Archives: Sections of this page older than three days are automatically relocated to the newest archive. |
---|
001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019 020 021 022 023 024 025 026 027 028 029 030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 059 060 061 062 063 064 065 066 067 068 069 070 071 072 073 074 075 076 077 078 079 080 081 082 083 084 085 086 087 088 089 090 091 092 093 094 095 096 097 098 099 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 |
Main Page error reports
To report an error on today's or tomorrow's Main Page, please add it to the appropriate section below.
- Where is the error? An exact quote of all or part of the text in question will help.
- Offer a correction if possible.
- References are helpful, especially when reporting an obscure factual or grammatical error.
- Time zones: The current date and time is displayed in Coordinated Universal Time (23:41 on 8 December 2016), not adjusted to your local time zone.
- Do not use {{edit fully-protected}}, which will not give you a faster response, and in fact causes problems if used here. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
- Done? Once an error has been fixed, or has rotated off the Main Page, or has been acknowledged as not an error, the error report will be removed from this page; please check the page's history for discussion and action taken.
- No chit-chat: Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere.
Errors in the summary of today's or tomorrow's featured article
Errors in In the news
Errors in the current Did you know...
Errors in today's or tomorrow's On this day
Errors in today's or tomorrow's featured picture
Errors in the summary of the last or next featured list
General discussion
Too intrusive advertisements
This has nothing to do with the Main Page. Indeed, the banners are imposed by the Wikimedia Foundation without any involvement of editors here. We have no control over the banner. Try commenting on this page on the Meta website instead. Modest Genius talk 17:59, 5 December 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.
O.K., I know you guys need to make cash but, these donation banners are getting WAY too intrusive. Makes me not want to visit the site. Just sayin' --2602:306:CC18:CF60:7454:4DA1:AC31:9713 (talk) 17:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- You might not even have much of site to visit without those donations though. Deli nk (talk) 17:51, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- The discussion above 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.
Male bias
Many men mentioned on the front page, and only one woman, Hannah Dadds. Also five photos of men, Walt Disney, Alexander vd Bellen, Tarzan, HH Asquith and John Jellicoe, and none of women. JMK (talk) 18:52, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- And all photos are of old white men.--128.227.215.11 (talk) 20:01, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- Be the change you'd like to see. Contribute pictures, articles, and news items you'd like on the front page. If you're noticing any bias, visit the respective pages and contribute to counter that bias.12.10.219.228 (talk) 20:45, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- It's an interesting point. As far as I know, all the different rotating sections (In the News, Did You Know, today's featured article, On this day, etc.) are all performed by different teams. There's presently no organized effort to ensure that there is any demographic balance. Brianga (talk) 21:55, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- I've been trying to restore mainly pictures related to women and people of colour this year. Unfortunately, such efforts have a long lead-in. Jellicoe, for example, was promoted in August 2014, and FPs appear on the main page roughly in order. Pragmatically., I suspect there's always going to be some male bias in an encyclopædia, because the historical side is filtered through what the past wanted to push towards the future. Women who should have been notable may have lost the documentation of their achievements, or simply been blocked from doing what they could have done in the first place. But we've hardly reached that limit yet: We can do better. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:59, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
- You have to understand that this site has a lot of people who like to play with their guns. Sometimes it is refreshing to know that we can be less pretentious.
Correlation does not equal causation. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 12:44, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- That is the attitude that promotes and causes systemic bias.--WaltCip (talk) 16:11, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Actually, the main cause of systemic bias at Wikipedia is editors who spend time complaining about it and don't spend that same time fixing articles so it goes away. Every second someone complains that <insert topic here> doesn't appear enough on the main page is a second that was wasted that could have otherwise been spent on improving articles on that topic. If the energy we spent telling everyone how mad we are that there aren't enough women on the main page was spent improving articles about women, we'd have solved the problem and then some. --Jayron32 16:28, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Blue tint
Um, am I the only one seeing this blue tint on the left column and at the top?--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 06:11, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing any blue tint. —Bruce1eetalk 06:14, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- Could be monitor miscalibration? 109.146.248.113 (talk) 04:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- I don't see it any more--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 00:49, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Warehouse "rave"
The event in Oakland was a tiny house party inside of an artist loft - which happened to be inside of a warehouse. It seems as soon as people heard "warehouse" and "edm", so they immediately assumed it was a rave, but its not. It's probably better that we just put "a party inside of an Oakland warehouse space". [qub/x q;o++a] ++ 10:42, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- By all means start another thread on this at WP:ERRORS. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:43, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- I have seen nothing in the media that characterized the event as a "rave". -- ☑ SamuelWantman 23:41, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- For future reference, this report goes in the errors section above. But I've made the change to the wording if only because "rave" isn't much used in the sources. — foxj 05:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- This was discussed before and media at that time were using rave more than "warehouse party", which was an unfamiliar formulation to several posters. --Khajidha (talk) 12:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Previous discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors&oldid=753296375 --Khajidha (talk) 12:32, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- For what it is worth, I don't think ITN should refer to the party as a "rave" when the article on the fire never uses the term "rave" to describe the event. "Warehouse party" is not much better, but at least the article does describe the venue as a warehouse. Dragons flight (talk) 12:39, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the context, Khajidha - I guess that's one downside of the lack of an archival system at ERRORS. Without wanting to drag this out too much further, the word "rave" currently exists exactly once in the article, and that's not in the article text. — foxj 19:20, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- For future reference, this report goes in the errors section above. But I've made the change to the wording if only because "rave" isn't much used in the sources. — foxj 05:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Today's featured article
Point made, answer given. Nothing more to be said. BencherliteTalk 00:08, 7 December 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.
Why does today's featured article have to include in the lede a rather gruesome listing of symptoms from consuming the mushroom? This seems a bit too macabre for the main page. Remember that some of us have kids who read this website. 128.227.227.8 (talk) 13:33, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- Well you should be grateful that Wikipedia is making the dangers of consuming such a dangerous mushroom very clear. It could save lives. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:37, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- Indeed, there are some strange issues people have with main page content. But I never would have thought "Don't teach my children the dangers of poisonous mushrooms" would be one of them. Deli nk (talk) 13:41, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- I assume that WP:NOTCENSORED has some exceptions for the main page - explicit images for example... I've never seen them here. But a couple of sentences of medical symptoms? "The initial gastrointestinal symptoms, including abdominal pain, diarrhea and vomiting, subside after two or three days. Ongoing damage to internal organs can cause jaundice, diarrhea, delirium, seizures, coma, and in many cases, death from liver failure 6 to 16 days after ingestion" I would say we have a duty to teach our children about these things as part of learning, not to censor it from their poor innocent eyes. — Amakuru (talk) 13:45, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- "Gruesome"? --Khajidha (talk) 15:03, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- If they're old enough to read and understand it, they'll be fine. freshacconci talk to me 15:43, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- To the original poster, there are literally tens of thousands of other pages that are far worse than that one. Wikipedia is not censored, if you feel it is not appropriate for your kids, then you should instruct them not to visit. 331dot (talk) 23:52, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- If they're old enough to read and understand it, they'll be fine. freshacconci talk to me 15:43, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- "Gruesome"? --Khajidha (talk) 15:03, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- I assume that WP:NOTCENSORED has some exceptions for the main page - explicit images for example... I've never seen them here. But a couple of sentences of medical symptoms? "The initial gastrointestinal symptoms, including abdominal pain, diarrhea and vomiting, subside after two or three days. Ongoing damage to internal organs can cause jaundice, diarrhea, delirium, seizures, coma, and in many cases, death from liver failure 6 to 16 days after ingestion" I would say we have a duty to teach our children about these things as part of learning, not to censor it from their poor innocent eyes. — Amakuru (talk) 13:45, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- Indeed, there are some strange issues people have with main page content. But I never would have thought "Don't teach my children the dangers of poisonous mushrooms" would be one of them. Deli nk (talk) 13:41, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
- The discussion above 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.
Jayalalithaa in recent deaths?
No room for Jayalalithaa there? According to her Jayalalithaa#Death section there's one day's national mourning in India, the world's second most populous country. If there's room in there for Andrew Sachs, surely there's room for Jayalalithaa? I don't see cricket test matches being switched because of his death... 2A02:C7D:3CBD:3100:51E1:6E92:BDB6:A037 (talk) 21:40, 8 December 2016 (UTC)