| Revision as of 06:54, 19 March 2006 view sourceCyde (talk | contribs)28,155 edits →The new []← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:55, 19 March 2006 view source Raul654 (talk | contribs)70,896 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 427: | Line 427: | ||
| As long as we have this hideous design (didn't even realize they were making a change until it was implemented; it should have been advertised better that there was a vote for a new page design), the least we can do is fix the featured picture section. Every time I come to the main page now I have to refresh it to have the text aligned correctly in the featured picture section. I'm not sure if it's the main page or my browser, but it's very annoying. Does everybody have this problem, or is it just me? ] 06:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC) | As long as we have this hideous design (didn't even realize they were making a change until it was implemented; it should have been advertised better that there was a vote for a new page design), the least we can do is fix the featured picture section. Every time I come to the main page now I have to refresh it to have the text aligned correctly in the featured picture section. I'm not sure if it's the main page or my browser, but it's very annoying. Does everybody have this problem, or is it just me? ] 06:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :Try pressing Ctrl-Shift-Reload to flush your cache, that might fix things. And the main page voting has been going on for awhile. --'''<font color="#0055aa">]</font>''' 06:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC) | :Try pressing Ctrl-Shift-Reload to flush your cache, that might fix things. And the main page voting has been going on for awhile. --'''<font color="#0055aa">]</font>''' 06:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :Say what you will about the design, but saying it wasn't well advertised is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a valid criticism. It's been featured at the top of this page for weeks; it was mentioend multiple times in the signpost, at goings-on, on the announcements page, at the village pump, and on the community portal (among others). Several outside news sites even picked it up . Short of hiring people to write it in the sky, I don't see what more they could have done. ] 06:55, 19 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:55, 19 March 2006
 | This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
 | Template:Main Page discussion header is deprecated, and is preserved only for historical reasons. Please see ] instead. |
This is the talk page for discussing changes to the Misplaced Pages Main Page: please read the information below to find the best place for your comment or question. For error reports, go here. Thank you.
|
Today's featured article
Did you know...
|
In the news
On this day...
|
Today's featured picture
- Today's featured picture is taken from the list of successful featured pictures, If you would like to nominate a picture to be featured see Picture of the Day.
- To report an error with "Today's featured picture...", add a note at the Error Report.
Main Page and beyond
- Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about the Main Page
- Preview tomorrow's Main Page at Main Page/Tomorrow. To report an error on tomorrow's Main Page, leave a note at the Error Report.
- If you want to start a new article seek help here.
- If you see something wrong with a particular article, raise your concerns on that article's own discussion page, or fix it yourself. Do not talk about other articles here.
- Misplaced Pages running slowly? Check the server status.
- If you have an opinion, comment, question or are looking for help regarding Misplaced Pages in general, find the place where your post will get the most attention here.
Otherwise; please read through this page to see if your comment has already been made by someone else before adding a new section by clicking the little + sign at the top of the page.
Main page discussion
- This page is for the discussion of technical issues with the main page's operations. See the help boxes above for possible better places for your post.
- Please add new topics to the bottom of this page. If you press the plus sign to the right of the edit this page button it will automatically add a new section for your post.
- Please sign your post with --~~~~. It will add the time and your name automatically.
Millennium Development Goals
I would like to see the Millennium Development Goals discussed on the front page. The plan to end world hunger is underway and agreed to by every nation on earth and I think Misplaced Pages could play an important role in bringing attention to the international agreement that will lift 600 million people out of hunger by 2015. The Borgen Project is a good source for more info. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.17.58.206 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- There is a short article at Millennium Development Goals. With some effort I'm sure it could be expanded to potentially featured article candidacy. --Quiddity 22:01, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Quizzes
I would like to ask the Misplaced Pages staff a question, to give an idea that is... Why don't you make Quzzes here in Misplaced Pages about various topics? It all can be arranged like in Encarta (for ideas see www.encarta.com). The quiz categories can be arranged, like, you know - history quiz, geography quiz, maths quiz etc. It would be really fun to make such a thing. Articles in Misplaced Pages can be the sources for quizzes... What do you think about that? Maybe more people would come to Misplaced Pages?
Boky 14:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)Boris
- You mean like Wikifun? GeeJo (t) (c) • 15:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Spanish Misplaced Pages Search
I think it is great that on the Spanish wikipedia that users can search for text within an article, not just for the title. Is there a way to do that on the English version? (On the Spanish main page there is a search box and two buttons below it, translated meaning "Search for an exact match" and "Search the full text") What do you think? --mets501 16:14, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- It's exactly the same on the English Misplaced Pages. "Go" is the same as "Search for an exact match", and "Search" is the same as "Search the full text". κаллэмакс 18:53, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oh yeah, you're right! I'm such an idiot. Thanks! --Jeremy
I think that this is a great website. The english version is very well setup. All the articles are well organized with proficient and accurate information.
US -> U.S. per MoS_U.S._per_MoS-2006-03-13T00:51:00.000Z">
The intro for the featured article uses "US" in place of "U.S." a few times. According to the manual of style U.S. is the preferred usage. Could an admin please change this? Dismas| 00:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)_U.S._per_MoS"> _U.S._per_MoS">
- Thanks! Dismas| 02:24, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
A suprise exclusion?
I realise that not every anniversary can be remembered, (If that's the right word) but today, (March 13th) is ten years to the day of the Dunblane School Massacre, in my own Scotland. Thought I'd suggest that perhaps, as it's ten years, it's worthy of a mention? A mere thought is all.
Kaenei 02:20, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- It certainly seems significant. --Lewk_of_Serthic contrib 02:28, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- Dunblane massacre is on the MainPage now on the 10th anniversary. -- PFHLai 19:52, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Featured article error
I'm surprised no one noticed yet, but there's an error in the featured article: "He was a famous historian and naturalist; his 15 books including works on outdoor life, natural history, U.S. Western and political history, an autobiography and a host of other topics." That should be written with a comma or 'include', and since it's 'include' in the full article, I guess it should be be that. Tell me if I'm wrong. ROY YOЯ 04:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks, I changed it to "include" now. Shanes 04:31, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Main page redesign
Could there be a link to the main page new design from the main page so that everybody that doesn't visit the C.P. will know about it. At least for the last week considering that less than 1% of the total active WP community voted. Lincher 04:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- See #So, what do you think of the Main Page election? above. - BanyanTree 17:05, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
the 'Did you know'
doesn't say which article (battle of hindenburg line) is pictured. is this standard for that sectioN? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aeosynth (talk • contribs) 04:46, 2006 March 13 (UTC).
- That's correct. The DYK image always goes with the top item in that section. -- PFHLai 19:59, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Theodore Roosevelt error
Before his presidency, Roosevelt served as a New York State assemblyman, Police Commissioner of New York City, U.S. Civil Service Commissioner, and Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Navy.
Shouldn't the bolded "and" be added?
- Added. Thanks, BanyanTree 18:22, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Nihilist
Shouldn't this link in the 1881 aniversary link to Nihilist movement rather than Nihilism ? -Robmods 16:37, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- Good idea. Thanks. I've re-wikified the link as suggested. -- PFHLai 19:36, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
NEED HELP ASAP!!!!
- (This discussion has nothing to do with Main Page. Moved to the talkpage of the Wikipedian who asked the questions.) -- PFHLai 21:45, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
War tuba?
The Japanese War Tuba link doesn't appear to go anywhere. --Serie 22:54, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- Looks like it does to me. Must've been a database error. GeeJo (t) (c) • 23:09, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Link name change requested.
Can "Governor of New Jersey" be changed to "Royal Governor of New Jersey" under the last "DYK" option? Thanx 68.39.174.238 00:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- I was referring to the link to that articel on the Main Page. 68.39.174.238 19:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC) (Granted the whole things pointless now). 68.39.174.238 19:13, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Main page
is "messy".
html problem?
Slobodan Milosevic
That is not a picture of him on the Main Page. Strange joke? --Scaife 
Don't forget Hanlon's Razor 02:47, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- It was a mistake. The wrong pic is gone now. --PFHLai 22:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Typo in the featured article
Kingdom is spelled Kindgom. It's been fixed in the article but not on the main page. Osomec 03:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Now it's fixed on the MainPage. Thanks for pointing this out. -- PFHLai 21:51, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Link Error in Featured Article
On the main page, "cataracts" in the extract from the featured article links to cataracts of the eye, not Cataracts of the Nile. In the article itself, the link is correct. CJ Withers 03:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Headline Photo of Milosevic is WRONG
Please check the picture and replace it with the one in the indicated article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.138.67.237 (talk • contribs) .
New Venezuelan Flag
As of 0800 GMT Tuesday, the "new" Venezuelan flag pictured on ITN is incorrect - it should have the coat of arms in the top left corner. Darcyj 08:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- And the new heradically correct coat of arms should have the horsey running left. An older one had the horsey running right, cowardly running away from the enemy. DanielDemaret 10:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
This looks right: http://commons.wikimedia.org/Image:Flag_of_Venezuela_%28state%29.svg DanielDemaret 10:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Hmm. according to this: http://commons.wikimedia.org/Image_talk:Flag_of_Venezuela.svg there are two flags in use. DanielDemaret 10:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Albert Einstein's Birthday ?
Why isn't Einstein listed in the selected anniversaries ? He was born March 14, 1879. —This unsigned comment is by 83.203.63.171 (talk • contribs) 13:24, 2006 March 14 (UTC).
- Because we don't usually do birthdays. Sometimes, we do it for very notable historical figures on special occasions such as the 100th, 250th, 400th ... etc. birthday. -- PFHLai 21:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- For a list of other people with the same birthday, please see March 14#Births. --PFHLai 22:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Main Page
Hello,
Add a column for the most recent additions to the encycolpedia. A running list updated daily or more frequently, based on the number of articles submitted.
regards ila
- There's a whole page for new additions: Special:Newpages. You can access this and other special pages from the tool box on the left-hand side of your window. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:34, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- And for a selection of the more interesting or well-written examples, there's Did you know. GeeJo (t) (c) • 16:55, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
new milestone for yi.wikipedia.org and th (Thai)
passed the 1000 articles. add them to main page.
and th.wikipedia passed 10K. update!
- Thai WP just passed the 10,000 articles on 14 March 2006. I'm wondering if anyone can change that. Thank you. --Manop - TH 21:03, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Updated. Congratulations to the Thai and Yiddish Wikipedians! - BanyanTree 22:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Slow news day?
I'd thought that it was policy not to announce recent deaths in the "In the News" section unless there was something particularly newsworthy about the death itself. The only other death I can remember seeing in the box was the death of the previous Pope. Not really that fussed about it, just curious why Lennart Meri appears while the others in Recent Deaths don't. GeeJo (t) (c) • 16:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- That was against ITN guidelines. It's been removed from the MainPage. -- PFHLai 22:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Erm...no it hasn't been -Elmer Clark 01:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'd removed the obituary from ITN, then I was accused of 'wheel warring'. I'm staying off ITN for now. I hope my fellow admins can come to a conclusion soon. For those interested, please see Template talk:In the news#Lennart Meri. Feel free to voice your opinion on this over there. To obit., or not obit. That's the question on ITN today. -- PFHLai 02:28, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Further Bias just in spite
After my comments regarding the change from 'BC' to 'BCE' just for migrating information from the original page to the Main Page, it has happened again whereas 'BC' and 'AD' are both changed to 'BCE' and 'CE'. I believe this was done only because of my earlier comments. This is rude, unneccesary and AGAINST Misplaced Pages policy and is discriminatory since Misplaced Pages accepts both systems as fair usage. I demand this be reverted immediately or I will contact Jimbo Wales about this personally. CrazyInSane 17:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Since we are trying to create an encyclopedia here, I think we should adopt a policy rather than continuing with the current wish-washy, anything-goes attitude. Academic standards call for CE and BCE, so that is what should be used. That should take care of such complaints. --Nelson Ricardo 18:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm talking about the present, not your hopeful future. This alteration from anno Domini to "common era" terms is against Misplaced Pages's MOS and is blatantly POV and discriminatory against Christianity and Xian terms. CrazyInSane 18:35, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- There are a million people here. You needn't assume malice. After all, you are merely one of the million voices on this global site. Heaven forfend you should offend someone. Peace. 18:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Not all of here accept that it is the year of your lord. It would seem to be against our rights to have such terminolgy forced upon us. Why should Christianity have special protections? --Nelson Ricardo 19:11, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- There already is a policy, it's that either BC or BCE can be used with no preference for either, as long as it's consistent in the same article, and fighting about the issue is discouraged since it's a waste of time for all involved. We have a similar policy for American/British spellings. Redquark 19:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Nelson, first of all you shouldn't completely change your comment after it's already been displayed. Secondly, nothing is "favoring Christianity", its just that people like you (there are alot of them) somehow are offended by Christian terms only, not other terms that force religious beliefs like Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, January, etc. They are all asserting the existence of other religious gods but nobody ever complains. So its either we rename every single religious-related word there is...or allow AD and BC to be used without discrimination. CrazyInSane 19:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Can someone please provive links to WP's policy regarding BC/BCE and AD/CE. The only thing I remember reading about this was the suggestion that consistency within an article was important. I think that we all could use some policy guidance about this. --hydnjo talk 19:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- See here, where it states the following:
- When either of two styles are acceptable it is inappropriate for a Misplaced Pages editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change. For example, with respect to English spelling as opposed to American spelling it would be acceptable to change from American spelling to English spelling if the article concerned an English subject. Revert warring over optional styles is unacceptable; if the article is colour rather than color, it would be wrong to switch simply to change styles as both are acceptable. -- Thus meaning that 'BC/AD' shall not be changed to 'BCE/CE' when transferred from today's featured article to the actual Main Page. CrazyInSane 19:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC).
- See here, where it states the following:
- As I read the it, the intent would seem to preclude changing the word "colour" within an article to "color" in a summary of that article. Does anyone disagree with my interpretation ? hydnjo talk 19:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- *Sigh*, just click on the link would you? -- Here it is again :--->>>>>>Misplaced Pages:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Eras...that's where I got the quote from and you can see it's perfectly in context with the 'BC/AD' situation. CrazyInSane 20:02, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Umm, I did read it. I was only trying to pull the argument out of the religeous arena by providing another example where change for the sake of change would be unacceptable. hydnjo talk 20:15, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Where did I change my comment? I posted two comments. You'll find both above, and the page history will absolve me of any allegations of changing my comment. Perhaps some of us are offended by Christain terms due to the way so many (certainly not all) Christians try to inflict their beliefs on others. I can't recall the last time a pagan or a follower of Norse mythology tried to inflict their beliefs on me. Remember the Crusades (year, I know along, long time ago)? Are you aware of the bile some Christians spew against homosexuals? I guess having been raised Christian (Roman Catholic) makes me a bit of an expert (not). --Nelson Ricardo 20:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
For the record, CrazyInSane, your first post on this talkpage regarding this issue was made at 02:15, 12 March 2006 (UTC). The MainPage TFA template was prepared at 05:01, 2006 March 11 (UTC), i.e. before your msg. BCE and CE were already in use at the time. The edit history indicates that BCE and CE were also already in use on Makuria at the time. Your accusation of a "change from 'BC' to 'BCE' just for migrating information from the original page to the Main Page" is false because such a change never happened. Do you still "believe this was done only because of (your) earlier comments" ? Please check the edit history of Makuria before you "contact Jimbo Wales about this personally". You may want to complain on Talk:Makuria, instead of this talkpage here. -- PFHLai 21:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- Has this made it into the stupidest edit wars ever article yet? Because it certainly has gotten quite ridiculous. MarcusGraly 15:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Is it the "Featured Article" or "Edited Article" of the day? If an article needs editing do it in the original.
word of the day, quote of the day, featured picture of the day
dear Wikipedians and all others like:
i think this site should have the word of the day, quote of the day (by people, not stock quotes), and the picture of the day. i think that would be a cool idea because then it would be more consistent with uncyclopedia. besides, not many people now days are very good with their vocab, and quotations are inspiring ways of talking to people. alright, tell me what you think.
- A word of the day would be more appropriate on our sister project Wiktionary, and quote of the day on Wikiquote. As for picture of the day, the upcoming redesign will include it. Redquark 20:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- These days, a Picture of the day is featured on MainPage on weekends. -- PFHLai 20:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments gals and guys, just my opinions - User:Xinyu
Einstein
Today is Einsteins birthday —This unsigned comment is by 84.173.5.84 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 2006 March 14(UTC).
- Please see above Talk:Main Page #Albert Einstein's Birthday ?. --PFHLai 22:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
i need help
i need help on info about copperheads
- Please see our Copperhead disambiguation page to choose which "Copperhead" you would like to know more about. Cheers, BanyanTree 00:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Main page TFD discussion
A deletion discussion is currently going on at Misplaced Pages:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Click_and_Template:Titled-click which could result in some changes to the Main Page. Specifically, deletion of the templates would cause clicking on the icons for the sister projects to take you to the image description page for each icon rather than to the sister project in question as they do currently. Please see the discussion at the link above for pros and cons of deleting these templates. --CBDunkerson 02:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Hungarian Revolution of 1848
I would like the Hungarian Revolution of 15 March 1848 , be mentioned under the Anniversaries, until it's too late ie. it's 16 March. Thank you -- bdamokos18:12, March 15, 2006 (UTC)
- What relevant wikiarticles about the events in Hungary on 15 March 1848 should be featured ? We don't feature stubs, or pages with problem tags such as {{POV}} on MainPage. 1848 Hungarian Revolution redirects to Revolutions of 1848 in the Habsburg areas, but this page is tagged with {{cleanup}}, so we can't use this. Lajos Kossuth makes not mention, and Lajos Batthyány is a stub. Any other suggestions ? Maybe someone should start a new article or re-write/clean up the aforementioned articles for 2007.... -- PFHLai 20:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your explanation, I shall look into the Hungarian Wikipages and try to translate their articles on the subject--Dami 14:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Flying saucer error
There's a superfluous "a" in the sentence about British Rail's crazy flying machine.
Also, should the "St George" bit refer to "on Victory Day" rather than "on the Victory Day"? PeteVerdon 18:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Corrected. Thanks, BanyanTree 19:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Caption of Ribbon of Saint George picture
In did you know?, the caption of the picture of the Ribbon of Saint George says "Astra Palace", is that correct? Afonso Silva 19:35, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Fixed. Forgetting to change the alt text of an image while updating text is one of the more common flubs. Thanks, BanyanTree 19:46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Suggested proposal for Main Page FA's
Every time a featured article ends up on the Main Page, it's always an easy target for vandals who want to mess it up in the worst way possible. Most of this intolerable activity happens on the day it shows up as such; for recent examples, see the page histories on Yagan () and Makuria ().
So, as a result of this, I would like to see featured articles protected or semi-protected in future. That way, it should take away other Wikipedians' pains of, and struggles in, reverting to the right version every time vandalism is done. If the accompanying picture is already protected during the day it appears on the page, then why not the article itself?
I've had some experience with vandals...and it's not looking any prettier, not even on the best FA's. We need to keep most of them from coming to do whatever they please, and do them a lot of justice in the process.
Your thoughts on the matter are welcome. --Slgrandson 22:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- While yes it's annoying, I think it's a general policy that we don't protect anything linked from the main page. While these articles make easy targets for vandals, new prospective editors also see these articles. Often articles linked on the main page actually improve (greatly), from their spent on the main page. Vandalism is usually dealt with very quickly. One useful tool, among other means, to spot vandalism is checking Special:Recentchangeslinked/Main_Page. -Kmf164 (talk | contribs) 22:32, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Protection of the day's feaured article is avoided if at all possible. See User:Raul654/protection for more information. Canderson7 23:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm curious - can anyone show me one example of an article that improved greatly while it was on the main page due to new users finding it and editing it? I've never seen a single one. Fixed typos? Sure. Grammatical errors? Maybe. Huge improvements? Never. These are featured articles to begin with; they don't need big changes. If they do, they shouldn't be on the main page in the first place. I could provide hundreds of examples of extreme vandalism on main page articles, but not a single instance of significant improvement of a main page article by new users. It's a myth. Kafziel 16:43, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Cheese, when it was featured on the main page, recieved a little under 400 edits and did improve quite a bit. This is just one example, there are plenty others. Raul654 17:08, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Also, this is a loaded question - how do you "substantially" improve an article that's 60kb and has already been checked for mistakes (of facts, grammer, spelling, style, prose, 'etc). And, generall, the people who are inclined to make such changes are the ones who have already written thea rticle. So, to put it bluntly, you're asking for the impossible. Raul654 17:10, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- "...the people who are inclined to make such changes are the ones who have already written the article."
- Exactly! And they'd still be able to fix it even if it was semi-protected. I can't tell from looking at the history on Cheese exactly when it was on the main page, but almost every edit in its history that was done by an IP has been reverted as vandalism. Nearly half of the first 500 edits on that page are reverts, which means the other half are bad edits. I doubt things were any better when it was the article of the day.
- My point is that nobody is going to show up at Misplaced Pages having never edited an article before and improve a featured article in any meaningful way. Established editors do, yes. But they could edit them anyway. More experienced IP users improve articles, too, but if they're not brand new then they know how to search for what interests them and they're not relying on editing the first thing they come across on the main page. What are the chances that a guy who has never seen Misplaced Pages before is going to show up and say, holy crap, I know way more about the Second Malaysia Plan than the dozens of others who came before me, and I will add NPOV, sourced content with proper citations and formatting"? Pretty much no chance at all. What are the chances that a guy will show up and say, "Shoe polish (or insert other article name here)? Who cares about shoe polish? I'll replace the article with a big photo of my cock. And I'll do it over and over again, no matter how many times they revert me." The chances of that are, in fact, 100 percent. Kafziel 17:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm curious - can anyone show me one example of an article that improved greatly while it was on the main page due to new users finding it and editing it? I've never seen a single one. Fixed typos? Sure. Grammatical errors? Maybe. Huge improvements? Never. These are featured articles to begin with; they don't need big changes. If they do, they shouldn't be on the main page in the first place. I could provide hundreds of examples of extreme vandalism on main page articles, but not a single instance of significant improvement of a main page article by new users. It's a myth. Kafziel 16:43, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- (indent shift) What we're missing is that not all vandals stay vandals. Some people just don't believe that they can actually edit Misplaced Pages, and the featured article of the day is one of the places where people start to realise that, yes, they can edit! If we get one good long term contributor for every day of the year, it will have been worth all that vandalism. Johnleemk | Talk 17:50, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- How awesome is it that somebody vandalized this page right after you said that? Oh man, did that ever crack me up.
- But seriously, I agree that it's a swell theory but there's absolutely no proof to back it up. I didn't start out on Misplaced Pages by editing articles on the main page. Few do. Most worthwhile contributors use the wiki for a while before they ever try to edit it. If your first edit is on an article you care about, chances are it will be a good edit. If your first edit is on the first article you ever see, chances are it won't be. I'm not advocating locking the articles down completely or permanently. If the edit is that important, it can wait a day until the article is unlocked or a request for the change can be made on the talk page, just like they are here. Kafziel 18:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Of course far from everyone started out this way. But people who make bad edits (i.e. tests) can and have been turned into good editors. Some people even have vandalism way back in the dusty archives of their contributions. Denying people the opportunity to edit -- even if that edit may be terrible or totally worthless -- is pretty much depriving us of one or two potential good editors (at least). In this particular case, test-like vandalism paves the way for future editors. Semi-protecting the featured article of the day denies particularly untech-savvy newcomers that "aha" moment when they realise anyone can edit. Johnleemk | Talk 18:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- But why can't they say "aha" on a different article? Nobody should be editing before they even know how to search. If you are unable to find an article besides the article of the day, you shouldn't be anywhere near the edit button.
- I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that vandals can become good editors, but that's still no reason to offer them the main page. You seem to be saying that vandalizing pages is good practice. No way I'm buying that. If that's the kind of practice they need, we don't need them. Kafziel 18:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- As a little postscript to that, I just combed through the edit history of Second Malaysia Plan. During the time it has been on the main page, there have been about three (possibly) well-intentioned edits. Two of them were wrong (they were overlooked and have not yet been corrected), and the other was a minor grammatical change. On the other hand, we had lots of this sort of thing, the sight of which would just as easily drive off even more potential good editors than the inability to edit one article out of (literally) a million would. Kafziel 19:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, I take that back. The only valuable (minor) edit was by an IP address, but not a brand-new user as I originally thought. So there have actually been absolutely no good contributions by new users whatsoever, even including minor edits. Kafziel 19:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Of course far from everyone started out this way. But people who make bad edits (i.e. tests) can and have been turned into good editors. Some people even have vandalism way back in the dusty archives of their contributions. Denying people the opportunity to edit -- even if that edit may be terrible or totally worthless -- is pretty much depriving us of one or two potential good editors (at least). In this particular case, test-like vandalism paves the way for future editors. Semi-protecting the featured article of the day denies particularly untech-savvy newcomers that "aha" moment when they realise anyone can edit. Johnleemk | Talk 18:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I see it now. "Welcome to Misplaced Pages, the free encyclopaedia anyone can edit. Except you can't actually edit pages linked to from our main page; they're sacred." Rob Church 15:11, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- The main page itself is "sacred". Why? Because that's the face we're presenting to the world. So why should the contents be any different? I'm sure new
vandalsusers would love to edit the main page, but that's too bad. They can't. Are they deterred by that? No. They go find another article. They'd do the same thing if we semi-protected the article of the day. And if they really want to edit that specific article, they can come back the next day when it's a free-for-all again. - I've never met anybody who said, "I don't use Misplaced Pages because one time they didn't let me edit an article." On the other hand, I've met lots of people who have said, "I don't use Misplaced Pages because every article I click on is filled with vandalism and bullshit."
- But for some reason everyone clings blindly to the myth that new, unregistered users make important improvements to featured articles. No matter how much evidence is offered to the contrary, no matter how many people we do drive away because this is the first (and last) article they ever see, some editors just want to believe that it would be evil, in some abstract and undefined way, to semi-protect an article for a few hours. Kafziel 19:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Is it only me...
or whole Wikimedia system is crashing now? I cannot edit or save anything! AshishG21:38, January 17, 2025 (UTC).
- Obviously not, because you were able to save this :). – Gweit Gischguniwi 00:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- it has been slower and crashing more often recently, for me, on several machines, but not a serious issue, just monir irritation. moza 10:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Commonwealth Games
Shouldn't there be some mention on the main page news section about the 2006 Commonwealth Games, which have just begun here in Melbourne? Knyght27 03:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Also (this probably won't be implemented) but should there be a section on the Main Page for the 2006 Commonwealth Games under the news like the Winter Olympic Games were? After all, the Commonwealth Games is the second largest international sports event (the first is the Summer Olympic Games). If the Winter Games (which has half as many athletes as the Commonwealth Games competing) were on the Main Page, the Commonwealth Games should be. —This unsigned comment is by 203.208.88.138 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 2006 March 16 (UTC).
- Yes, but you'll need to find an admin willing to do regular updates. Good Luck. -- PFHLai 05:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Looks like we do have some good luck ! ITN now has a new section on the Commonwealth Games ! --PFHLai 17:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, but you'll need to find an admin willing to do regular updates. Good Luck. -- PFHLai 05:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Note that the Commonwealth Games do involve fewer countries. But nevertheless, it does deserve a mention on the Main Page. joturner 03:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- It's up there on ITN now. -- PFHLai 05:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- It looks a bit strange not being bullet pointed like the other news in the ITN section. User:Tim_teddybear
- Take it down??? I'm positive even in the isle of man and norfolk island half the population are watching the games right now. It's the second biggest event in Melbourne and third biggest in Australia (behind the 1956 Summer Olympics, and the 2000 Summer Olympics) and is setting new standards just like the 1956 Melbourne Olympics did by bringing the atheletes togeather during the closing ceremony. It's the first time elite atheletes have competed at the same time as the normal events and their medals are counted on the main tally. Also, it was the first time ever an opening ceremony was staged outside of the main stadium in adition to within it. I'm positive once again Melbourne will set the trends that will become the norm throughout the rest of the world. I think the current arrangement on the main page is perfect the way it is. Oh and by the way, just because the states isnt a member of the commonwealth nations dosent mean the games dosent mean alot to those 70 odd nations that participate in it every 4 years. 144.132.21.233 09:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your opinion; I generally consider myself a Brit living in America rather than an American, but you can have it that way if you want. However, while you sound like a Commonwealth Games organizer, I can assure you that the British care not a whit, at least the vast majority, for the Commonwealth Games, and I would assume that the attitude is the same across the Commonwealth, even in Melbourne. Light, even the Olympics barely get attention any more! —Cuiviénen, Sunday, 19 March 2006 @ 01:11 (UTC)
- News is limited to Gold medals?
Civil Partnerships in Czech Republic
Recognition for same-sex couples in the Czech Republic has been granted by their Parliament . Shall this make it into the Main News section? --Cumbiagermen 03:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- You are encouraged to post a news headline along with external newslinks on Current events. For the ITN section on MainPage, relevant wikiarticles need to be updated first. Once this is done, please post a suggested headline at Misplaced Pages:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Having said that, I have to say that this topic has been on ITN before (when the first few countries adopted same-sex marriage), it's unlikely to get on ITN again. -- PFHLai 05:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- If you really think this should be on ITN, you are welcome to present your case on the Candidates' page. -- PFHLai 20:01, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
ITN needs a grammar fix
"The remains of former Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milošević is flown to Serbia for burial" should say the remains ... are.
- Just about to mention this myself... it certainly does. Stealthychimp 11:06, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Dang, somebody already got there :-) - MatthewDBA 11:14, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- It still says "is". Kafziel 13:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Quick, somebody make me an admin so I can fix it! ;) Kafziel 13:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Fixed. Thanks, BanyanTree 15:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Featured article image
The current Second Malaysia Plan featured article has an image that is very hard to understand in low resolution. It looks abstract to me, and I didn't figure out that it was a tree until I saw the full-sized version. The Image:Malaysiaparliament.jpg image (from the Politics of Malaysia page) would be much more useful for main page context on this article. -Harmil 16:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think this is a policy, but images in the TFA section are usually chosen from those already on the featured article. Not much choice today, unfortunately. -- PFHLai 19:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Second Malaysia Plan - context please
I think some context could be provided by amending the text to read: "The Second Malaysia Plan was an economic development plan set out by the government of Malaysia between 1971 and 1975, with the goal of implementing the aims of the New Economic Policy." - Gobeirne 23:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, but it's too late now. We now have a different featured article on MainPage. -- PFHLai 07:26, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Cough. Misplaced Pages:Do not bite the newbies. Cough. Misplaced Pages:Welcome, newcomers. Hint hint. Rob Church 15:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- Excuse me, Rob Church, can I help you ? Try some dextromethorphan. Hope this helps. :-) -- PFHLai 15:39, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm. I seem to have stumbled in on some private discussion between you two. And I hope you're not calling me a newbie! :) - Gobeirne 19:35, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
On one of 2006-03-17's newest articles
I have, for good reasons, renamed Abur to Old Permic script. I recommend changing Permian alphabet to Old Permic script on this page, or at least changing the link to that instead of the redirecting Abur. Evertype 09:42, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- That item about Stephen of Perm is no longer on MainPage. Wish I had seen this earlier. -- PFHLai 15:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Typo in the current DYK listing on the main page
According to the Manual of Style, italics should be used for television show titles and double quotes should be used for episode titles. Right now the DYK section says, "...award-winning Star Trek: The Next Generation episode The Inner Light is..." Could someone please fix this? Dismas| 13:41, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- Corrected. Thanks, BanyanTree 14:01, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- And thank you! Dismas| 17:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Californium
In Anniversaries, californium should not be capitalized. --Cam 15:51, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- Fixed. Thanks, BanyanTree 16:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Commonwealth games
As with the Winter Olympics Misplaced Pages included news on the happenings of each day in the headlines. There should be a section in English wikipedia detailing the games. -- User:Tim_teddybear
- Two reasons why this likely wouldn't happen. The Commonwealth Games is less international, and more importantly the articles relating to the Games aren't being as actively updated. If you could put in more info the article 2006 Commonwealth Games, they'd be more likely to appear prominently on the front page. -- Zanimum 17:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- There are simply too many of these competitions to keep them all on the mainpage. We settled for the Olympics, them being the most international event and occuring only once every 2 years (winter/summer). If we start including other, less international competitions, there's also Mediterranean Games, Balkan Games, Goodwill Games, etc, etc. We should get rid of the separate section and include any newsworthy results in the main body of ITN. Zocky | picture popups 17:50, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- I agree, and I'm wondering why it has made it to the mainpage. Nickpowerz 17:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- I doubt the wikipages for Mediterranean Games, Balkan Games, Goodwill Games, .... will get updated well enough to deserve being featured on ITN. -- PFHLai 18:00, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- Because it is a major international competition, with more than 1 in 3 of the world's nations competing?! Batmanand | Talk 19:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- It's still not international as in "any country may appear". It's simply not the same level as Olympics. Remember, we don't normally do sports on the main page - we made an exception for Olympics, as opposed to setting a new rule. Zocky | picture popups 20:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- Because it is a major international competition, with more than 1 in 3 of the world's nations competing?! Batmanand | Talk 19:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- There are simply too many of these competitions to keep them all on the mainpage. We settled for the Olympics, them being the most international event and occuring only once every 2 years (winter/summer). If we start including other, less international competitions, there's also Mediterranean Games, Balkan Games, Goodwill Games, etc, etc. We should get rid of the separate section and include any newsworthy results in the main body of ITN. Zocky | picture popups 17:50, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
The page 2006 Commonwealth Games page seems to be updated enough (with a medal tally, and daily highlights). To anyone who says it isn't an "international" event, it is actually the second largest international sport event (first is the Summer Games), with twice as many athletes than the Olympics Winter Games. I can see what other people mean, though, but if the Winter Games is featured, than so should the Commonwealth Games.
Featured Picture
Last week's is up again instead of a new one. —Cuiviénen, Saturday, 18 March 2006 @ 00:02 (UTC)
- And it's not {{mprotected}}. --199.71.174.100 00:06, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Fixed. RexNL 00:13, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- The link under American West is U.S. West, which redirects to some bell comany. American West itself redircets to the correct article for the situation. —This unsigned comment was added by Theunknown42 (talk • contribs) 01:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC).
- Such as Western United States. -- 199.71.174.100 01:59, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Or better, American Old West. EdC 02:27, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, American Old West is indeed better. Where are the admins when we need them ? -- 199.71.174.100 02:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hopefully the rest of the cabal is out someplace with green beer. Fixed. Thanks, BanyanTree 02:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, American Old West is indeed better. Where are the admins when we need them ? -- 199.71.174.100 02:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Or better, American Old West. EdC 02:27, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Such as Western United States. -- 199.71.174.100 01:59, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- The link under American West is U.S. West, which redirects to some bell comany. American West itself redircets to the correct article for the situation. —This unsigned comment was added by Theunknown42 (talk • contribs) 01:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC).
- Fixed. RexNL 00:13, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
The new Main Page
Does anyone know what the timetable is for implementation of the new design, since it appears to have consensus? Just wondering... it's still the old Main Page that is serving that role at this moment... --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- See discussion. hydnjo talk 01:58, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- It looks like a Wikiportal now.--Kross 04:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
I was asked, in my capacity as a bureacrat, to take a look at the vote and render an official decision. I decided that roughly 75% was consensus, and went ahead and implimented the new design. Raul654 04:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- LOL, hehehe... ;) - Mailer Diablo 05:19, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- It would have been nice for the new main page designers to actually specificy the text color, so that people with custom skins can still read the text. Right now, my main page is light green text on light green background. They specified the text color in the old main page, why not in this one? Or did they just not think of it? — 0918 • 2006-03-19 04:51
- You're the first person to complain about this. Please insert whatever code is missing. —David Levy 05:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- I complained about it with the old main page, but apparently the designers of the new page missed that. I've fixed most of the problem, although everything from the POTD down is still unreadable, and I can't figure out how to get the text to be defined as black so that it is readable. — 0918 • 2006-03-19 05:49
- You're the first person to complain about this. Please insert whatever code is missing. —David Levy 05:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- I still have major problems with this design... I know others like it so is there any way of having a skin which allows some of us to have the old main page instead whilst everyone else has this design? I've looked through the current options and I can't find such at current. - JVG 05:33, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- The old main page is saved somewhere for people to use, and you can use javascript to get your Main Page links to go to that page. — 0918 • 2006-03-19 05:35
Is there a way someone could put a tad bit more space between the featured picture and the text of section? It looks cramped. Thanks. --LV 05:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think it is something to do with an "margin-right:0.9em" or something of that source. --LV 05:55, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- You would have to change it in all of the Misplaced Pages:POTD row subpages, and make sure that people keep using this change in the future. If you do do this, please make sure to add
color:#000to all their style definitions so that people like me with custom skins can read the text. :) — 0918 • 2006-03-19 06:07
- You would have to change it in all of the Misplaced Pages:POTD row subpages, and make sure that people keep using this change in the future. If you do do this, please make sure to add
Change is bad. --NoPetrol 05:48, 19 March 2006 (UTC) One of the main arguments for the new design is that Welcome to Misplaced Pages REPLACES the Main Page title at the top. Your implementation completely ignores this.
As long as we have this hideous design (didn't even realize they were making a change until it was implemented; it should have been advertised better that there was a vote for a new page design), the least we can do is fix the featured picture section. Every time I come to the main page now I have to refresh it to have the text aligned correctly in the featured picture section. I'm not sure if it's the main page or my browser, but it's very annoying. Does everybody have this problem, or is it just me? bob rulz 06:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Try pressing Ctrl-Shift-Reload to flush your cache, that might fix things. And the main page voting has been going on for awhile. --Cyde Weys 06:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Say what you will about the design, but saying it wasn't well advertised is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a valid criticism. It's been featured at the top of this page for weeks; it was mentioend multiple times in the signpost, at goings-on, on the announcements page, at the village pump, and on the community portal (among others). Several outside news sites even picked it up . Short of hiring people to write it in the sky, I don't see what more they could have done. Raul654 06:55, 19 March 2006 (UTC)