Talk:Main Page/Archive 68

Archive 65

Archive 66

Archive 67

Archive 68

Archive 69

Archive 70

→

Archive 75

Picture Error in On this day

The picture is the USS Phoenix NOT the ARA General Belgrano. Dabbler 00:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

OK I see from the Belgrano article that the Belgrano was originally the Phoenix, but the labelling is still incorrect and confusing and the picture page is not clear that they are one and the same. (I removed an anonymous edit to my first entry). Dabbler 00:51, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

On this day: May 2

I'm not a naval expert, but I have never heard of a British warship being described as The HMS anything. It isn't done and doesn't make any grammatical sense (ie 'The Her/His Majesty's Ship'?). This may be an export from across the water, where I believe it is common to use this phraseology (ie 'The United States' Ship' Yada-Yada). It is, in short incorrect- the sentence should read simply HMS Conqueror sank the ARA General Belgrano. I'm not offended by it, but some might be; it might be an idea for someone who can to fix the mistake, although it's no biggie. Badgerpatrol 03:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

That sentence has been completely re-written. -- 199.71.174.100 22:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Grammar problem @ ITN

• Immigration reform protests in the United States, sparked by proposed legislation H.R. 4437, continues with the Great American Boycott.

The "protests" is plural. Could someone take the "s" off "continues" or re-write the sentence, please ? Thanks. -- 199.71.174.100 05:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the tip! Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 05:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing it, Titoxd. -- 199.71.174.100 22:25, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Typo in feature article?

If some one could fix it up, I'm not sure how. Thanks -Nekura 16:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Unless it's a weird grammatical thing that is correct, but just doesn't sound right. Cause I'm no English Major -Nekura 19:13, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. RexNL 20:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Canadian budget

I just made the article Canadian federal budget, 2006. I think it should be featured on the main page (Really ?), or at least in current events, because it is an extremely slow news day. I mean, I'm really excited about this cricket championship and some Hundai exec being arrested, but I think this news could squeeze in. Theonlyedge 22:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

There are more candidates to fill up ITN waiting at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. -- 199.71.174.100 22:25, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I posted this on Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. FellowWikipedian 23:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Number of articles

Congrats, Wikipedia has (had for some time) more articles than the population of the Birmingham, Alabama metro area! See List of United States metropolitan statistical areas by population). --- Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} My "Great Project"

Apparently, there are only 47 US metropolitan areas that have a higher population than the number of Wikipedia articles! 70.128.104.145 21:32, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Reinserting a break

About a month ago, and now again, I saw near the top a pair of lines with this code:

the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.

(As it's in a cell it breaks somewhere; possibly not at the same place for every viewer. For me, it breaks after "anyone", which is ugly.)

I changed it to:

the free encyclopedia that
anyone can edit.

So the top line is shorter than it was (but still longer than the bottom line) and does not contain part of a link. Who has a problem with that? Robin Patterson 01:27, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Great idea. Before it was ugly. I do not have a problem with that I just thought I should give you positive feedback. FellowWikipedian 01:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I saw it as a single line of text, and your change makes the header look horrible for me. What browser and what resolution are you using? I am using Firefox, with 1024 x 768 resolution. Prodego ^talk 01:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

It did not break for me (Firefox Linux 1024x786) no matter how I resized my browser and now it looks worse.--Clawed 01:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The previous version fit all on one line, even if I shrink the window as small as it will go. It's not supposed to be a two-line message. Oh and I've tried it on 4 different Windows browsers and it's 1-line in all of them. –Tifego^(t) _{01:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)}

Screenshots of how I am seeing it before and after your change. Prodego ^talk 01:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

It looks really horrible for me now. I use a 1280x1024 resolution, and now most of the top of the page just looks like white space now that the bar is so wide! I'll have screenshots in a moment. —Mets501^talk 02:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Here we go (with a table border so the height is clear): Before:

and after:

—Mets501^talk 02:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Here's an idea that should make everyone happy: Change

the free encyclopedia that [[Wikipedia:Introduction|anyone can edit]].

to

the free encyclopedia that [[Wikipedia:Introduction|anyone can edit]].

That way it doesn't split in the middle of the link on browsers that incorrectly split it into 2 lines, and it still looks the same as before (displays as 1 line) for everyone else. –Tifego^(t) _{03:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC)}

I made the change to use nbsp.-gadfium 05:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Looks great now! —Mets501^talk 22:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

On This Day: 3 May

Is there an admin awake yet? It's 100% wrong to say that the Polish Constitution of May 3, 1791 was "the first codified national constitution in Europe". Here's an older one: Instrument of Government. And to say that it's "the second oldest constitution in the world" is just asking for trouble: have a look at Constitution#History_and_development.

I suggest that the entry be changed to "1791 - The Polish Constitution of May 3, 1791, Europe's first modern codified national constitution, was adopted." StockholmSyndrome 06:45, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:DYK

This section is a backlog. Please update as soon as possible. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 07:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Namespace

Why is Main Page in the main namespace? It should be at Wikipedia:Main Page. If there is ever a famous book/band/movie called "Main Page" how will the redirect work? I wanted to make a redirect for Home page. jnestorius^(talk) 13:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

See Talk:Main Page/Archive 67#Namespace. --64.229.225.56 14:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

tongan earthquake

we need to mention it in the top news, no?

Someone put it in the news but there is one on WikiNews. WikiNews articles can't be on Wikipedia. Please see the mention here Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. FellowWikipedian 20:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

P

Wikipedian Governor

I think that we should elect a governor of Wikipedia to settle all disputes. 1028 23:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Jimbo Wales. But there are far too many disputes for one person to handle, that's why ArbCom exists. Prodego ^talk 23:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

But then we just have disputes about the appropriateness of Jimbo's remedies!  :)

The idea of ArbCom is that it is a last resort since any decision they might make is final and binding. So therefore there wouldn't be disputes about their remedies since all other possible steps should have been tried before resorting to ArbCom. --Happynoodleboy 09:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

More helpfully (perhaps), see Wikipedia:Resolving disputes for the dispute resolution mechanisms. Ideally, the Arbcom would have nothing to do because everything would have been settled before it reached their level. - BanyanTree 01:05, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Typo

In On This Day, "1855 - William Walker and group of mercenaries" should really be "1855 - William Walker and a group of mercenaries". Art LaPella 02:33, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks. Shanes 02:36, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Proposed change to the top of the page subject list ("Culture" to replace "Arts")

I suggest that "Culture" should replace "Arts" in the subject list on the top of the main page. "Arts" is a subdivision of culture and is not a fundamental top level category like the other seven subjects shown. Including it in the list means that the list does not cover the full range of knowledge, or the full content of Wikipedia. Adding "Culture" to the list in its place will solve these problems. CalJW 02:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Overlap with 'Society' ? -- 65.95.106.174 15:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Some might suggest another solution might be to make arts a top level category. As suggested above, society overlaps with culture, which is where perhaps it should be categorised, and I'd also add that guidelines tell us categories do not form a strict hierarchy. Therefore I'd suggest you're arguing froma flawed premise, and also note we should be presenting information for our reader's considerations, not our own. I'm also confused as to why Technology is a top level category and not a sub-category of Science, and the same could be argued for Maths. History could be placed in Culture, and thus so could Biography, and since Culture is now in Society, before you know it we have reduced the links to one, Category:Categories. Hiding Talk 23:22, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I oppose Culture replacing Arts. It's possible to say that Arts as a sub-category of Culture, but if the latter is defined so widely that everything else fits within it, it defeats the purpose of having separate categories IMO. - Kleinzach 10:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I stand with Hiding and Kleinzach in opposing. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 14:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I, as well, agree with Hiding and Kleinzach. -- T.o.n.y 17:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose - more category silliness - it is just as easy to make a case for all knowledge being one and any division being artificial. So all categorization is incomplete an unable to express the full subtlety for human enquiry. Leave as it. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 16:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

ITN Technicality

Technically, Zacarias Moussaoui has not been sentenced to life in prison without parole yet. Juries cannot hand down sentences. Instead, the news item should read something like:

A jury in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui (pictured) determines he should serve life in prison without the possibility of parole for involvement in the September 11, 2001 attacks.

On May 4, at 10:00am Alexandria, Virginia time (1400 UTC), the sentence (which will most likely be life in prison w/o parole) should be official. joturner 02:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Try Talk:Main Page/errors. --65.95.106.174 15:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't see that. That's new. I suppose it was necessary (and a good idea). joturner 22:25, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Freedom Tower link

Does anyone else get a screwy link to Freedom Tower? In Firefox this link shows up red and takes me to the editing page for the article. However, it only does this when I'm logged in. Does this have something to do with it being protected? Imaginaryoctopus^(talk) 03:22, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm using Firefox (and I'm logged in) and I'm not having that problem. joturner 03:25, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, me neither now. I've been refreshing the page for the past few minutes and it suddenly stopped being redlinked. Strange...oh well, nevermind. Imaginaryoctopus^(talk) 03:30, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

It was deleted to clean up a vandal attack. It should be ok now. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 03:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

That's so weird. Exactly the same thing happened to me, but with the link to the September 11, 2001 attacks article. The problem went away when I refreshed the page after a couple of minutes. Arvindn 04:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Same thing there. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 05:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Two Edward S. Curtis FPs in a row?

Shouldn't we go for a bit more variety with the FPs? Or are we running out again? 03:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Ask at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. --65.95.106.174 15:25, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Minor edit needed to correct a current Did You Know

In the current did you know: "That Nerima Daikon Brothers is a rare musical comedy format anime series that pokes fun of Junichiro Koizumi, Michael Jackson, Bae Yong-Joon..." of should be at.--Fuhghettaboutit 03:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Even smaller edit: the entry on Anders Uppström should start with three dots instead of two. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 13:40, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Try Talk:Main Page/errors. --65.95.106.174 15:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Josip Broz - Tito died on May 4th

As a great political leader and founder of the Non-Aligned_Movement, he more then deserves being mentioned on the main page.

Deaths are not usually put onto selected anniverseries unless the person is tremendously historically significant, and even then only on the 50th, 100th etc. anniversaries. He might have had a chance last year, on the 25th anniversary of his death, but probably not again until the 50th in 2030. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 11:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

hey everyone

why did sacaria musowi not get the death penalty?

I dunno, Internet? Ziggur 18:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

No Kent State

Seriously, no Kent State shootings?--YoungFreud 15:51, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Generally speaking, more than two items on one country in Selected anniversaries is considered bad form. There are (arguably) already three items that are US-related and adding another would be bad form. May 4 does list the shootings. - BanyanTree 19:25, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Can you see the Albatross?

I can't see this featured article.... Ithink it has been vandalized --Melaen 22:01, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

No, something happened, it takes me to the edit page of Albatross. Up until 30 seconds ago it brought me to a picture of a movie. —Mets501^talk 22:06, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Working now. —Mets501^talk 22:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Redlink on main page now.Guinnog 22:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Fixed now. It was necessary to remove personal information from the edit history of the page. Unfortunately Albatross has had to be semiprotected, but that is necessary also. --Darth Deskana (talk page) 22:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

German Main Page

I like the new main page at de. It's slim and professional. Shouldn't it be used at en, too?

You like that one better? I like ours. It lookies "happier." —Mets501^talk 22:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• I like the German one. The talk page looks realy good. How do you like the Italian Wikipedia. Not that we should change the en Wikipedia to this one. But this looks nice also. FellowWikipedian 22:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Now that's a nice one. Playful and fun looking, but everything is there. I also like their rounded tabs at the top of each page instead of our square ones. —Mets501^talk 22:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Eh, I'm not too big on the huge section portal. I personally never use it, and it would definitely bother me having to scroll past it each time. -Elmer Clark 23:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Background-color on the Italian Wikipedia talk page looks realy good.FellowWikipedian 02:07, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

If anyone's interested, there are long discussions about the various merits and demerits of various layouts in the archives of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability/Main Page, which led us to the page we have. - BanyanTree 14:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't like the German one. I can't understand it. Actually, a lot of things about the de wikipedia i think are nice. Like the lowercase warning, and the categories box. -M1ss1ontomars2k4 01:51, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Error reports

Just a suggestion, maybe all future error report threads that show up here should be moved over to the error report subpage which some admins watch independent of this page (since this page often fills up with irrelevant threats) and therefore would more quickly be able to fix any problems that are reported. If there's no objections to this I'd suggest amending something to the error page notice at the top of this page to state that any error reports posted here will be moved to the subpage. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 00:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

This sounds like a good idea. The banner that is on the error report subpage should moved to the talk page. FellowWikipedian 14:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean? joturner 16:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

same image forever

ok, do we have to look at that zak guy's face forever? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.76.99.106 (talk • contribs)

If and when another world event occurs, the image, and the top news item, will be replaced. joturner 02:15, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

LOL. Yeah, it would be nice if WP:ITN had more diversity than the MSM. But hey, anyone can edit and all that. Arvindn 17:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know why today, but it clicked on me too. Don't you think someone should update the news? --Alexignatiou 15:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the admins are too busy fighting vandals at the Featured Article to worry about updating ITN .... -- 65.95.105.129 17:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Cinco De Mayo

Shouldn't Cinco De Mayo be put as a holiday?--68.198.111.189 10:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, Cinco de Mayo points to Cinco de mayo which is a redirect to Cinco de Mayo. Piet 15:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

The link has been corrected. As for not being listed under holidays, Cinco de Mayo is not a legal/formal holiday in any of the locations it is celebrated. --Allen3 ^talk 15:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Wait, Anheuser-Busch isn't a location? --Dhartung | Talk 00:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Solar eclipse

What's going on with the featured article page? If someone could restore... Superdosh 17:08, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

what seems to be the problem?--Alhutch 17:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, looks like its been resolved (thanks). The problem was that the page was wiped and replaced with a picture (first of the movie Dick, and later of a character from Spongebob), and there wasn't any history that I could use to restore. Superdosh 17:12, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

yeah, vandalism. i put it on my watchlist, so we'll do our best to keep it clean.--Alhutch 17:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Er...why does the featured article have a red link? Agent_Koopa 17:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Mysterious. Seems to happen to some people randomly. Ninjas are probably to blame. See the section on the Freedom Tower link above. Arvindn 17:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

It's linked to the edit page. That's why it's red. Somebody fix please. --65.25.217.79 17:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

It's called a "vandal eclipse of the FA". It often happens when admins deal with FA vandalism. Some vandal is (hopefully) bleeding profusely, making the link red.... It will be blue or purple again soon, reflecting the color of the face of the beaten vandals. -- 65.95.105.129 17:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Hahaha... that's funny. Kill the vandals ! Anyway, Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors#Red-Linked FA explains what happened. -- 199.71.174.100 21:15, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

WHAT?! UNDERLINE

Oh, please, admins, NO! JUST DON'T PUT ON THE LINK UNDERLINES! PLEASE! HOW CAN I REMOVE THOSE UGLY UNDERLINES?!?!?!?!? GOD DARN IT HAPPENED SO FAST!

EDIT: Ignore, it seems to be set back. What was it, anyways? --nlitement ^[talk] 18:12, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

This has been discussed at the Village Pump, on IRC, and at Jimbo's talk page (see, especially, error in Wikipedia? here, inter al.; the conclusion generally reached is that, even as there are sundry causes of which one might think, none seems properly to explain the random occurrences. At the very least, you should be comforted to know that others have experienced the same problem, not only because one imagines that a solution will eventually be divined, but also because you needn't to think yourself to be crazy. I was altogether afraid ever to say anything about the problem, thinking that I must have done something to cause it or that, in any case, it wasn't a problem with which others would identify... Joe 18:46, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

If you have an account there's an easy fix using your monobook.css file, just go to User:USERNAME/monobook.js (assuming your using the monobook skin, if not replace monobook with name of skin) and put in a ( font-decoration: none; ) which will effectively get rid of the underlines under all the links. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 21:12, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I think you mean User:USERNAME/monobook.css. :-) --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 23:43, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

What's so bad about underlines? Anyway, why don't you just set your browser to permanently remove all underlines for links? WTF? --M1ss1ontomars2k4 23:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

On this day: May 5

How did Karl Marx not make it in the birthday list?!?!? May 5th, 1818. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.107.192.24 (talk • contribs) 22:08, 2006 May 5 (UTC).

Yes, he did. See May 5#Births. -- PFHLai 10:11, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

The picking process for the featured article on main page ("Raul654")

Wikipedia:Today's featured article#Guidelines

Why is it that only this single person gets to pick the article for the main page of the whole of the wiki, who gave him this authority? I cannot find any vote by the community akin to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship or Wikipedia:Elections, can someone please point me towards any relevant information? Thanks --Col. Hauler 22:36, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Col Hauler - while I do choose the featured articles, lately most of the ones I have been choosing are there because someone requested them (from the pool of featured articles). You can see pending requests on Wikipedia talk:Tomorrow's featured article Raul654 15:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

• Ratification here. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 22:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

BTW, Raul654 doesn't decide which wikipage becomes a featured article. He is only the scheduler. And he has been doing a good job. -- PFHLai 01:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

second that he does very nice work--Alhutch 02:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Another vote of confidence here. Col. Hauler, you do know that the Featured Articles are voted on by the community, so Raul654 is only choosing from a short list of articles widely considered "fantastic". --Dhartung | Talk 00:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I for one think it's just TOO MUCH POWER for just ONE MAN to handle. Even for a beefcake [1] like Mark. He he. --JohnO 06:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, we for one disagree. If Raul ever screws up, we'll be on his ass in a moment. It's like the best of both worlds, IMO; we give one man full power, but he is totally accountable for his actions. (Kind of like the early concept of Roman dictators.) This way he has the authority to do what is necessary, but remains responsible for what he does. Johnleemk | Talk 06:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Suspiciously similar to Utopia by Gilbert and Sullivan. An absolute tyrant who is totally accountable for his actions with death. 88.144.79.120 15:07, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

...thanks for the vote of confidence.... Raul654 15:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

rofl. good thread :) -Quiddity 00:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

News Picture

Am I the only one who thinks that the CIA seal being pictured over the man himself is stupid? I mean we have his picture, there is not need to have the CIA seal instead. Zzz345zzz 03:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a strict policy of allowing only free images on the Main Page. The portrait of Porter J. Goss has an obsolete "public domain" tag on it, so it isn't obvious whether it is truly free or not. (The photo we have appears to be larger than but otherwise identical to the one at [2], so it's probably an official portrait). I suspect that whoever updated the main page decided to play it safe.-gadfium 04:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

But this one's public domain ({{PD-USGov-Congress}})... what's so bad with it? → Тодор Божинов / Todor Bozhinov → 16:06, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Main page has grown

Look how much the main page has grown from [3]. --GeorgeMoney^{Talk  Contribs} 04:47, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I see your 2 and raise you a [4]. AmiDaniel (Talk) 04:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Strangely, this version does not appear in the page's history, and prior to the 5th of August there is absolutely no revision history. Strange. AmiDaniel (Talk) 04:55, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I know. I had to press "older version" link about one hundred times. --GeorgeMoney^{Talk  Contribs} 04:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

There must have been some kind of page transition at that point. Here is the site frozen as of 20 December 2001. I notice that the histories of the articles on Nostalgia Wikipedia actually go back a couple months further. (Wikipedia and Wikipedia) - BanyanTree 16:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

FPC link

Gorgeous picture of the cows, but technically the bolded word should be Cattle not Hereford, as that's where the picture is actually used. Stevage 08:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Click on the bolded link there, and you'll get Hereford (cattle), better than Cattle or Hereford. -- PFHLai 10:15, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

On This Day: May 6

Any specific reason why Sigmund Freud did not make it into today's selection? It is his 150th birthday. -- 141.40.169.148 21:50, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

• sigh* The people who select the items do so from the article for the day which usually has hundreds of things to choose from, but only about half-a-dozen can fit on the page. Birthdays sometimes make it on there, especially on big anniversaries, but it's not guaranteed and there's no need to look for a "reason". --Dhartung | Talk 00:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Miners Trapped 1km below the surface in Beaconsfield, Australia

Beaconsfield mine collapse I believe that this deserves an ongoing place in the "in the news" section. I feel it is far more important than the centence of a terrorist or a cabinet shuffle in Brittain. There are places and people in the world other than in America and Europe. Get your acts togeather.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.132.21.233 (talk • contribs)

I posted this on Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. FellowWikipedian 3:07 7 May 2006 (UTC)

And Sudan. There are also places besides Sudan. And also Armenia. And let's not forget Nepal. Clearly we need to get our acts togeather and stop our blatant America-Europe-Asia-Africa bias on ITN. - BanyanTree 03:38, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the last post. There are places becides Sudan and America etc. We need to get our acts togeather and think about other places in the world. FellowWikipedian 15:54, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

ITN items generally affect large numbers of people or have long-lasting effects -- wars, elections, and so forth. This involves two people who are in some danger but who should be rescued soon -- basically a human-interest story perfect for cable news, but not very encyclopedic. That said, the article is very well done, but I still don't think it makes the cut for the front page. --Dhartung | Talk 16:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

New design

I've made a new design, though regular editors won't see any differences. My design uses div tags and style attributes, and does away with the table tags.

See User:Ta bu shi da yu/MainPage2. The only think I can't work out is how to make the two column sizes the same. If anyone has any ideas, please feel free to go ahead and fix this! - Ta bu shi da yu 05:58, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

How did it break the main page? - Ta bu shi da yu 06:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

On the machine I am using at the moment (640x480 resolution), the 4 panes form a single column rather than the 2x2 layout they are supposed to. Raul654 06:35, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm on 1024x768 1280x1024 and it looks horrible to me too ... everything at the top got shoved over to the right, and everything's off a bit. I prefer the previous version. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know how it looks on your end, but it's seriously messed up on mine. I was about to type out a list of flaws when you went ahead and made the change. Then Mark reverted a few seconds before I was able to, and you ignored his concerns by reverting to your version! I'll post the aforementioned list of flaws as soon as I finish typing it. Please don't revert again in the interim. —David Levy 06:39, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

And I was about to rollback my change, and you got to it before me. It would have been nice if Mark would have noted what the break was, but I do recognise that this was my fault. Sorry. Can I get some help in fixing these issues? - Ta bu shi da yu 06:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm confused. What occurred during the minute after you reverted to your code that caused you to change your mind? Why didn't you ask Mark what the problem was before reverting? (Was he supposed to type a detailed explanation instead of fixing the main page as quickly as possible?) And finally, why did you rework the main page without thoroughly testing the new code or even providing a reasonable opportunity for others to comment? Don't you realize that what looks good to you might not look good for others (using different browsers, resolutions, skins and settings)? Please see my list of issues below. —David Levy 07:24, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

What happened was that I realised I made a mistake. All I wanted was an explanation of what went wrong, when I checked the talk page I couldn't see anything. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm running Firefox on Windows XP at 1400x1050. I use the MonoBook skin. Here's what I see:

• The "articlecount" id has been omitted, thereby preventing the suppression of the article count.
• "Overview · Searching · Editing · Questions · Help" and "Categories · Featured content · A–Z index" are too close to the header box.
• The featured content boxes are pushed to the left, with empty space on the right side of the page (to which the other elements extend).
• The columns are substantially unequal in height, with a large amount of whitespace below the right-hand column (with the present content).
• The text and images are not properly aligned with the headings; there's empty space on the left and right.
• When I reduce the window to a smaller size, I experience the problem that Mark described; the five featured elements are stacked in one column. Also, some of the portal links overlap and protrude from the header box. —David Levy 07:24, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I think most of the issues have now been addressed on the copy in Ta bu shi da yu's userspace, except for the height of the second column, which I can't seem to figure out. Also the overview, etc., and the Categories, featured content, etc., links are too tight in between the header and what comes below it. Take a look at it, and see if you're still experiencing the same problems. (I hope you don't mind that I took it upon myself to do some adjusting in your userspace, Ta bu shi da yu). AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:35, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Or maybe look at this earlier version so you don't get confused by the section edits and changes being done since then. AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:38, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

None of the issues that I cited have been eliminated. Now everything is pushed to the left, and the header links are too close to both the header box and the featured content columns. All of the other problems remain unchanged. —David Levy 07:43, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I think this is a screen resolution problem that will never be solved. It now looks almost correct on my resolution, but when I resize the window the columns get even more distorted in width, height, and order. The problem with the div approach is that it's nearly impossible to order the items consistently, whereas with tables it's rather simple to arrange the items to look right on every resolution (and I personally find the divs ten times more confusing to edit than the table approach). Frankly, I think I'm going to return to my original statement that the current format of the main page seems to work just fine, and as the changes being implemented have the goal of identically emulating the current look of the main page, I guess I just don't see the point. AmiDaniel (Talk) 08:01, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Just wondering, what exactly was the incentive for using divs and styles instead of tables? If it ain't broke, don't fix it (IMO, at least). AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:41, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Nice to be able to skin it better. For instance, I want to change the line-spacing for main articles to be line and a half spacing to stop <ref> tags from messing up (they squish). Tables are ugly. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Tables have been depreciated for layout according to the W3C. They shouldn't be used for anything but presenting tables of information. I've noticed that some newer browsers are already breaking table layout websites. So it will need to be done eventually. Also as mentioned above, using divs allows greater flexibility in styles. --Monotonehell 08:06, 7 May 2006 (UPegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 08:43, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Pegasus1138 -- CSS is "web standard" design. There may be difficulties implementing the standard, however, especially if the MediaWiki software requires modifications to do so. You should go back and look at the process that we just went through to redesign the front page at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Usability/Main_Page and bring up your ideas with the folks there, who are intimately familiar with some of the technical (and political!) limitations of such a change. Talk:Main Page is not really the place to lobby for a redesign. --Dhartung | Talk 16:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The government of Sudan and main Darfur rebel group, the Sudan Liberation Army, sign a peace accord in Abuja, Nigeria

As far as I can see the SLA merged into the Alliance of Revolutionary Forces of West Sudan in January so why are they still listed here as a seperate group? --Horses In The Sky 10:26, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

There aren't a lot of editors updating these sorts of topics on Wikipedia. The merge with the JEM didn't really take, so the SLA is still separate. Only the larger faction within the SLA signed the deal, but the ITN blurb is still correct, even if by omission. Here's a link with the relevant background. - BanyanTree 15:04, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

If your question is whether the article should be deleted since the groups have merged, the answer is no, because an encyclopedia contains historical information as well as current. If information in the article needs to be updated, you could bring it up on the article's Talk page, or find an appropriate regional Wikiproject, or put an "update" template tag in the article, or update the information yourself.--Dhartung | Talk 16:50, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalizm

I think that the featured article has been vandalized. I tried to fix it and partially succeeded but now only the source is being displayed.Vcelloho 20:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The featured article is a red link to me! Don't know what's wrong. Valentinian ^(talk) 20:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Gee. Don't know what on earth happend, but it appears to work now. ???? Valentinian ^(talk) 20:52, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

This has happened often enough that I've added a blurb to the FAQ, while hopefully being vague enough to avoid WP:BEANS. - BanyanTree 20:57, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

CRISIS!

The main page feature article is a red link--the article is deleted. An admin is needed. Theonlyedge 22:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The article is not deleted: see Rabindranath Tagore. Someone has vandalized the redirect. Ratzd'mishukribo 22:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Cam someody please unprotect the page?138.237.240.232 00:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Better image for HTTP cookie

I'd like to replace today's FA thumbnail from this to this. Please comment at Talk:HTTP cookie. Melchoir 00:29, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

File:HTTPCookie.png

See the images at right: Melchoir 00:54, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I liked your idea so much I've actually already put it in the article. Whether is goes on the mainpage is another matter though; anyone else care to comment?--Pharos 01:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, whoops, sorry, it looks like we both uploaded it. Could you, or someone, work some admin magic and merge/redirect/delete/whatever Image:Internetcookie.jpg to Image:HTTP-gingerbreadcookie.jpg? Melchoir 01:11, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, we've had three supports and no opposes after a while so I've changed it.--Pharos 01:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Woohoo! Thanks. Melchoir 01:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

There's some more discussion now, including the two images at right. Me, I like the fortune cookie. Melchoir 06:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Though I admit it's clever, just a picture of a fortune cookie is not really relevant to the topic. I think your discovery of a real-life public information cartoon is rather more appropriate.--Pharos 06:12, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

More appropriate, absolutely. I just worry that it's also more confusing and distracting. Melchoir 06:23, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Copyright status of this image

At Image talk:Internetcookie.png, two separate users have brought up the possible copyvio status of this image. Apparently, the left side of the image is Microsoft clipart, which is not allowed to be redistributed in this manner. Just thought I should bring the discussion to the Main Page, where it might be more noticed. — Scm83x ^{hook 'em} 09:54, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

In that case, we should change the image ASAP, being on the front page and all. I'm for the choco-chip image, as it is clearly a cookie, and the article explains the details. In the article itself, some sort of clever image like the one shown (but free of copyvio concerns) seems fine, but when viewed on the front page as a thumbnail, it's almost impossible to make out what's going on. -Harmil 14:44, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I've already replaced the Microsoft clipart with a PD image from the Commons. —David Levy 14:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Plain text image

An HTTP cookie

Ok, if we want the visual pun, that's cool, I support either of the actual cookie images. But if we don't want the visual pun, I suggest the image to the right as a simple and yet accurate representation of a real cookie, gathered by telnetting to port 80 on google.com and issuing:

GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: www.google.com

The screenshot was of a gnome-terminal and was done in the Gimp. -Harmil 15:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

That's probably a good addition to the article, but not visually interesting or explanatory enough for the front page, IMO. --Dhartung | Talk 16:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, keep in mind, right now we have a goggle-wearing gingerbread man. You can only go up in terms of explanatory value ;-) -Harmil 16:44, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Can this image legally be licensed under a CC licence? GNOME would have to be licensed with the same licence. Should the correct licence not be the GPL? Johnleemk | Talk 17:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Flag of Singapore

It ought to have a border--it's hard to see looking down at an LCD. Right now it looks like a band of red with empty space below it. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 01:38, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I concur. Melchoir 01:40, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

You're right; at the time I put it up, somehow I couldn't get the "border" template to work with the image on the right. Any ideas?--Pharos 01:42, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

If necessary, you can always make a new image with the border already on it. I'm not sure why the template wouldn't work; I thought I have seen images with borders in ITN. joturner 01:54, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Apparently the problem was that someone changed template:border to force the image to display the inline. I've stripped this out for template:border-notinline, though I do wonder why the change was made in the first place...--Pharos 02:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I can see the border inline. FellowWikipedian 19:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

the talk

you dont spell britain like that u spell it brittain —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.61.101.247 (talk • contribs)

Sorry, Britain has one T, but we don't know what you're on about because the word "Britain" doesn't appear on the Main Page or Talk:Main Page either. --Dhartung | Talk 16:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I typed in the talk and got this. Mabie this is what he is talking about? FellowWikipedian 19:37, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Reagan who?

"...was restored so successfully that Reagan presented..." There is no previous mention of President Reagan in this blurb, so you need to spell out of whom you speak.

Fixed. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Pink Floyd

The links are not right. --Aaron Walden 00:12, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Something shady is happening. Yanksox 00:38, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

What happend? Someone vandilized the article. Get an admin's help immediately! Can anybody help? FellowWikipedian 00:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The page had to be temporarily deleted and restored by an admin to get rid of private info that someone posted. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 00:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The article is still there but not on the main page. Go here. FellowWikipedian 00:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The acticle is back. FellowWikipedian 00:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Fixed in about a minute...Whew! --216.209.112.148 00:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

It's gone again. :( (^'-')^ Covington 01:17, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

It's going crazy...Ouuplas 01:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah... -EdGl 01:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Its a...Red Link? What happened? TomStar81 01:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

See the discussion here. FellowWikipedian 02:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

• We should have a plan for these kind of things when it happens, try switching it with tomorrow's article, and we will put pink floyd tomorrow. Pseudoanonymous 19:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

But he/she picks whatever article is on the main page, so the only thing to do is protect the page. Prodego ^talk 19:31, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

We should always protect the articles that are going to be featured. FellowWikipedian 20:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

See User:Raul654/protection for why we shouldn't. Prodego ^talk 20:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Then we should at least semi-protect the featured articles for a while before the vandal strikes to prevent him from doing this.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 22:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

After reading the semi-protection policy, I withdraw my suggestion. But nevertheless, there has to be something we can do about this.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 03:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

It would be relatively easy to temporarily redirect to a protected version of the featured article before it was vandalized, probably one without a history, and then replace the redirect with the original article after it has been fixed. That all depends on if anybody thinks it's actually worth it for the short time that the article is down, and the main priority is just to get the private info off the front page as soon as possible, so it might just make things more difficult for the admins.  freshgavinΓΛĿЌ  06:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

On this day: May 8/9

I am quite surprised that in the On This Day section, there is no mention of the German surrender to the Red Army in 1945. If I may, I would like to suggest putting this on the On This Day section:

1945-Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel, Admiral Hans-Georg von Friedeburg, and Colonel-General Hans-Jürgen Stumpff signed the final German surrender to the Red Army in Berlin-Karlshorst. -User:FritzK0310

VE Day is on "On This Day". The two are equivalent, so there's no need for it to be there twice. —Cuiviénen (talk•contribs), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 @ 01:00 UTC

Actually, that was yesterday (UTC). Victory Day (Eastern Europe), the Soviet equivalent, is up there today. —Cuiviénen (talk•contribs), Tuesday, 9 May 2006 @ 01:03 UTC

The Wilhelm Keitel page says he signed the capitulation papers to the Red Army on May 9. The May 9 page says the same thing. End of World War II in Europe says that should be May 8. For those familiar with WW2 history, please help confirm the date and reply on Talk: Wilhelm Keitel. Until the dates can be confirmed, let's not post this on the Main Page. Thanks. -- PFHLai 02:06, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

"That surrender took place in two installments - once in Reims on May 7 and again in Berlin on May 9" -- A World At Arms, pg 827. Raul654 02:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The German Instrument of Surrender signed in Berlin was dated May 8, 1945 (Wikisource). -- PFHLai 07:06, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The signing was announced on May 9. I've rewritten the line in On This Day accordingly. -- PFHLai 08:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I think we also have a German Instrument of Surrender page - I wonder if that is correct? Carcharoth 14:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. It is at a dated title: German Instrument of Surrender, 1945 - now I'm off to check whether anyone above stumbled across this page (it is categorised under "surrenders" after all) and made it consistent with the rest of Wikipedia... Carcharoth 14:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I haven't checked it all, but it looks like there was indeed a Wikipedia article about this under our noses all the time... I'll do a redirect from German Instrument of Surrender. See also Japanese Instrument of Surrender and Category:Surrenders. Carcharoth 15:00, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

DYK, May 9th

Shouldn't "the Russian Futurists 1912 manifesto" have an apostrophe after the s in "Futurists"? I suppose you could argue that it's the other way, but it looks wrong to me. --Doug (talk) 15:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Correction: I think it should be "Russian Futurist" or "Russian Futurists'", when you consider other uses of manifesto such as "Conservative manifesto" "Republican manifesto" etc. --Doug (talk) 15:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

... or The Communist Manifesto. He's right. By the way, Doug, there's a page dedicated for pointing out errors like these. It's at Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors (or WP:ERRORS). joturner 02:20, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Typo in the "In the News" Section

Judgment is spelled wrong, in "Judgement is given in London for Apple Computer in Apple Corps v. Apple Computer, a trademark lawsuit brought by The Beatles' company, Apple Corps." No "e". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.84.188.205 (talk • contribs) .

Thanks for bringing this up; I have fixed it. AndyZ _t 01:00, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

For future reference, judgement can spelled with or without the e. joturner 02:18, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

My (paper! omg!) dictionary concurs. But it looks so wrong without the 'e' lol --Monotonehell 10:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I was going to note that "judgement" is the more appropriate spelling for an account of an event that occurred in the UK, but our "judgment" article indicates that the spelling "judgment" is preferred in legal contexts. Rather than reverting, I've reworded. —David Levy 12:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Pic of the day

could the passage be somewhat rephrased?

• The term "rooster" is reputedly so used because the cock is said to roost over clutches of eggs to guard them. "is said to" is redundant, when we've already used "reputedly".
• However, they will also crow during the rest of the day, and even sometimes on a bright moonlit night. Should we use present tense?--K.C. Tang 01:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I was wondering if the use of the term 'cock' was wider than the term 'cockerel' which I was familiar with. 57.66.51.165 08:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. Couldn't someone replace the word cock with cockerel??? Also, doesn't seem like it needs to be emboldend either. To me personally, it just looks like someone's attempt to get a rude word on the mainpage, if you get what I mean?Dbalsdon 21:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

No. Cock is an acceptable word. Even the King James Bible uses it in the story of Peter denying Jesus. --Nelson Ricardo 22:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Picture error in the news

The news column of the site shows the locator map for Tasmania yet the picture info (the hover-on text) says "Flag of Tasmania." That doesn't look much like a flag.

Thanks for pointing this out. I changed it to "location of Tasmania". Raven4x4x 03:24, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

accuracy

How does Wikipedia ensure t that its articles are rereliable and accurrrate sources of information?

How does WIKIPEDIA Ensure that the website is not hacked and is not tampered by the users ??

It doesn't ensure or guarantee it. See the Wikipedia article for the overview, the Wikipedia:General disclaimer that is found at the bottom of every page and Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is so great for one relevant point of view. - BanyanTree 16:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

The former - with dedicated teams of editors, much like any other encyclopedia. The latter - with really strong firewalls and vandalism patrollers. —Cuiviénen (talk•contribs), Wednesday, 10 May 2006 @ 16:39 UTC