not true.
#lightgray
, with the border being #darkgray
. This is invalid HTML and displays wrong on some browsers. (The # is for hex colors only, not named)
Goplat 17:06, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)Now with no background, it's very easy to miss.
In general, the Welcome, 1 mil link and tiny links on the right (FAQ, Sister Projects...) should be contained in some kind of light box simmilar to the sections below for a more clear organization. As it stands now, in additon to Browse... links, it looks much too cluttered.
In the Northern Hemisphere autumn begins on Sept. 22 at 6:23 P.M. EDT. There's no mention of this on the Main Page. It seems to me that even in a wired world we are not immune, nor should we be, from the changing of the seasons.
I put it in Selected anniversaries. Let's see if it survives. ✏ Sverdrup 18:45, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It might just be the way I say it, but isn't 'squi-rreled' two syllables? -- uvarov 05:56, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
Please see Talk:List of the longest English words with one syllable for a longer discussion. -- Heron 09:09, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hello,
As an editor for the French Wiki, I'm wondering on two links in our Voltaire page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaire
The two last links refer to mirror sites, which have little relation to Voltaire.
The problem is the title of the last link : H. Duthel: «Allez-y, dites-moi que je suis un vieux con !» Oui? alors vous-etes de connard"
I think I should not translate this piece, because it's very insulting : "C'mon. Tell me I'm an old bastard ! Yes ? Then you're an a..-hole".
I don't want to edit this piece as I'm not too sure of the reasons why it's here. The other links are perfect !
Cheers
Power.
Hi: Thanks for this. I've removed these links as they are fairly clearly inappropriate for the article. Filiocht 13:50, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thanks Filiocht ! Power
The diagram on today's (sept 24) main page has been created wrongly.
It has a bit snipped off from the right which makes it "senseless".
I cannot fix it as I don't have a PNG editor to hand.
-- SGBailey 2004-09-24 14:52 BST
Thank you for notifying us about it; I just downloaded the png generated in the article and uploaded it to fix it. ✏ Sverdrup 17:50, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) PS. Wikipedians do the nifty timestamp trick by signing their posts with ~~~~.
Some searches seem to fail, and reveal no results, even though the articles that I search for exist. Do you have to add something to the page so that the page appears when performing a search? Or is this maybe something that just happens when the page is new? -- Logariasmo 02:18, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
If you're using the Google search, then, yes, new items won't show up, because Google hasn't caught on to the new page yet. Rick K 19:09, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)
I have noticed that many articles that aren't visited often tend to have more inconsistencies and inaccurate information than the articles that are visited more often. What can be done about it?
Please feel free to comment on this issue. -- Logariasmo 06:33, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Per the Manual of Style, shouldn't this be formatted as " Yesterday" rather than Yesterday? 13:15, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
... . . .
Since the main page is locked down, could someone with rights change the link to the Polish wikipedia from "Polska" (i.e. the country) to "Polski" (the language), since we're talking about languages.
As the only way to goto a page you want is to search, I feel position of "search" should be the first one after wikipedia Logo (ie, just above "Navigation") on wikipedia articles like
search .-------------------. | [ ] | | [Go] [Search] | `-------------------' navigation .-------------------. |* Main Page | |* Community portal | |* Current events | |* Recent changes | |* Random page | |* Help | |* Donations | `-------------------'
~Bijee
I concur. That looks like a problem for Monobook.css, though. —
El Chico!
Talk 01:25, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I believe that it would be better to have the Portuguese form of his name (João Rodrigues Cabrilho) instead of the current Spanish version (Selected anniversaries Sept 18). He was after all Portuguese, even if he did sail for the Spanish.[[User:Nricardo|-- Nelson Ricardo >>Talk<<]] 00:07, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
Which version is he known by to English speakers? We say John Cabot, not Giovanni Caboto. Rick K 18:34, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
Hmm. Interesting point. But a mistaken majority is not right. (Besides, most English speakers probably have little idea who he is).[[User:Nricardo|-- Nelson Ricardo >>Talk<<]] 20:57, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
It has nothing to do with "right" or "wrong", and all to do with usage. Wikipedia policy is to use the name a person is best known by to English speakers. Rick K 21:17, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
OK, makes sense. Then "Richard Alpert" should redirect to "Ram Dass" instead of the other way around, eh? (Got a couple of good photos of him this past weekend, BTW) ;Bear 23:14, 2004 Sep 28 (UTC)
I've always heard Salem, NJ, not MA, but as the talk page on tomato points out, there are conflicting versions on the Internet. So what makes a good source? This really points out the unreliability of the Internet. Spalding 17:01, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
I was wondering if it's possible to include a pronunciation in brackets of the article title. Just now I came across Hythe, Kent and I have no idea how Hythe is pronounced. I think it would be helpful in situations where the pronunciation is not so obvious. For example, Gloucester I had always thought was (glau-ses-ter) but later I found out it's more like (glos-ter).
Dawn Fairchild anounces the annul staff orgy is on May 1st
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 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
I was wondering when the English wikipedia will be converted to Unicode.
The major wikipedias in Japanese, German, French, Spanish, Chinese... are all encoded in UTF-8. I use the German wikipedia very often and the Japanese one occasionally and the Unicode encoding works very well, I've never detected a problem with it. Internet Explorer, Opera and Mozilla have complete Unicode support as well as all major operating systems and applications. So why is the English wikipedia still in ISO-8859-1?! Wikipedia is (in my opinion) the nicest multilingual environment on the internet. And UTF-8 is the future for multilingual text processing... so why don't we go ahead and do the conversion like the French wikipedia did. I don't know if there are still other wikipedias that use ISO-8859-1, but in the long run, using UTF-8 everywhere should be the way to go. This way, wikipedia would definitely be the largest seamless Unicode project on the web! Wouldn't that be cool? ;-)
Ben
The following organizational paradigm:
Featured article | In the news ---------------- | ------------- Anniversaries | Did you know?
has been used for a while, and I dont' really have a problem with it, but it seems slightly wrong. Featured Article and Did you know both introduce the reader to interesting info in Wikipedia. In the news and Anniversaries give the reader a little contact with the "real world". Should Anniversaries and Did you know be switched, to reflect these similarties, that is use this scheme:
Featured article | In the news ---------------- | ------------- Did you know? | Anniversaries
Just a thought — siro χ o 22:42, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
Makes enough sense to me, leave it how it is (: — siro χ o
Can someone explain me why the number of dead for the September 11 are shown on the mainpage while these of the Chile Coup and the Pinochet Regime are not ? Are dead Chileans not as much worth mentioning as dead US-citizens ? And why is the crucial information concerning the CIA missing ?
1973 - A military coup in Chile headed by General Augusto Pinochet and heavily supported by the CIA toppled the elected Socialist government of President Salvador Allende. During the Pinochet regime over 3000 people were killed or disappeared and many more were subject to torture.
I would be pleased if someone could exchange the current version with the one I have written.
Why is the nationality of the victims important?. Were all the victims of terrorist attacks killed on Sept. 11?. I think not. :)
Sept. 11, 1973 was a tragedy. Democracy was challenged by authoritarism and a policy of terror replaced it. What's more important... it was a "democratic" country who backed the coup (U.S). about 3000 were killed and tortured because of it. That is worth remembering.
I just looked at an archived version of the front page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&oldid=3076580) Any change that the months with featured articles could be listed as before?
I changed the wording on the front page back to 'free content' (which it used to say a long time ago) in response to an email from Richard Stallman about the issue. I would appreciate it if it could stay this way during a period of discussion about it, and if we must change it back, we can do so only after we really understand why. I feel pretty sure that there must have been some big huge discussion about this back when the change was made, but I'm currently unaware of the parameters of that discussion.
My position is pretty simple. "open content" makes even less sense than "open source" as a term, because with source code it is possible to publish a binary executable without publishing the code. With content, it's always open in that sense.
Additionally, while I think Stallman is right about the use of the word "free," I also think it's worth noting that most people don't care much about it, and most of those who do would prefer "free" to "open". I am open to contrary evidence on this.
Finally, there was recently a comment on the mailing list, a comment I referred to as "trollish," saying that we are not clear on what we mean by "free." I think that's silly, we are clear on what we mean by it, and our commitment to it has never wavered. Therefore, the softer term "open content" (which is prone to misunderstanding due to there being several non-free 'open content' licenses out there) should be avoided.
Jimbo Wales 16:14, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
A user, 2:13 AM, 11 October 2004
I love the way the language section looks now. It's much more intuitive and easy to see now that the font has changed to reflect the number of articles. This way the most popular ones will be seen first and so visitors will be catered to faster.
Very nice improvement overall. Though I think it could be better if the drop shadows were more pronounced under buttons, to the right and in other such places. -- Exigentsky
I want to thank Wikipedia's leadership for its broad and authoritative spectrum. Indeed, it has a considerable database, and is beyond most encyclopaedias I personally know such as Encarta. I used for long time Encarta, and when I discovered Wikipedia, I just stopped using Encarta, which, in my view, is quite poor, in comparison with Wikipedia.
Moreover, I like the fact that Wikipedia is a free encyclopaedia, and that it is open for everyone, such as a forum for discussions. I mean that it is trying to give an objective point of view, although this may not be always the case in particular articles, in my point of view. However, the fact that it is so much open and free is a breeze of fresh air, when we compare to Encarta. That is indeed the basis of a healthy society, and a vibrant democracy.
Therefore, I want to express my support for those who are in charge of Wikipedia, and hope that it will become even bigger, and even more dynamic.
I object to the currently chosen featured article. We do not permit references to genitalia in usernames, so why should this be permissible on the main page? --[[User:Eequor| η υωρ]] 05:12, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It's peculiar that I'm told to grow up when I haven't resorted to personal attacks to support my argument. --[[User:Eequor| η υωρ]] 06:58, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
While I do not find this article offensive personally, I have some reservations about feauring it on main page (and, by the way, the external links are frankly dreadful). What I do find offensive is the reaction of Eloquence and of Raul654 to any suggestion of an opinion not in accord with their own. In the context of an encyclopaedia, one might have hoped for a little more enlightenment. Filiocht 10:08, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
This is plainly ridiculous - Puritanical, even; I find all religion an offense to rationality and humanity, but that doesn't mean I uselessly whine when such topics are covered.
James F.
(talk)
I don't understand what is so offensive? Would those people who are offended please take a moment to explain what they find offensive about having this article on the main page? Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 10:42, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
To all of you are complaining, please note that future featured articles are listed on Wikipedia:Tomorrow's featured article, list your objections there, otherwise don't be surprised if something "objectionable" appears on the Main Page. Remember, just because something is objectionable dosen't mean you can't write a good article about it. Norm 12:20, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I won't comment on whether or not the article is too offensive for the main page -- I wasn't offended (as a Christian) by the article, and we had plenty of people from all backgrounds agree on the article when it was nominated for featured. I didn't envision at the time that it would hit the main page, but I personally have no issue with it. The article isn't particularly graphic (nor does it bear an image of the relic), so I can't say the disgust factor seems high to me, but that's pretty subjective. Anyhow, I have no idea why people are claiming the article is badly referenced -- there are two print references cited. Filiocht, have you consulted them and found them unsatisfactory? The article was put together largely by Ihcoyc, as I recall -- he's one of the most thorough, careful writers we have on religious topics, and I'd bet good money he used both references for most of the details of the work. I see no reason to doubt him. If we're going to demand that people only use sources we can all read for free on the web, I don't think we're adding much to the world, which is the point of Wikipedia, I do hope. That's my USD $0.02 -- Jwrosenzweig 23:20, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I found the Coca-Cola as a featured article a bit offensive, but I'm not sure why the Holy Prepuce as a featured article would be considered offensive. (I haven't read the articles themselves, only seen them on the main page.) Κσυπ Cyp 22:16, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC) — *lol* dab
Ivan is currently a Category 4 hurricane, per the 1 PM CDT (0600Z) National Hurricane Center advisory. Advisories are released roughly every 3 hours at 0600Z, 0900Z, 1200Z, etc. for main page editors. Link is here: http://www.nhc.noaa.gov. -- -Rob 18:42, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Can you guys add a section to the main page designed to help new users get started with their contributions? — Wikipedia Administrator 19:06, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Okay but can someone please help the whole "namespace" thing is confusing me! Wikipedia Administrator 19:14, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Talk to me about my user name on my talk page. I just want to know about the “NAMESPACE” thingy! Wikipedia Administrator 19:20, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
What's wrong with a username called "administrator"? Wikipedia Administrator 19:20, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hey the time is wrong, I only have 3:48 (that's 15:48) on my Mac, but this server has 19:48, that's 7:48 PM! And still no one's used my talk page to explain the whole user name thing. Wikipedia Administrator 19:49, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The second sentence of today's featured article Lawrence v. Texas says "the justices invalidated the criminal prohibition of homosexual sodomy in Texas". The prohibition wasn't criminal, was it? I'd Be Bold and put it to the test by removing the word "criminal", but as it's featured article today I thought I'd ask here first. Thoughts anyone? Moriori 00:29, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
Ok, wikipedia is possibly the coolest thing ever made, but the "search" box needs a major revamp.
Lessons from Interfaces 101:
Given the importance of the search capability I'm surprised that it has such a poor interface.-- Jawed
Please can we end all this 'dispute' tagging of articles, it's a vile one liner that just ruins Wikipedia. Can we not just sort these articles out - decide one way or another - then either delete or keep?
SimonMayer 19:21, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Why isn't the Paralympic games article mentioned on the main page... 2004_Summer_Paralympics and I quote "The Paralympic Summer Games are the second-largest sporting event in the world, after the Summer Olympic games". If this is true, it would pretty low to have a high amount of publicity for the 2004_Olympic_Games and not for the Paralympics... wouldn't that just be discrimination to those who are physically disabled... would it or wouldn't it ? squash 08:19, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)
Any chance there could be a space below that box? The tops of pages look squeezed. Rick K 00:20, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
Just thought I'd mention that Holy Prepuce has 23,000 page views this month, which makes it our 7th most popular article (after Hurricane_Ivan_(2004), Goatse, Sexual_slang, Goatse.cx, OS-tan, and Jennifer_Hawkins). That's almost 5x as many page views as featured articles normally get. So I guess some people must have found it interesting. →Raul654 08:11, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
I wonder what % of the day's vandalism does the featured article suffer? Filiocht 14:00, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I want to download this website template...where do I get it?
Search needs to be better and faster
Nice. where do i get translation?
Firefox dosnt work for wikis for some reason
shuaibao, editor
<style type="text/css" media="screen,projection">/* <![CDATA[*/@import"/style/monobook/main.css"; /*]]>*/</style> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="print" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/style/commonPrint.css"/>
A reporter and a librarian have written back to me to say "I went to wikipedia's site but couldn't find any ref to the press release!" and of course they're right. Added a banner, perhaps just for the next two days as initial word gets out. +sj + 18:18, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Will someone please modify the red background on the "1 million pages" announcement? It is a violent shade of red that is jangling my nerves.
Does anyone actually know what the one millionth article was? -- ScottyBoy900Q ∞ 23:04, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
On the Main Page, "visit our Community Portal " starts up the edit page. Ancheta Wis 23:59, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC) One clue is the color of the link. It looks orange, where the other links are blue. or purple.
What's wrong with that? it shouldn't behavor that way. -- Yacht (talk) 04:22, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)
There are regular complaints about low article ranks or slow updating of Google and other search engines. I've added a test section to the bottom of the page which may assist. It covers several issues:
Only time - probably several months - will give us sufficient feedback to know whether this is helping to solve the problem or not. Please feel free to adjust the cosmetics of it on this page.:) However, if you want to change the template itself, please create a new template. The one in use for the test was created for user pages and should not be modified for main page. Jamesday 10:28, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Google pays a lot of attention to the <alt> attributes on images.
Kevin Baas |
talk 16:12, 2004 Sep 21 (UTC)
Where is this? I can't find a link. -- user:zanimum
for the fundraising banner that appears at the top of every page i think it is wise to state that we wish to raise "US$50000" instead of the more ambiguous "$" - Krithin 11:27, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Wikimedia Fundrasing Drive. Help us raise $50,000 (U.S). See our fundraising page for details.
Is the Wikimedia foundation going to give a PC and Internet connection to everyone in the world that hasn't got one? Will $50,000 cover it? Asking for help is one thing, using drivel like this to do it is another entirely.
Filiocht 14:37, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I went to the link and found the silly disclaimer that the solicitation for donations is not a solicitation for donations. Good grief! ;Bear 19:06, 2004 Sep 21 (UTC)
I'm using IE-6.0 and I see a strange box just above the disclaimers with overlapping text/numbers? What's that?? Awolf002 20:52, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
display: none
Goplat 03:07, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Please tell me the full version of IE you're using - I'm interested in knowing which ones are actually respecting the 10% font size setting. Neither my version of IE6 nor my version of Firefox does. I've raised the percentage to something which might be readable but still small. Jamesday 09:45, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I suggest you create a special Template:Googlebait for this. Then, you would not need to include quite so many links. Also, Google is very dismissive about urls with lots of CGI-options (along the lines of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Newpages&limit=500&offset=500 ). So, in the interest of both the intended impact and the reduction of traffic, there should be redirects with shorter urls, for example Special:New_500 replacing the above. As it is now, the approach is excluded alone by the expected traffic of 5G/month it will generate (see above) dab 11:15, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It says "this is an example". Not sure why it says that but it could be taken as offensive, for example -- the terrorists made him an example. Remember that in some browsers the alt text comes up if you hover the mouse over the image.
It should just say "Picture of Eugene Armstrong, from CNN.com"
Can someone please fix this in respect for the deceased -- Main page not editable by Joe average user. Thanks.
Please change the color of that bar. When I see the orange, my first thought is 'Oh! I have messages' which is obviously not true.
#lightgray
, with the border being #darkgray
. This is invalid HTML and displays wrong on some browsers. (The # is for hex colors only, not named)
Goplat 17:06, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)Now with no background, it's very easy to miss.
In general, the Welcome, 1 mil link and tiny links on the right (FAQ, Sister Projects...) should be contained in some kind of light box simmilar to the sections below for a more clear organization. As it stands now, in additon to Browse... links, it looks much too cluttered.
In the Northern Hemisphere autumn begins on Sept. 22 at 6:23 P.M. EDT. There's no mention of this on the Main Page. It seems to me that even in a wired world we are not immune, nor should we be, from the changing of the seasons.
I put it in Selected anniversaries. Let's see if it survives. ✏ Sverdrup 18:45, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It might just be the way I say it, but isn't 'squi-rreled' two syllables? -- uvarov 05:56, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
Please see Talk:List of the longest English words with one syllable for a longer discussion. -- Heron 09:09, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Hello,
As an editor for the French Wiki, I'm wondering on two links in our Voltaire page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaire
The two last links refer to mirror sites, which have little relation to Voltaire.
The problem is the title of the last link : H. Duthel: «Allez-y, dites-moi que je suis un vieux con !» Oui? alors vous-etes de connard"
I think I should not translate this piece, because it's very insulting : "C'mon. Tell me I'm an old bastard ! Yes ? Then you're an a..-hole".
I don't want to edit this piece as I'm not too sure of the reasons why it's here. The other links are perfect !
Cheers
Power.
Hi: Thanks for this. I've removed these links as they are fairly clearly inappropriate for the article. Filiocht 13:50, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Thanks Filiocht ! Power
The diagram on today's (sept 24) main page has been created wrongly.
It has a bit snipped off from the right which makes it "senseless".
I cannot fix it as I don't have a PNG editor to hand.
-- SGBailey 2004-09-24 14:52 BST
Thank you for notifying us about it; I just downloaded the png generated in the article and uploaded it to fix it. ✏ Sverdrup 17:50, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) PS. Wikipedians do the nifty timestamp trick by signing their posts with ~~~~.
Some searches seem to fail, and reveal no results, even though the articles that I search for exist. Do you have to add something to the page so that the page appears when performing a search? Or is this maybe something that just happens when the page is new? -- Logariasmo 02:18, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
If you're using the Google search, then, yes, new items won't show up, because Google hasn't caught on to the new page yet. Rick K 19:09, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)
I have noticed that many articles that aren't visited often tend to have more inconsistencies and inaccurate information than the articles that are visited more often. What can be done about it?
Please feel free to comment on this issue. -- Logariasmo 06:33, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Per the Manual of Style, shouldn't this be formatted as " Yesterday" rather than Yesterday? 13:15, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
... . . .
Since the main page is locked down, could someone with rights change the link to the Polish wikipedia from "Polska" (i.e. the country) to "Polski" (the language), since we're talking about languages.
As the only way to goto a page you want is to search, I feel position of "search" should be the first one after wikipedia Logo (ie, just above "Navigation") on wikipedia articles like
search .-------------------. | [ ] | | [Go] [Search] | `-------------------' navigation .-------------------. |* Main Page | |* Community portal | |* Current events | |* Recent changes | |* Random page | |* Help | |* Donations | `-------------------'
~Bijee
I concur. That looks like a problem for Monobook.css, though. —
El Chico!
Talk 01:25, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I believe that it would be better to have the Portuguese form of his name (João Rodrigues Cabrilho) instead of the current Spanish version (Selected anniversaries Sept 18). He was after all Portuguese, even if he did sail for the Spanish.[[User:Nricardo|-- Nelson Ricardo >>Talk<<]] 00:07, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
Which version is he known by to English speakers? We say John Cabot, not Giovanni Caboto. Rick K 18:34, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
Hmm. Interesting point. But a mistaken majority is not right. (Besides, most English speakers probably have little idea who he is).[[User:Nricardo|-- Nelson Ricardo >>Talk<<]] 20:57, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
It has nothing to do with "right" or "wrong", and all to do with usage. Wikipedia policy is to use the name a person is best known by to English speakers. Rick K 21:17, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
OK, makes sense. Then "Richard Alpert" should redirect to "Ram Dass" instead of the other way around, eh? (Got a couple of good photos of him this past weekend, BTW) ;Bear 23:14, 2004 Sep 28 (UTC)
I've always heard Salem, NJ, not MA, but as the talk page on tomato points out, there are conflicting versions on the Internet. So what makes a good source? This really points out the unreliability of the Internet. Spalding 17:01, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
I was wondering if it's possible to include a pronunciation in brackets of the article title. Just now I came across Hythe, Kent and I have no idea how Hythe is pronounced. I think it would be helpful in situations where the pronunciation is not so obvious. For example, Gloucester I had always thought was (glau-ses-ter) but later I found out it's more like (glos-ter).
Dawn Fairchild anounces the annul staff orgy is on May 1st