Talk:Main Page

Main Page error reports

To report an error in content currently or imminently on the Main Page, use the appropriate section below.

• Where is the error? An exact quotation of the text in question helps.
• Offer a correction if possible.
• References are helpful, especially when reporting an obscure factual or grammatical error.
• Time zones. The Main Page runs on Coordinated Universal Time (UTC, currently 12:39 on 9 December 2024) and is not adjusted to your local time zone.
• Can you resolve the problem yourself? If the error lies primarily in the content of an article linked from the Main Page, fix the problem there before reporting it here. Text on the Main Page generally defers to the articles with bolded links. Upcoming content on the Main Page is usually only protected from editing beginning 24 hours before its scheduled appearance. Before that period, you can be bold and fix any issues yourself.
• Do not use {{edit fully-protected}} on this page, which will not get a faster response. It is unnecessary, because this page is not protected, and causes display problems. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
• No chit-chat. Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere, such as the talk page of the relevant article or project.
• Respect other editors. Another user wrote the text you want changed, or reported an issue they see in something you wrote. Everyone's goal should be producing the best Main Page possible. The compressed time frame of the Main Page means sometimes action must be taken before there has been time for everyone to comment. Be civil to fellow users.
• Reports are removed when resolved. Once an error has been addressed or determined not to be an error, or the item has been rotated off the Main Page, the report will be removed from this page. Check the revision history for a record of any discussion or action taken; no archives are kept.

Administrators: Clear all reports

Errors in the summary of the featured article

Please do not remove this invisible timestamp. See WT:ERRORS and WP:SUBSCRIBE. - Dank (push to talk) 01:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Errors with "In the news"

I think Fall of the Assad regime should be linked to from the word "overthrown." — Knightoftheswords 18:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Linked. Stephen 23:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

I think Fall of Damascus should be relinked to Fall of the Assad regime sure it is the battle that ousted Assad (and his dynasty) from power but I think the "Fall of Assad regime" is more fitting. — Rager7 (talk)

overthrown ... flees is excessive, either word alone is enough. Srnec (talk) 20:31, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Srnec, maybe you have a point but I can't think of a reworded blurb that maintains the link to Fall of the Assad regime. If you can think of a blurb, please post your suggestion here. Schwede66 23:49, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Simplest way: Syrian rebel forces capture Damascus following multiple offensives and overthrow president Bashar al-Assad (pictured). If it is critical to mention Russia, then: Syrian rebel forces capture Damascus following multiple offensives, forcing president Bashar al-Assad (pictured) to flee to Russia. Srnec (talk) 02:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Now do it with the existing links. Stephen 02:44, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to Srnec in case you don't monitor this page. Schwede66 08:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

• I agree that the current blurb is overloaded with links. It seems that there wasn't a significant battle for Damascus as Assad jumped before he was pushed and so his regime collapsed without a fight. The bold link therefore ought to be Fall of the Assad regime rather than a battle that didn't happen. The link to the various offensives seems adequate to cover the limited fighting that did happen. A simplified blurb could then be:

• Syrian president Bashar al-Assad (pictured) flees to Russia as his regime collapses following opposition offensives.

Andrew🐉(talk) 10:09, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

That might be OK, but firstly the linked article has citations needed, and secondly you need to run this past WP:ITN/C as it's a blurb and linked article change not a straight error.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:59, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Current DYK

Thomas Sewell

• that Thomas Sewell attempted to recruit Brenton Tarrant, the perpetrator of the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings, into the Lads Society?

The sources makes this very much clear this is a claim from Sewell and not a fact: [1] [2] Traumnovelle (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Changed to:

• ... that Thomas Sewell said that in 2017 he attempted to recruit Brenton Tarrant, the perpetrator of the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings, into the Lads Society?

- Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 07:33, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Abortion in Gabon

• ... that while supporting a law easing restrictions on abortion in Gabon, Prime Minister Rose Christiane Raponda said "it is not yet the right time" for further legalization

"Legalization" is binary: something is either legal or it is not. You can't, therefore, have "further" legalization, any more than something can become "more legal". Suggest "further liberalization". UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

• Thanks for bringing that up, UndercoverClassicist. I have removed the phrase "for further legalization" from the abortion in Gabon hook as that qualification is not present in the article. Looking at the history, that qualification hasn't been removed by recent editing either. DYK hooks shouldn't make statements that aren't in the target article. Schwede66 07:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Errors in "On this day"

Today's OTD

The Main page says: 1688 – In the only substantial military action in England during the Glorious Revolution, forces loyal to William of Orange were decisively victorious at the Battle of Reading. The Battle of Reading page says: The Battle of Reading[b] took place on 9 December 1688 in Reading, Berkshire. It was one of only two substantial military actions in England during the Glorious Revolution (the other being at Wincanton), and was a decisive victory for forces loyal to William III of Orange.

So, 'only' or 'one of two'?

The Wincanton clash involved about 150 people and killed about 20; we have it named as the Wincanton Skirmish. The Battle of Reading involved about 900 people and killed about the same number. I'll leave it to others to determine whether that's enough of a difference to mark one as "substantial" and the other as not. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:43, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I've changed it to read In one of two substantial military actions in England.... Thanks for your report, UndercoverClassicist. Schwede66 08:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Tomorrow's OTD

The 1848 Napoleon III entry needs to be changed to past tense.:Jay8g [V•T•E] 08:11, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I've tweaked the hook as suggested and made other improvements, too. Schwede66 08:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(December 13)

Monday's FL

(December 9, today)

Errors in the summary of the featured picture

Notice to administrators: When fixing POTD errors, please update the corresponding regular version (i.e. without "protected" in the page title) in addition to the Main Page version linked below.

General discussion

Issue with wide TFA images on mobile

Moved from WP:ERRORS

 – Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 08:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Can someone try to figure out how to fix wide image formatting in the FA blurbs on mobile devices? This has become more and more apparent with recent FAs. Right now for the KARE article, the image has a width that is not quite 100% of the box it is in, but the text is still trying to wrap alongside it in the narrow space that remains. This results in a whopping 2 characters per line appearing for the first 4 lines of the blurb. It is incredibly frustrating as a reader and long-time contributor that mobile layouts can still look like this in 2024. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 06:10, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

This is probably best as a general thread at Talk:Main Page unless there's an issue specific to the KARE image. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 06:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Agree with T: this isn't an error in the blurb (which is what this section is for), but a flaw in the structure way beyond the capabilities of any editor to fix - it's something the WMF tech people need to fix. - SchroCat (talk) 08:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Moved. Courtesy pings @Y2kcrazyjoker4 and SchroCat. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 08:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

I see the same problem on mobile. I seem to recall that when we've had this problem before, it was simply fixed by putting {{nowrap}} around the problematic text. So in this case, something like:

{{nowrap|'''[[KARE (TV)|KARE]]'''}} {{nowrap|(channel 11)}}

I haven't tested this though. Modest Genius ^talk 12:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

"Main Pag" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Main Pag has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 9 § Main Pag until a consensus is reached. Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 12:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)