Talk:Main Page/Archive 69

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive 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.

←60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | Archive 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78→

Contents

Main

In Eviction i don't see what i do with the tenant who have NOT lease.I need know about this. Rosangelaludvig

Contact a lawyer. --Nelson Ricardo 22:55, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, this does not have anything to do with the main page. Please contact a lawyer. Thanks.FellowWikipedian 23:31, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Images

Err, this might just be me, but no images are appearing. I'm using Mozilla Firefox, and when I click the link to an image, it brings me to a "Server not found" page. Crüsäder

Yes, I'm getting the same problem. Reloading doesn't help. --antifreez 20:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting the same thing. Perhaps the server that holds the pictures is down again. It seems to happen alot. dposse 20:51, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I also use Mozilla FireFox and have had that problem happen to me in the past. The solution in just to simply empty your cache. --DChiuch 10:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The picture in the "In the News" section says it's Saddam Hussein, but it's clearly not. Smedley Hirkum 23:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you should clear your cache, as said above. Press ctrl+F5 or the equivalent to clear your cache. Hope that helps! Funnybunny (talk/Counter Vandalism Unit) 03:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Underlining

How do we get rid of the ugly underlining on links all over wikipedia! Its so ugly! Felixboy 19:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Just reload the page, that happens sometimes. Prodego talk 20:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Or you can go to your preferences, click on "Misc.", then in the "Underline Links" drop-down menu, click on "Never." Crüsäder

ok, Thanks Felixboy 20:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

That's what I did on my preferences when I started. It still does that ugly underlining sometimes. FellowWikipedian 23:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
The opposite also occurs. (I have "Always" selected, but the underlines occasionally disappear for me.) Usually, changing the setting to "Never" and back to "Always" (which I imagine might work in reverse) eliminates the problem, Otherwise, it corrects itself after a short while. —David Levy 00:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Need more images

Focus on Search Box When Main Page Loads

Is there any way someone can change the main page so that when it is first loaded, the insertion point is already blinking in the "Search" box (like, for example, when you go to Google). It would mean that the moment a person loaded the page, they could type what they're looking for. It's an encyclopedia, so the search box should have a little more priority, don't you think? The fact that it takes an extra click to get to the search box suggests that the main page is primarily a "click-thru" page to other content. I may be wrong, but for me the main page is primarily where I start searching (by using the very tiny search box that I have to first click in). Spmenic

Wikipedia:Main Page FAQ#Why doesn't the cursor appear in the search box, like with Google? - BanyanTree 21:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually, one simple click does not take much energy and it isn't inconvenient. Funnybunny (talk/Counter Vandalism Unit) 04:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Also, the search box appears on each and every page in Wikipedia - not just on the main page. You could go to your user talk, your user page or your watchlist and it's the same box. :) 155.69.5.235 10:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Bob Marley

Bob Marley died 25 years ago today (11 May) , shouldn't that be mentioned on the main page ?

He died of cancer, partially, it seems, due to his reluctance to take advange of Western medicine. Marley's article suggests that his birthday, not his deathday, is what is celebrated annually. Does Wikipedia do these anniversaries on round numbers like 25? -- 71.139.168.199 11:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Not usually. Maybe on the 100th anniversary of his death. Maybe. More likely not. —Cuiviénen (talk•contribs), Thursday, 11 May 2006 @ 19:02 UTC

There should be a Bob Marley holiday :) sick197666 71.29.173.68 21:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Any information on Japanese names?

Can anybody give me more names for Japanese? See page Kitsumiti --Shadow ruler 19:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I have replied on the user's talk, pointing to the entries on individual characters at Wiktionary. - BanyanTree 21:11, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
didnt he get shot?

phone tapping news

I wonder why wire tapping isn't mentioned in the recent news section.

We need a recently updated article. The shut-down of the investigation into the NSA wiretaps would probably qualify for "In the News". —Cuiviénen (talk•contribs), Thursday, 11 May 2006 @ 20:11 UTC

Inappropriate featured article

While I think the topics are relevant to current events, I don't think the computer game and China prostitution articles should be main page articles. These topics just aren't what most people go to an encyclopedia for. A main page article should have broad appeal to all audiences. Perhaps you could have a "relevant topics" box at the bottom of the first page to contain references to these types of articles and ideas with hypertext links for those interested. I think the main page article should also contribute to the days' news. For instance, since the NSA wiretapping was in the news, the main page article could have been on the NSA or spying. Just something so that when you wake up and turn on Wikipedia you get an article that that is somehow relevant to the day's news.

And today's featured article is about a computer game. Once again Wikipedia shoots itself in the foot. Scranchuse 02:14, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Just wait until you see tomorrow's featured article... JusticeGuy 02:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Computer games are just as notable as anything else. It isn't as if we only have video games on the front page. And yes, tomorrow's featured article will rile up a few people. —Cuiviénen (talk•contribs), Friday, 12 May 2006 @ 02:53 UTC
It's not like we have to worry about China blocking us. Raul654 02:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking more along the lines of people appalled that prostitution is on the Main Page. I know about the Chinese blocking Wikipedia. —Cuiviénen (talk•contribs), Friday, 12 May 2006 @ 03:03 UTC
Prostitution was on the Main Page on 3 May 2004, so there's precedent. (Since defeatured.) My initial reaction was also "What the?!!" but I just read the article and it's very well done and deserving of a wide readership. - BanyanTree 00:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
This is a bizarre choice for a featured article. Although well written, researched and presented it tells the reader nothing original about the relationship beltween prostitution and the state. Any number of countries have tried innumerable of methods or controlling or eliminating prostitution, all with very little success. Surely a featured article on the front page of Wikipedia should encycopedic in nature. This article may qualify as a featured article but it's not worthy of the front page of Wikipedia. --86.141.56.73 12:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
"Surely a featured article on the front page of Wikipedia should encycopedic in nature." Who are you to say it's not encylopedic, though? Besides your misspelling of the word and your omittance of the word 'be', you also fail to mention what does is encyclopedic. I'd say it is, if it's well-written and informative, as this article is. I'd say it's an excellent choice for the front page.Retinarow 21:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh come now. Let's not fire flames of syntax Mr. "does is encyclopedic". Personally, I agree with you. It's interesting, relevant and has a place on the main site. But no more ad hominem please.Bordello 10:37, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Archive

Should we archive Talk:Main Page? FellowWikipedian 00:49, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Er...we do. It's at the top. Also, could you please log in for once? Like on the Keith Marlowe article, there is no way of telling that some of the anon edits are actually you. Also, you may actually be an anon masquerading as FellowWikipedian, which wouldn't be fun. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 00:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
It's a pain to log in. But I am login in more so don't worry. FellowWikipedian 02:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


Featured article

How do you think Baidupedia's article on Prostitution in the People's Republic of China compares with Wikipedia's? Hawkestone 11:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that the photo they used was inappropriate. The timeframe of the story is post-Mao and the near-WW II vintage photo seesm out-of-place, especially the dreary and menacing nature of the soldier and that large bayonet. It will not help with the Blocking of Wikipedia in mainland China either. Wikipedia does not need to censor itself, but this will not help the situation. -- 71.141.22.14 12:48, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

The complaint about the photograph is a valid one. However, to date, noone has uploaded a more fitting photograph on the subject. If you wish to, you can travel there and take one yourself. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 14:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I personally think that wikipedia could have censorship to some extent. In my opinion, the featured article today "Prostitution in the People's Republic of China" paints a bad picture about China. It can also be linked with racism to some extent. Also, I don't see the point of having articles of prostitution of any country. People that are brought up in Europe or America might not think that it is offensive, but as a person brought up in Asia, I declare that I am very offended by the article. Also, I doubt the information of "Prostitution in Hong Kong" being correct at all.

You might think that China blocking wikipedia is ridiculous, but to some extent, some content in wikipedia does give people a bad image to China, or cannot be accepted by people in China. Cherubfish 14:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't really agree with you about this. Having an article on "Prostitution in the PRC" featured on the main page no more paints a bad picture of China than putting Ku Klux Klan (also an FA) onto the front page paints a bad picture of the United States. They're both negative topics, but they're encyclopedic, and the articles are informative and interesting. As for being racist, I'd say it'd be erring towards reverse discrimination to say an article on the subject shouldn't exist. It's a shame the articles on Prostitution in the Netherlands and Prostitution in the United Kingdom arent of the same quality. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 14:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

My point is, most people brought up in Asia do not find it interesting, and would be offended. If a person from America/ Europe does not find it offensive, then I won't mind protitution articles about those countries existing! Also, I demand more information on the term "encyclopedic" in terms of wikipedia's standards.

Also, note that, I only said "I don't see the point of having articles of prostitution.", NOT "these articles should not exist", so I am not having reverse discrimination here. I am just passing on an information of people brought up in Asia may have the tendancy of being offended. Cherubfish 16:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored. But, out of curiosity, besides being "offended", where do you see the harm in offering comprehensive information about the international status of prostitution? The article about the PRC happens to be the only one that has reached featured article quality standards, though Prostitution in Germany is also fairly comprehensive.--Eloquence* 16:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Yep, wikipedia is not censored. Only WP:OFFICE can censor Wikipedia. 65.95.63.179 02:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
WP:OFFICE has a right to remove libellous, unsourced content. This is not censorship. If the content was well-sourced (not to some random internet forum) and neutral, then it would be alright. Unfortunately, almost all of Wikipedia is unsourced, and rarely neutral. --BRIAN0918 18:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Any action that supresses the flow of information is censorship, even if the said information is considered bad, garbage, libellous to some people; or if one has the right to remove it. Supertramps 19:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Maybe if Wikipedia was a government/community first, then you could call it censorship, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia first, and well-sourced, factual information takes precedence over unsourced, libellous, false information. This isn't about freedom of speech, it's about the freedom to have access to useful, correct, well-sourced information. If you want to ramble on without caring how true your statements are, sign up with MySpace or LiveJournal. --BRIAN0918 21:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
YES, wikipedia is a commnuity, so yes, it's censorship. 70.48.250.138 06:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
The article made it seem like Chinese government are trying hard to stop protitution but there are still loads--ie seems that they are quite vulnerable, plans don't work, etc.

Normally, people brought up in Asia (especially north east Asia) associate prostitution and prostitude with pornography quite well. Cherubfish 19:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

removed
I really agree with you here. I think the article could be more acceptable when it is written and structured in a more philosophical/ scientific/ which ever subject concerned way. Cherubfish 19:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

And could we not have featured an article on the Main Page with an "unsourced statement" tag in it? It doesn't look good. Daniel Case 23:11, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I just checked the current FA (as well as the last three before it) and I see no such tag anywhere. Raul654 23:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
My apologies ... it was there earlier today but it has been fixed. Daniel Case 23:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
The article looks fine to me- not fantastic by FA standards, but certainly not egregiously bad. Provided the information is true and verified, it is irrelevant whether some find it offensive on subjective grounds- it certainly does not seem to me that the article is written to shock, or that the average person would find it unduly shocking or offensive. I am very surprised that the issue of censorship has even been brought up. If the Chinese government don't like this encyclopedia because of articles like this, then we need to wait until that government is removed or until they change their minds, not dilute Wikipedia to suit political pressure. Freedom of speech is not negotiable. Badgerpatrol 23:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Article-May 27

Hi. Could you guys consider posting the followin Wiki on May 27?-F-4 Phantom- Its maiden flight was on May 27, 1958. Please! (Hpetwe 19:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC))

Go here.--ᎠᏢ462090Contribs 19:55, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually, Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/May 27 may be better. -- 199.71.174.100 09:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Spelling error

The short description of the Sanssouci article contains a spelling error; "single-storey" should read "single-story."

  • It's British English spelling, which is perfectly acceptable at wikipedia. JeremyA 16:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Ok, that was simply confusion on my part. --71.111.77.10 17:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • That's a British spelling? Gee, if I had seen it maybe I would have thought it was an error too. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 | T | C | @ 05:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
It is indeed. A storey is a floor of a building, a story is a tale. Handy, but confusing for those unfamiliar no doubt. 57.66.51.165 08:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
You should report main page errors here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors --Andeee 19:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Hulk Hogan error

It should be "WWF's Hulk Hogan" or "WWE's Hulk Hogan" or "Wrestler Hulk Hogan". WrestleMania is an event, and as such Hulk Hogan can't really belong to it.

Fixed, Thanks. --Mark Neelstin (Dark Mark) 01:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Preval Sworn in As Haiti's New President

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti - Rene Preval, the only elected president in Haiti's history to finish his term, was sworn in Sunday to again lead the impoverished nation in its latest attempt at democracy after decades of armed uprisings, lawlessness and foreign intervention.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060514/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/haiti;_ylt=AnenSGV.bOmDqak_4hEn0Jms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b3JuZGZhBHNlYwM3MjE-

This is an important international news.Patchouli 01:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
So ? Instead of stating the obvious, please go update Current events, René Préval, & List of Presidents of Haiti.... and various related pages in Wikipedia. **THEN**, think about a suggested headline for ITN and post it at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. -- 64.229.177.247 03:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Please don't bite the newcomers. That said, as soon as the relevant articles are updated, that information can be placed on the Main Page. —CuiviénenT|C, Monday, 15 May 2006 @ 13:52 UTC

Sandbox seems to have been deleted fully!

Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sandbox and someone wrote China and so one. Unfortuantly I don't know who the culprit is, but I hope you can catch him as I was going to work on sand box and that person has runined it for me. If they are allowed to do that then please inform me. Thank you and best regards, --kitsumiti 15:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

It gets re-set every 12 hours, by Sandbot, so it's not the end of the world, but their not supposed to mess with the heading.--ᎠᏢ462090Contribs 19:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

hi

hi

If you like to spam then please go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sandbox. This is a discussion page not a spam page. Thank you and best regards, --kitsumiti 16:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Notability of things on WP

Could there be other projects created so that the unknown albums that will never be encyclopaedic articles be dump at so that when cleaning WP of the new articles, these would be classified easily and not dropped into oblivion until. I suggest something like WikiMusic or WikiVideogames or things like that so that articles like Milord (album), Loin de moi (album) or X (Game Boy game) be put in an appropriate place and not stay uselessly on WP knowing that people wont read the articles??? Lincher 20:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

How do you know that no one will read them? Someone created the articles so there must be some people interested. mad_cat_42 16:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I know but if there are seperated wikis for them, it would be easier to find since this is not the first place people search for albums or games or that kind of stuff. Lincher 23:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
If you search by Google, you may end up here anyways. -- 64.229.177.254 12:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually, this is the first place I look for information on albums. Tyir 21:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

помощь!

Здравствулте!. Где я? Я не знаю я. Вы знаете? Где это место здесь? Где русский вариант этого? Я помощь! Help. No spek englis.

Try the russian wikipedia: Заглавная страница --flatluigi(talk/contrib) 21:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
If it helps, Russian Wikipedia —CuiviénenT|C, Monday, 15 May 2006 @ 21:10 UTC

Greek Wikipedia up one floor

Please note that the Greek wikipedia has happily surpassed 10,000 articles, so it should be moved to the "More than 10,000 articles:" section. Cheers - Badseed 22:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The update has been performed. --Allen3 talk 23:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Picture of the Day

Does anybody know where the ISS is orbiting above in that picture? If so, maybe that could be added to the heading. It looks like it's over the Caspian Sea to me. But I could be wrong. BirdValiant 00:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

My first question, upon seeing the image, was how was it taken?
Hubble? mad_cat_42 16:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Unlikely. It's probably from one of the Soyuz capsules used for cargo and/or crew transport. Stuff has to get to and from the station, after all, and that provides plenty of photo opportunities. — ceejayoz talk 16:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I mean, the description of the ISS' inhabitants is great, but we could use a picture caption as well. Anyway, all of our questions about the picture, and more, are succinctly answered by APOD, which by some dark conspiracy is featuring the same image today! Melchoir 10:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
So it looks like the answer is the Caspian Sea. -- SmthManly / ManlyTalk / ManlyContribs 20:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Uhhh. shouldn't questions like this be directed elsewhere? Like the image's talk page? -- nsandwich 03:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Beaconsfield

Instead of 'two miners, can we have, 'Miners Brant Webb and Todd Russell'? They were trapped for 2 weeks. I think we should at least mention their names. Scalene 08:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Looks like nobody cares... or cared.--143.92.1.33 23:04, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Saddam Hussein

Where is this story? It's not on the bbc and its not on the actual page. Dave 15:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

It is on the BBC [1] although not prominently. It is a bit of a non-story really. Badgerpatrol 16:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh ok, thankyou, but, as a non-story, why is it on the news section? Dave 16:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Because being officially charged with a crime over two years after arrest is notable. mad_cat_42 16:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the line should be like so:

Saddam Hussein (pictured) is formally indicted for crimes against humanity.

Just for those who forget what an indictment is. Also, the bit has been added to Saddam's article. mad_cat_42 16:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I also added this reference to the Crimes against humanity article. Porphyric Hemophiliac § 18:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Saddam Hussein is NOT currently pictured.

"Saddam Hussein, he's our hero. He's going to take pollution down to zero." -- nsandwich 03:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Large

When will Wikipedia ever have over 1,000 featured articles? It's getting tougher to promote featured articles these days. General Eisenhower • (at war or at peace) 18:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

We will hit 1000 featured articles sometime next month. -- The featured article director. 20:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Error on Main Page: Featured Picture - International Space Station

The blurb for the Featured Picture - International Space Station says "there have always been at least two people on board" (emphasis added).

Actually there were five shuttle flights that docked with the ISS before it was permanently manned, during each of which there were several people on board for several days before it was once again left unmanned.

So, it should say something like, "there have always been at least two people on board since the arrival of the first permanent crew." - Reaverdrop 22:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Note that errors in the future should be reported to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors (also accessible via WP:ERRORS). joturner 22:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Saddam (is no longer pictured)...

In the current news section, there is a picture of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, though it still says "Saddam Hussein (pictured) is formally indicted..."

It doesn't say that any more. Either someone is avidly monitoring this page or happened to notice it himself. AmiDaniel (talk) 23:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
So shouldn't it say "Ayaan Hiris Ali (pictured) ..." ? RyanMcK 00:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Error reports posted on Talk:Main Page may be moved without notice.

I like this policy. Should remove quite a bit of the clutter on this page. -- 199.71.174.100 09:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Good. It was not my idea but I supported this one. There is too much clutter. FellowWikipedian 21:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Eh, somebody's just got a policeman or schoolteacher complex. --Nelson Ricardo 00:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
I find this proposal to be shallow and pedantic. -- nsandwich 03:48, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
It's not a proposal, but a new policy. See the second red box at the top of this page. -- 64.229.228.200 05:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Did this ever get discussed ? It just seemed to turn up one day. Robmods 13:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Operation Dropshot

I've been searching and albeit the percentage of history covered there isn't such article??? Not sure whether I address appropriate site, but please move this request to appropriate site, as this is indeed notable topic of 20th century. --193.77.179.47

It's mentioned briefly on World War III#Historical_scenarios. There seem to be very few comprehensive sources per Google, so a good article would need an editor with access to primary sources, e.g. an academic library. I agree it would be interesting. --Dhartung | Talk 05:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Big symbol

I think that the big symbol should be found anywhere on a webpage not just at the top because some people might not know that is clickable they mite think its only decoration.

Where else ? And how would moving it make those who "might not know that is clickable they mite think its only decoration" know better ? -- 199.71.174.100 01:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Would anyone like to discuss...

Would anyone like to debate this question here at: Talk:Akimichi Choji Thank you!--kitsumiti 15:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Not a big debate. I put my answer there. FellowWikipedian 21:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Should have gone to the Village pump for something like this. --64.229.228.200 05:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Someone

Someone named Hans keeps on deleting the navigational box, which makes it more annoying to scroll around just to find some subjects. Can you please trace who this person is and try and get him not to do that? Thank you and best regards, --kitsumiti 19:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

What navigational box are you referring to? --TantalumTelluride 19:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
You will have to tell us the name of an article that has been modified. Perhaps there is a reason for deleting the navigation box, which might be discussed on the article's Talk page. --Dhartung | Talk 05:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

The navigational page for this page of course! --kitsumiti 11:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

There's a navigational page for this page ? Where ? (Not the ToC ?) Who's Hans ? --199.71.174.100 01:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Square?

Today's featured picture about the British Museum describes the Great Court as a "covered square", but it's unclear from the picture if it's a geometric square (that was my first impression) or some sort of town square. Would a link to town square or market square be appropriate? – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 00:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

It's just a big square room, basically. Town & market squares are generally open and have a significance beyond just being square, so I wouldn't make the link. --Cherry blossom tree 13:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Hirsi Ali Item Misleading

A news item currently reads: "Dutch parliamentarian Ayaan Hirsi Ali resigns after renewed revelations that she lied on her asylum application." But there were not in fact any new revelations about her asylum application, as the lies had been known about for years. The tone seems like anti-Hirsi Ali POV. I would recommend something more like, "Dutch parliamentarian Ayaan Hirsi Ali resigns amid threats to revoke her citizenship over immigration violations." --Tisco 05:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Is lack of action on this because the editors think I'm wrong, or just because no one has gotten to it? Now that I look at it afresh, the current wording makes it sound like Hirsi Ali was pressured to resign after a public outcry over the asylum application, which is exactly opposite the truth. The asylum application simply was not the direct cause of her resignation. It really should be changed. --Tisco 14:53, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
"Error reports posted on Talk:Main Page may be moved without notice." (See top of this page.) Try WP:ERRORS. --199.71.174.100 01:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh. I interpreted "error" as something technical like a spelling mistake or a broken link, and thought my more substantive criticism of the content would belong here, as it has in the past. Well, I'll know where to go next time. You might change the template at the top of this page, perhaps changing "spelling mistakes and other errors" to "spelling mistakes and other criticisms", just to make it more clear. --Tisco 14:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, just did that myself. --Tisco 14:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
To point out bad choices of vocabulary, yes, WP:ERRORS is the place to go. Not all "other criticisms". (For instance, to complain that a news item is not important enough to grace the Main Page, Template talk: In the news is probably better.) I've changed "criticisms" on the template at the top of this page to "minor problems". -- 199.71.174.100 21:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

On this day: May 18, 1958

Please add the top speed of the Starfighter in SI units: 2,259.82 km/h. 212.114.211.8 08:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Were SI units used by the flight crew that day in 1958 ? Probably not. -- 64.229.231.210 14:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
SI units are used by most of the world, so someone should add it. Arnold S. Truman 16:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
No, whatever was on the speedometer should be used. What we need is someone to wikify the unit 'mph'. -- 64.229.179.90 21:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
How are the readers to make a useful comparison if all 'other' measurments are not converted to SI? --Monotonehell 05:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
The other measurements can be mentioned in the article. Same deal when it comes to money. How many currencies do we need to include ? Let's not clutter the Main Page. --199.71.174.100 07:38, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
The airspeed indicator would most likely have been in knots. mhunter 17:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Add link to CL final

Would an editor add a link to the article 2006 Champions League Final on the word "final" in the match's "in the news" entry? Thanks.

The bolded text links to the same page. "Error reports posted on Talk:Main Page may be moved without notice." (See top of this page.) Try WP:ERRORS next time. --199.71.174.100 01:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Can't imagine the scare at White House!

> 1980 - Mount St. Helens erupted (pictured), killing 57 people in Washington

Whoa! Did Osama agitate that volcano? You should understand that 90% of world population thinks of the US capital when "in Washington" is mentioned, so the front page should make it clear that the event was in W. State, not the D.C. (Which is regrettable however, as hillbillies are much more worthy than politicians. Some 57 less of those corrupt liars would have been a feast). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.70.32.136 (talk • contribs).

Fixed... I guess. Could someone look it over and see if it sounds ok, though. Thanks! -- SmthManly / ManlyTalk / ManlyContribs 21:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me. AmiDaniel (talk) 23:38, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Looks good to me before and after the change. Links to the same page. No difference. --199.71.174.100 00:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Can an RSS version of the Main Page be provided?

The Main Page is great and I suspect would get even more coverage if it could be provided in RSS format. Is it possible? It would certainly make my life easier. Steve (who's forgot his login, oops!)

Relevant info at Wikipedia:Main Page FAQ#Is there an RSS feed? - BanyanTree 16:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Problem with featured article?

Can someone please tell me why we've had the same main page featured article for eight days now, when they usually change each and every day??? Is there some problem? Happy-melon 19:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure why it hasn't changed for you. Today's featured article should be Henry James (at least for another hour). Then the featured article for the day should be Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport. joturner 23:02, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
It's a cache issue on your end. Go to the main page and hit control+shift+R to force a clean reload. That should solve your problems. Raul654 23:05, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - fixed now. I dunno why it randomly stopped refreshing the page for me - it was fine for months up till now! Happy-melon 18:05, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Template

Hey guys! I just had this idea. Can admin folk change the format of the Wikipedia template so that it includes different colors as well? Just a thought. (Hpetwe 01:11, 20 May 2006 (UTC))

Huh? "Hey guys, radically change the design of the layout"? A lot of time and thought was put into the layout for the main page. It's not something that just gets "changed around" because a member had "just a thought". Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean. —Michiel Sikma, 08:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay! I didn't know that it would be this radical. I'm really sorry, but please do try to sound a little less angry. I only wanted to know if they would be able to, not asking them to do it. Never mind. Forget it. I don't want to cause anymore uproar. I won't say it again. Sorry. (Hpetwe 18:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC))

Origin of the Logo

Did you guys use photoshop, or something for the logo. How did you guys come up with it? Amaas120 04:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Logo_history for details – Gurch 12:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Featured Picture

Is it just me or does calling Charlotte Corday a "poor French aristocrat" seem kind of oxymoronic? Patking90 15:34, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

That's what it says in the Charlotte Corday wikiarticle. -- 199.71.174.100 23:43, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Aristocrat refers to social status, which is not the same thing as wealth. One can be upper class but still poor - so, no, it's not necessarily an oxymoron. zafiroblue05 | Talk 00:40, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
That is very true. Being in the upper class of social status does not necessary mean that one is wealthy. --Siva1979Talk to me 02:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Jersey City is Central Jersey???!

I think the characterization of the Cross-Harbor rail tunnel's new jersey origin being "central jersey" is completely wrong. First of all, it is on the hudson river, the coast of new jersey - which is a unique region of new jersey. further south, it is referred to as "the shore." Second, central jersey is a region south of the new york metropolitan area. Central jersey can be safely said to be a region that buffers between seriously high commuting popultations (to new york) and extremely low commuting populations(to new york). Jersey City is definately in North Jersey. I'm sorry that this post is grammatically (sp?) abhorrent, but i was just thinking with my fingers. pardon me.

1/3 meter

Moved to the Reference desk.

DYK

The image in DYK seems to be outsize. --Ghirla -трёп- 06:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Glorious Revolution

That is a very POV term to use on the main page featured article.

zoney ♣ talk 09:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Ummm... that is the name of the Revolution. See Glorious Revolution. -- SmthManly / ManlyTalk / ManlyContribs

I think there may be a subtext here. Rightly or wrongly, that's the name of the historical event. Can't be changed whether we would want to or not. Badgerpatrol 10:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Of course it can be referred to by another name here. Is it right for Wikipedia to continue using biased historical terms coined by the victors? I agree that it's the historical term, but it's biased (which isn't unusual for history - most countries don't even teach the same histories today). I am suggesting that it nevertheless does not fit with Wikipedia's NPOV aim. zoney ♣ talk 10:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
It does fit perfectly with Wikipedia's NPOV claim, in the sense that Wikipedia doesn't take a point of view- in itself. For better or for worse (and probably for worse) the term GR is extensively used by historians and others, and that is what is being reported herein. Sadly, history is always written by the victors. Although 'Glorious Revolution' has name-recognition, I guess in this case it is probably appropriate to modify the text to Revolution of 1688, or similar. Badgerpatrol 10:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary, it would not fit with Wikipedia's NPOV aim to refer to it as anything other than the Glorious Revolution. siarach 10:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

The relevant guideline here is Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). If you feel it necessary to change the name of the Glorious Revolution, I'd advise moving Alexander the Great to Alexander of Macedon while you're at it. The point is, Wikipedia is supposed to use the most common name, not necessarily the most neutral. Else Charles, Prince of Wales would be either "The Prince Charles, Prince of Wales" or "Charles Philip Arthur George Mountbatten-Windsor" GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 17:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Serbia & Montenegro

I would like someone to delete the article Serbia and Montenegro (whoever knows how to do it) or to correct the article to -past tense-. --BokyBoky 09:56, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

It's too early to do so yet: results of the vote notwithstanding, the process of becoming independent is likely to be a rather drawn-out one. --Nick Boalch\talk 10:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
No, the article will not be deleted. Even if the country ceases to exist, we will still want to record it for historical purposes.
We'll do it later (if at all) when everything is settled. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 | T | C | @ 00:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
While we're at it, why don't we delete Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, too? (By the way, this discussion should really be at Talk:Serbia and Montenegro.) TheProject 03:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Adding Philosophy to the main portals list

I know this has been discussed extensively before, but I'm going to take a crack at re-opening discussion... We need to find some way to add Portal:Philosophy to the list of main portals. It is currently part of the {{browsebar}} that sits atop the main portals, but discussion at Wikipedia talk:Portal may lead to its removal to match the Main page. If this happens, the philosophy portal as well as all the religion portals will be almost impossible to reach through the main sections of portals, going from one portal to the advertised "related portals" or "subportals" (Science or History->History of Science->Philosophy->Religion is the only path I can find).--ragesoss 19:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Arthur Conan Doyle

I thought I'd mention that today is Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's birthday! Since Google changed their logo for that today. --66.82.9.76 21:57, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Length

I think the main page is a bit too long. Please shorten it.

Nate 00:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

How? -flatluigi(talk/contrib) 01:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Date and time

I would strongly suggest putting the current date and time (UTC) on the main page. I know the date is there already under "On this day.." but it would be nice to have it prominently displayed somewhere. —Mets501talk 03:16, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

That's a very good idea; I agree.--ragesoss 03:31, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Proposal for changing format of links to sister Wikipedias

Please see Template talk:Wikipedialang#How about a tag cloud? for an interesting proposal.--Pharos 03:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/i/Talk%7EMain_Page_Archive_69_bf6b.html"