英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基

草榴社区 | 妖娆社区 | 激情小说 | 激情视频 | 色小鬼影视 | 国产精品

Page semi-protected

Talk:Main Page

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archives: Sections of this page older than three days are automatically relocated to the newest archive.

001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019 020 021 022 023 024 025 026 027 028 029 030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 059 060 061 062 063 064 065 066 067 068 069 070 071 072 073 074 075 076 077 078 079 080 081 082 083 084 085 086 087 088 089 090 091 092 093 094 095 096 097 098 099 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203

Main Page error reports

To report an error in current or upcoming Main Page content, please add it to the appropriate section below.

  • Where is the error? An exact quotation of all or part of the text in question will help.
  • Please 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 15:45 on 24 May 2022), not adjusted to your local time zone.
  • Do not use {{edit fully-protected}} on this page, which will not give you a faster response; it is unnecessary as this page is not protected and will in fact cause problems if used here. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
  • Done? Once an error has been fixed, rotated off the Main Page or acknowledged not to be an error, the report will be removed from this page; please check the revision history for a record of any discussion or action taken, as no archives are kept.
  • No chit-chat: Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere, such as the relevant article or project talk page.
  • Please respect other editors. A real person wrote the blurb or hook for which you are suggesting a fix, or a real person noticed what they honestly believe is an issue with the blurb or hook that you wrote. Everyone is interested in creating the best Main Page possible; with the compressed time frame, there is sometimes more stress and more opportunities to step on toes. Please be civil to fellow users.
  • Can you resolve the problem yourself? If the error lies primarily in the content of an article linked from the Main Page, consider first attempting to fix the problem there before reporting it here if necessary. Text on the Main Page generally defers to the articles with bolded links. In addition, upcoming content is typically only protected from editing 24 hours before its scheduled appearance; in most cases, you can be bold and fix any issues yourself.

Errors in the summary of the featured article

Today's FA

Tomorrow's FA

Day-after-tomorrow's FA

Errors with "In the news"

Errors in "Did you know"

Current DYK

Next DYK

Next-but-one DYK

Errors in "On this day"

Today's OTD

Tomorrow's OTD

Day-after-tomorrow's OTD

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(May 27)

Monday's FL

(May 30)

Errors in the summary of the featured picture

Today's POTD

"Brigid Balfour (24 May 1914 – 1 March 1994) was a British scientist who studied cellular morphology and ultrastructure in relation to immune function. She advanced the study of dendritic cells, realising that they were derived from Langerhans cells and played an important role in initiating and promoting immune reactions." The tense is wrong. Dendritic cells haven't changed after her death and continue to be derived from Langerhans cells. The last sentence should read "She advanced the study of dendritic cells, realising that they are derived from Langerhans cells and play an important role in initiating and promoting immune reactions" Fgf10 (talk) 06:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tomorrow's POTD

General discussion

Wikipedia:Picture of the day

Picture of the day is a feature on the main page that is urgently in need of other participants. There is no co-ordinator and I have been listing most of the POTDs myself, but now have less time to devote to Wikipedia than previously. For example, there are five days in May for which POTDs have yet to be selected. Help would be much appreciated. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:01, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cwmhiraeth: I had no idea that the project was in such a concerning state. I'd love to help out, but I have no experience with POTD. What specific tasks does the project need more help with, since this isn't really clear at WP:POTD?PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 00:46, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, just found Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Guidelines. I'll give a go at creating one, I guess. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 00:51, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cwmhiraeth and PerfectSoundWhatever: I used to be fairly active in scheduling POTDs myself, but have also taken a step back owing to real-life concerns. Despite this, I do still tinker with the templates to make sure they're in a consistent "house style" before Main Page appearance, and I would certainly be happy to do more scheduling if needed. (P.S. just a note that the POTD guidelines page is generally accurate but ever so slightly out of date.) — RAVENPVFF · talk · 01:06, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cwmhiraeth and Ravenpuff: I gave it a shot Template:POTD/2022-05-25. Would either of you mind letting me know if I did it correctly? I haven't placed any of the accompanying templates (e.g. {{Picture of the day}}) in case I made the POTD incorrectly. Face-smile.svgPerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 01:33, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PerfectSoundWhatever: Thank you, that looks excellent. I will add the requisite templates. If you and Ravenpuff can do a few POTDs, and @Amakuru: also helps, we should be able to keep up. I also appreciate Ravenpuff's attention to the MOS details that I often miss. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:02, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PerfectSoundWhatever, Cwmhiraeth, and Ravenpuff: thanks for agreeing to contribute to the project, the more hands we have on deck the easier it will be for everyone. That template looks great, I've just taken the minor liberty of removing the official name from the template. In most cases it is sufficient to call it by whatever the article title calls it, and it looked a bit excessive to also include the official name in the template. As Ravenpuff says, the guidelines are more or less fine. Just to highlight one of them (and those with experience in this project will recall that I beat this drum quite often!) - it is important that all facts used in the POTD template be cited to reliable sources. The article itself doesn't have to be fully cited (unlike the rest of the main page) but the prose used on the main page itself does need to be. Other than that, good luck!
And apologies to Cwmhiraeth, after a spate earlier this year I've not done much scheduling in the past couple of months due to off-wiki reasons. Will try to step back up to the plate again as much as I can. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 09:11, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do we not have co-ords for a reason? Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 19:41, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Crisco 1492 was coordinator for many years but we do not currently have a coordinator. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:01, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • And before me, Howcheng... from its initiation, I believe. But yeah, I'm not willing to get back into the drama involved in the main page (and besides, you kinda need a mop IIRC). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:10, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, I did it for a long time, but I was not the first person either. I don't think there was any single individual before me, but people like PFHLai contributed on occasion. I wrote the guidelines, but as I haven't been involved in a number of years, I'm not comfortable updating them if they're out of date. howcheng {chat} 20:05, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, maybe our first point of call is to look around and see who might want to co-ordinate this task. Adam Cuerden is this something you'd like to be involved with, or can think of someone who would might be interested. As much as it probably needs someone with the mop, it might be pertinent to have someone very familiar with FP picking out the images and then having an admin add to the queue. Just a thought. I have so little knowledge of the pictures side of Wikipedia! Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 20:10, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your original question, there is no formal process for selecting a coordinator. Someone just has to be willing to step up. howcheng {chat} 20:43, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I could, but I'd probably have to just schedule them in order, because I have too high of a proportion to get selective. Is there a list of FPs that haven't appeared? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 00:04, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Adam Cuerden: We have Category:Featured pictures that have not appeared on the Main Page, minus Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused for those which probably shouldn't appear. Certes (talk) 00:16, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. No list in order, eh? That's... awkward. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 10:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, first thing I'm going to do is to clear out the ones on Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused that don't have particularly good reasons. We don't hold things back because a different version appeared on the main page anymore, so, come, Anatomy Lesson! Also anything that's blocked purely for risk of giggles. Wikipedia will survive a urination cartoon. I'll hold off on the sexual and extreme violent content, though. This removes seven items from Unused that I just can't see as being that controversial, and leaves eight, of which I could see three to five more being possible, the remaining ones, though, we've either missed the boat on (low-quality, better versions available, not used in any significant way anymore), or they're problematic as fuck. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 10:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And we're now ready to early July, which is a good start. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 18:26, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
{{Featured picture}} attempts to add images to Featured pictures that have not appeared on the Main Page with a sort code of yyyy-mm, based on the FP nomination date, so the category is generally in date order. Most of the first 300 pictures are from sets where one member has been featured, but there are good individual candidates from about the middle of the second page of 200. Certes (talk) 18:43, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Certes: Aye. Very clever! I'm working my way through, holding off on money until I see if June 28th breaks anything, and leaving the Lichfield Cathedral as there's two other cathedral sets going (I'm just scheduling sets to run once a month until completion, as it's easier to set them up as a batch). Saw there was a big batch of birds coming up, so trying to pre-schedule some of those too. Currently up to early July, which is a nice backlog. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 19:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to take over if we can get a bot to make a list of all featured pictures that haven't yet appeared on the main page in order that I can work from. Otherwise, it's impossible to be fair. I know there's going to need to be a certain amount of reordering things, but we really should be getting the oldest FPs first, barring anniversaries/holidays/other special events. We currently are good until June 22. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 12:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC) Okay, that's clever. Template:Featured picture does a bunch of auto-categorising, and sorts by date. I can work with that Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 13:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On another thread, is there a script or something I can use to notify pages and users that a POTD is coming up? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 12:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - it would be better IMHO to have the system where lots of people step in and do this, rather than having a single coordinator. I worked on this mostly on my own for a couple of years 2018-2019, and it's a lot of work for one person... which I think has been an issue for Cwmhiraeth recently too. As for ordering, I would oppose having a bot do it, due to the FPs now being equally spaced in terms of what was promoted when. The older ones tend to be a lot of artworks and coins etc, and we purposely do not schedule those all in order. As noted above, I'm happy to muck in with this as and when, without committing to doing all the work myself!  — Amakuru (talk) 13:20, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I meant more as to whether we could have a script where you set up, say, Template:POTD/2022-06-09 then clicked a button, and it notified the article and nominators for you. Well, I've spaced out the remaining bits of Hunting of the Snark, next step is to go through and start setting up the money. Think we should have one or two money-related FPs every month until we run out (which looks to be about 5 years into the future, but once they're set up, we can ignore them). Any volunteers? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 14:13, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

Honestly, we could probably use more participation at the project that provides these images to the main page. We're consistently promoting slightly less than one image a day, which was not true historically. If we run out of FPs, that will be a problem. Even if it's just bringing over images you like from commons:Commons:FPC, that's still going to put those Commons images in articles, and a more robust voting pool never hurts. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 23:54, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Södermanland Runic Inscription 113

Just want to say thanks to everyone here and on WP:DYK who managed to make this Runestone's appearance on the mainpage such a success. It's felt wonderful. Given that the image looks to be passing WP:FPC, I suppose we'll be seeing it again in a couple years, but this has been a wonderful start. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 10:35, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lynching2.jpg

Please read the file name before clicking on it. It's exactly what it sounds like.

Okay. Let's talk. Should this appear in Picture of the day? I think there is educational value in shocking people sometimes, but I'm inclined to say, "No", because there's a lot of photographic decisions that might be coincidental, but which also feel like they paint a narrative:

Not photographing the face is a photographic decision that reinforces the dehumanisation of the victim. The hat - seriously, why would he be wearing a hat after a lynching - hides any evidence of beatings prior to the lynching. His neck is hidden by the collar, hiding the actual lynching except for a short bit of chain. His arms are tied, but that isn't possible. It feels like this photograph was staged, the body arranged to lessen the violence, and hide the humanity of the victim.

Also, there's an extreme lack of documentation for this image. Other than knowing it comes from 1925, we don't know where it happened, we don't know who it happened to. And, I hesitate to say this, but the lack of documentation means we don't even know for certain this was a real hanging: stage rigs for fake-hanging someone aren't particularly complex. (Obviously, lynchings happen, but that would go some way to explaining some of the other features of the image).

I'm open to violence on the main page. But it needs to serve a purpose. Any objections to leaving this one off? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 11:49, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't see this image on the main page. Am I missing something? --Jayron32 15:41, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nor do I. I just see another bird, as is typical for PotD. WaltCip-(talk) 16:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Doing the schedule work for next month's POTD, and this is one of the images (theoretically) in the queue. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 16:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you're scheduling, and it bothers you, then who's going to stop you? Personally, doesn't make any difference to me. It would not be a problem to put it on the main page, but hey, if you're the one doing the hard work of setting up the queue and scheduling the pictures, it's your world. Nothing bad happens if you find other pictures to take up the queue. --Jayron32 18:19, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There's no rule that all FPs have to be POTD. We have no shortage of other images to feature. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 15:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Planned POTD 2022-07-25 (File:Nadar - "Hermaphrodite" (Seventh Gallica image).jpg)

I'm just going to note this here. It was next in the queue, we routinely put up artwork with more explicit imagery, it's historically significant, and it's medical, not titilation. Wikipedia is not censored, and I can't find any reason to justify excluding non-sexual nudity under any policy. However, I don't imagine springing it on the main page and not saying anything is particularly friendly.

If there's worries about people looking at Wikipedia at work or in schools, we could always do a click through, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 10:11, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden think we've had a long discussion about that image being a problem - plus the one above are you just trying to push Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused over all of the other possible candidates?? — xaosflux Talk 10:31, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
From one: Talk:Main_Page/Archive_199#Picture_of_an_intersex_person (where you were pushing for this) and Talk:Main Page/Archive 194/Section 7 with 78% oppose -- going to just restate: Oppose for all of that, and that you should first try to establish a consensus in favor to move this forward now. — xaosflux Talk 10:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"I will not say that there is consensus against ever using this photograph on the Main Page. " - closing admin.
The only reason I can see to keep images like this off the main page is because dealing with the inevitable unjustified complaints will stress out quite a lot of Wikipedians. (And somebody will give in to the pressure and remove the image). —Kusma (talk) 11:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hence why I suggested the possibility of a click through, if it would simplify things. There's no policy-based argument nor consensus to keep it off. Wikipedia will not be harmed by non-sexual nudity, especially with a click through. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 11:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm kind of worried about the precedent of admitting to the world that Wikipedia is censored by showing a clickthrough. We don't do clickthroughs for other controversial images like File:Jyllands-Posten-pg3-article-in-Sept-30-2005-edition-of-KulturWeekend-entitled-Muhammeds-ansigt.png or File:Bahá'u'lláh (Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Núrí) in 1868.jpg either. —Kusma (talk) 11:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You have a point. If we don't censor Muhammed, we really, really shouldn't censor nudity. That would not send a good message. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 12:26, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is (quite rightly) not censored, in the sense that if I go looking for an image of someone's genitals I expect to find one. However, that doesn't justify thrusting them in my face on the front page. We have plenty of uncontentious images to display, and arguably many of them are of better quality than the one proposed. I wouldn't be offended; most people probably wouldn't; but some (especially younger readers) might. If we start to run out of material then we can consider putting controversial images up but, until then, let's play it safe. Certes (talk) 11:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If children are anything like I remember being, they will be the last to be offended; they will be fascinated! In fact nowadays most have probably discovered far more "shocking" images of genitalia by surfing the internet. This image is highly educational and I admire Adam's courage in scheduling it. Jmchutchinson (talk) 13:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose, if only to avoid stirring up drama. This is the third time Adam had tried to get this picture as POTD. The first time in 2019, we wasted 90,000 bytes discussing at Talk:Main_Page/Archive_194/Section_7 to overwhelming opposition, and when he brought it up again in 2020 at Talk:Main_Page/Archive_199#Picture_of_an_intersex_person there was no consensus to overturn the previous decision. I understand that Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED, but I think Wikipedia:Offensive material#least astonishment applies here as people coming to the main page would not be expecting to see images where genitalia are the primary focus of the image. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 15:34, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging all participants in the previous two discussions that haven't already commented here: @Amakuru, Drmies, ImpWarfare, Cullen328, HiLo48, Masem, Bondegezou, Funcrunch, Ritchie333, WanderingWanda, Ravenpuff, Herostratus, Frederika Eilers, Compassionate727, LookingYourBest, FlightTime, Serial Number 54129, Bruce1ee, 331dot, Calidum, The Rambling Man, MB, WhatamIdoing, StudiesWorld, Trystan, , LetUsNotLoseHeart, GRuban, Hut 8.5, Bilorv, WaltCip, Davey2010, CIreland, Trankuility, Robvanvee, TheDJ, Nizolan, Deli nk, Masumrezarock100, Levivich, Alanscottwalker, Hlevy2, Sluzzelin, Funcrunch, Trankuility, MPS1992, MJL, Pbsouthwood, and SmokeyJoe. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 15:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Part 2: @Abote2, Gerrit, MZEEBETE, Alison, Aoba47, Boing! said Zebedee, AnotherToast, Jonathunder, Rockstone35, Leaky caldron, Ivar the Boneful, Sceptre, XOR'easter, Sdkb, Kingsif, and Coffeeandcrumbs. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 15:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ping to three users in the above list who have since changed their usernames: @ITBF, Ainz Ooal Gown, and Vaulter. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 15:45, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Planned POTD 2022-06-14 (File:Checker shadow illusion.svg)

"Different versions of the same picture " (Tangentially related to /Unused) - are you also really trying to push basically duplicate images to main page now too? (File:Grey square optical illusion.PNG vs File:Checker shadow illusion.svg) Are we out of images? — xaosflux Talk 10:46, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As for the other, they're different versions. The new one's a vector, which is a lot of work, and hiding that from the main page because of an inferior version appearing is something we stopped doing five years ago. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 11:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
re the format version of those shapes - I'm not really buying that as something that is best for the readers - what do we expect readers will gain from that? — xaosflux Talk 13:28, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd make a similar point about near-duplicate images, whether it's a new version of an illusion or a banknote which looks just like last month's banknote with a different number on. We currently have plenty of varied images which have not appeared. Having been featured for a long time is just one selection criterion; I'd argue that variety is at least as important. Certes (talk) 12:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's also been over 15 years since the non-vector version appeared. It appeared in the very early days of Wikipedia; why should we slight our vector artists because of ancient Wiki history? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 12:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We don't need to honor our "artists" at the expense of our readers. — xaosflux Talk 13:29, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Planned POTD 2022-06-13 (File:Michele Merkin 1.jpg)

There was clear consensus against including this image as POTD at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day/Archive 6#Discussion regarding possible picture of the day: Michele Merkin. I'm confused as to why User:Adam Cuerden removed it from Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Unused without discussion and scheduled it to run on 2022-06-13. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 15:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]