Talk:Main Page

Purge page cache

Main page error reports

To report an error you have noticed on the current main page or tomorrow's main page please add it to the appropriate section below. You can do this by pressing the [edit] button to the right of the appropriate below section's heading. Also, please sign your post using four tildes (~~~~)

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 12:07 on 5 June 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, determined not to be an error, or the item has 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"

• Comment - unfortunately I don't think we have a usable image of the Chang'e spacecraft, I've just removed the two that were in the article as dubious copyright status. If anyone thinks differently or has other images, let me know. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 08:34, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Errors in "On this day"

Today's OTD

• In the 1997 item it says "...ordered the detainment of his rival..." but shouldn't it be "...ordered the detention of his rival..."? "Detention" is a much more common word than "detainment", according to Google Trends. I suspect this a French term creeping into the story. Abductive (reasoning) 03:51, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

  or "ordered the detainment of his rival Denis Sassou Nguesso detained"—Bagumba (talk) 04:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

  "detention" it is. Schwede66 08:07, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(June 7)

Monday's FL

(June 10)

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.

Today's POTD

• "They grow to a height...". Nothing in the plural has been mentioned before. So please change "They" to "Trees". JMCHutchinson (talk) 22:03, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

  @Amakuru and Ravenpuff: Notifying you as the main editors. Another option is "It grows to a height...", as it could be unclear which trees are being referred to. —Bagumba (talk) 01:21, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

• "They become tan when mature,". "They" could refer to cones or bracts. Please change "They" to "The cones". JMCHutchinson (talk) 22:03, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
  • I implemented both of the above changes (though I went with "The trees") before seeing Bagumba's comment. The change to "The cones" introduces a repetition problem, but I figured that was better than a clarity problem. I'd be happy if others want to wordsmith further. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:28, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
• The link for "trifid" could be handier if pipe is changed to section ie [[Glossary of botanical terms#T|trifid]] JennyOz (talk) 05:39, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

   Done Schwede66 08:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Main page general discussion

"... is discovered to contain water " (???) ....uh, yeah, right.

Give me a break; where's the frickin' proof. And the article itself condradicts the headline!!! READ: "Using a combination of the previously published Hubble Space Telescope measurements and new theoretical models, Barman found strong evidence for water absorption in the atmosphere of the planet."

New theoretical models??? HELL-frickin'-O!!!!!

And "strong evidence" does not constitute a discovery, unless you're dealing with super sloppy standards, and a low bar for proof. Maybe the operative word "strong" should have read "kinda strong" or maybe "deeply-felt" or "smacking". But is it really, "unmistakeable," "decisive," or "persistent."

Hey, maybe somebody needs funding, give it to them; but don't say things are true unless they absolutely are beyond a reasonable doubt. PLEASE!!!!

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" [Carl Sagan] --Charlesrkiss 03:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Please join the discussion at Talk:HD 209458 b #Water vapor discovery question. If the line on ITN needs to be re-phrased, please post a new line at WP:ERRORS or WP:ITN/C. Thanks. --199.71.174.100 04:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Unless it was changed, you also seem to have missed part of the headline - it reads "...water vapor in its atmosphere", not "water". —AySz88\^-^ 04:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

And it should actually be rather surprising that we've never detected water vapor in the atmosphere of extrasolar planets, not the other way around; every planet in our system that has an atmosphere has at least some water vapor in it. Saturn, IIRC, has a higher percentage than Earth. —Cuiviénen 05:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't care about the above discussion, however I think someone should point out Charlesrkiss's less than civil comments. There's no need to use less than savoury language to get a view point across & doing so only shows that you can't find a better word & must resort to swearing. Anyway, just my 2 cents. Spawn Man 05:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

What swearing? "Frickin" is to " ing" as "darned" is to "damned". "Hell" may be considered verboten by some Christian groups, but is perfectly acceptable among Catholics and probably most non-Christians. 70.23.169.146 10:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I have a theory. In about 100 years, everyone will be speaking English, and in about 101 years, everyone will be speaking German. At least the Übermensch! :)--Scheibenzahl 19:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah! The IP speaks. ;) Thansk for the reply, but the second part of my comment was hypothetical whilst the first was directly relating to the above comments. So no, he/she did not swear, but in my hypothetical explaination I was giving that person did. Thanks, :) Spawn Man 11:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

The detection itself is notable; however, what's so exciting about H₂O? It's what hydrogen & oxygen do naturally. Unstated premise is possibility of life on other planets; it would really be surprising if planets in other systems were uniformly barren of water. Billbrock 05:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

You all seem to be missing the point. The story isn't that there may be water there. The story is that this is the first time scientists have been able to detect it on a planet not in our solar system. --Monotonehell 12:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. The story is that they now (hopefully) have a better idea of how to detect water on other planets. Detecting stuff like this is not easy, you know. It's difficult enough detecting the planets themselves! Carcharoth 02:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

What did the "German and English" thing have to do wit hanything?--Katherine Kaiquser 01:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

"In the Olds"

Maybe the ITN section should be renamed to "In the Olds". What's the point of it if it lists events from three weeks ago as current? 89.172.155.225 01:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, right. It's "In The News", not "Currently In The News". If ITN is not current enough for you, please consider helping out and update wikiarticles with recent news materials. Only those articles that are well updated can be used on ITN. Thanks. --PFHLai 06:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I think tomorrow's (17th April) ITN should say about the college massacre at virginia tech college?!(ColaRules 18:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC))

Please go to WP:ITN/C to post suggestions for ITN. Thanks. --PFHLai 06:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Wikipedia ???

Kk, quick question. Why does User:Wikipedia redirect to the main page? 71.154.153.209 07:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Wikipedia is wikipedia, whose's page is the main page. Or something. Maybe... Nil Einne 07:36, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Schobeiri would be the one to ask. (S)he was the one who redirected it. ShadowHalo 08:09, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

There actually was someone who registered that username and made a few edits before being blocked (obviously). [1] After that time, the page was created and deleted several times [2] before Schobeiri decided it would be best to have a redirect there. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 14:06, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

maybe a better redirect would be the Community Portal? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 222.155.136.77 (talk) 04:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

Why even redirect it at all? --Katherine Kaiquser 01:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Featured Lists on the Main Page

Hello. I believe this has been brought up sometime before, but I'm not sure where. I'll make this a poll. No IP voting please. --Birdman1 ^{talk/contribs} 21:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Question: Should featured lists appear on the Main Page? If so, how (List of the day/week/month...)?

Support:

• Support. I don't think a little extra box on the Main Page would hurt anybody. Users work hard to get lists featured. Lists are an important organizational tool for Wikipedia. I think a "List of the week" would be nice, starting with newer lists. If the supply of new lists is exhausted, old lists can be used until new lists are created. --Birdman1 ^{talk/contribs} 21:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
• Conditional support — perhaps "featured list of the week" and "featured topic of the month"? — Deckiller 23:43, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

• But if a person doesn't read the list/topic in the first couple of days, I doubt tacking even more time will get them to look at it. ShadowHalo 00:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• The main reason I recommend week or month is so we don't run out of lists. — Deckiller 01:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• But leaving it for a week or month renders the section useless for readers, most of the time that is. ShadowHalo 01:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support Mainly because I'm working on a list ;) Majorly (hot!) 23:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support A Featured list of the day would work fine. There are 243 FLs currently and if they were featured, that number would surely increase at a rate higher than now. This is due to an incentive now possible to list editors.--Hamedog_Talk|^@ 00:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support for an FL once a week; to prevent staleness, on Monday would be the topmost part of the list, then on Tuesday the next part, up to Sunday when we reach the last part; if the list is very long it's OK if we don't reach the end of it. This is currently done on WP:FC with only the first part of the list displayed; if it can be displayed there I see absolutely no reason why we can't do it here. --Howard the Duck 03:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support - lists are just a type of article. Make the 'article of the day' a 'featured list' from time to time. Solves any problems of 'insufficient space' and 'not enough lists'. The fact that we have featured lists on the featured content page shows that they can be put into summary form. --CBD 11:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support I agree that would be a good idea, and it would help wikipedians contribute what they feel to wikipedia. --Katherine Kaiquser 00:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support But are there enough lists to rotate? Well, I guess people would be motivated to start working on them, so they would increase quickly. · AO ^Talk 17:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
• Support The idea of a Featured List of the week is a good one, especially combined with the idea of breaking it into sections for each day to add variety. Having that will encourage the proliferation of high-quality lists. I think letting readers see some of our best lists is a service to them. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

• Oppose From what I can tell, there aren't nearly enough featured lists for this to work. ShadowHalo 23:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

But would it work if we did a featured list of the week/month? --Birdman1 ^{talk/contribs} 00:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Why would we want to? If a person wants to ready the list/topic, they'll read it within the first couple of days. Leaving it up for an entire week or month isn't going to get people to read it. ShadowHalo 00:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose. There aren't nearly enough lists promoted each month to keep this up, unfortunately. —Cuiviénen 23:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

See above. --Birdman1 ^{talk/contribs} 00:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• Definitely not. —Cuiviénen 14:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose I'm not sure why this is being done as a poll, but I see one major problem with this idea. Articles can be summarized, pictures can be resized. How does one summarize a list? By putting it in list form, its about as summarized as it gets. Even if we use tiny font, lists like List of California birds and most other FLs will be extremely long. Also, in response to "reusing lists" there are currently 243 FLs, with one being nominated about every 2 days. If everyone of them passes, we would run out in less than 2 years (486 days). If only half pass, we would run out in less than a year (324 days). Doing it weekly would work, but that may start to seem stale after a while. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 00:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

We could just adapt the introduction from the featured lists, similar to what we do with featured articles. --Tntnnbltn 16:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose I really don't think that a featured list of the day/week would be all that interesting to the non-Wikipedians who frequent the Main Page. We already seem to do this at Wikipedia:Featured content, which is linked on the sidebar. Also, wouldn't adding something to the Main Page require a more substantial ordeal than a poll on this page? --Maxamegalon2000 02:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose. They all come in a different size and shape. Some are rather long. Some are tabulated and hard to squeeze onto MainPage. Where on MainPage do we put these FLs, anyway? I worry about layout problems on MainPage. --PFHLai 03:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC), 14:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose I appreciate the work that often goes into lists, but I still think that lists aren't content the same was images and prose are. They're just tools to make the user's life easier. No one would suggest a "featured template of the day", or some such. It seems like that putting things on the main page simply as a "reward" to the editors is something to be avoided. Also, why is this a poll, and why is it here? 69.95.50.15 14:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Please, no IP voting. Someone could vote twice. Please make an account. (If anyone opposes this comment, please reply.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Birdman1 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 2007 April 17 (UTC).

The IP is entitled to his/her opinion. And we should be discussing instead of voting. --PFHLai 15:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Please do not strikeout another use's comment. That should be used for self-retraction only. El_C 18:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose As much as a lot of hard work goes into lists, I don't think that the main page is the best place to feature it. Firstly I already think there are too many boxes on the main page and secondly I agree with 69.95.50.15 above, lists aren't quite the same as pictures and prose. LukeSurl 19:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Neutral

• Neutral - It's a really good idea. People work very hard on them, I why call them featured if you aren't going to recognize them for it. As of now, I don't think it'd work, because there isn't enough Featured list, however, maybe in the future, when more are featured class, we could have them on the main page.--theblueflamingo^Squawk 00:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral. I don't oppose them completely, but we have two serious issues in my opinion — lack of numbers of FLs and lack of space on the MainPage for a new section. I was thinking, though, maybe we could sneak in some "Bonus featured list"s when they're directly related to the FA of the day. This could just be one line: "Bonus featured list: List of Xes", at the bottom of the FA. These would only be featured on an occasional basis.--Pharos 03:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral. As Pharos, I concur it's an excellent idea, but so far I see two issues; (1) lack of FL's. Long before there were as many features pictures, we used to show one picture per week, but I believe doing so today won't be a good idea due to traffic Wikipedia receives daily, and (2) inconstancy with the rest of the main page and others lists. We aren't able to show the entire list except only a fraction of it, which is neither encyclopedic nor attractive — not to mention some lists are built through tables. Perhaps someday. Michaelas¹⁰ 16:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

some real discussion

The oppose votes say that there are too few FLs and they are differently structured, but the remedy is to have an FL per week, and for every day, a new section displayed so that it'll not be that stale. Which brings me, lets cut the voting and do some real discussion so we can get over this. --Howard the Duck 16:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Patriots Day in Massachusetts today

Could put that in holidays and observances. DandyDan2007 17:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget Emancipation Day in Washington, too. --199.71.174.100 19:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Patriots Day is already added. Just added Emancipation Day for next year. --PFHLai 05:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

HD 209458 b

Is the discovery of extra-solar water vapor on this planet really news-worthy anymore? It's been on for a really long time. EDIT-Forgot to sign. --Geoffron 19:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree it's not news-worthy.--Katherine Kaiquser 00:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

If you know of wikiarticles better updated with more recent news materials, please post them at WP:ITN/C. Thanks. --PFHLai 05:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It certainly is newsworthy, otherwise it would have been removed or not inserted in the first place. The only way for valid In The News items to be otherwise "removed" from the main page is for them to be pushed off the bottom of the list as newer items are added to the top. In The News isn't magic, it relies on people suggesting new items at WP:ITN/C. Recently there have been very few candidates for inclusion. As mentioned above, if you'd like to help out, please do. --Monotonehell 10:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Look of the Main Page

I like the current look of the main page. It's classy and elegant, and not at all flashy. However, some may consider it a bit boring (actually, so do I...). It's interesting to note that the English wikipedia is one of the simpler main pages, like the German and French main pages. However, some other languages, like the Indonesian are more colorful (and more friendly), and full of icons. The Italian Wikipedia is downright shiny. I read somewhere on this talk page that the main page is periodically revamped. When will this happen again? How can I get involved? I suppose it could be tedious and time-consuming, but probably a lot of fun. Thoughts? Goldfritter 09:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Use some of the Wikipedia:Main_Page_alternatives as your personal main page. ffm ✎talk 11:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Wow. That's a nice and simple way to put someone down. =/ . I don't want to customise my Wikipedia. I want to improve everyone's Wikipedia. I go back to my previous question: Is the main page going to get redone in the foreseeable future? Or should I leave it alone? Goldfritter 12:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It was redone a few months ago, so I don't see it being redone in the near future, may be in 2008. IMHO the Main Page is fine enough, I don't like flashly pages, since it distracts attention away from the content. --Howard the Duck 12:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

To Howard: thanks. To FireFoxMan: sorry - that was uncalled for. I realise that you're just trying to help. Goldfritter 13:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

"A few months ago" is actually "over a year ago" now. If there is enough support for it being redone, i could see it happening, but be warned that people only like incremental changes. —Cuiviénen 12:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

And thanks, again. Where would people go to show their support? To be honest, I think that we should wait a few more months, but if it could happen now, that would also be cool. Goldfritter 13:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

(reindent)Check out some of the links in Wikipedia:Main Page FAQ#Is there some way to make the Main Page look better? I'm certainly not going to reopen months of discussion over multiple options requiring six archives back when the user base was much smaller, but that's just me. As I recall, consensus opinion back then explicitly stated their distaste of Italian Wikipedia's design, so it may be worth checking out details before proposing it as a template. Cheers, - BanyanTree 19:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The look of the Dutch Main page has recently changed: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoofdpagina. On its talk page a few alternatives are shown. Wiki-uk 09:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

New Idea for a feature article

The Louis Vitton Cup is beginning this evening in Valancia, Spain. Perhaps someone should feature the America's Cup article as this is the third biggest sporting event in the world. Thank you. --Conner5553 12:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

America's Cup is not a featured article. ShadowHalo 13:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

maybe for ITN? --Howard the Duck 14:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The "Louis Vuitton Cup" article may become a featured article if someone (Conner5553 & friends?) can substantially expand and improve this article. Happy editing. :-) --PFHLai 15:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Virginia Tech massacre

Instead of on the front page saying a school shooting, put the name of the gunman now that he's formally been identified. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.98.125.108 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 2007 April 17 (UTC).

Suggestions for ITN are best discussed at WP:ITN/C. Thanks. --PFHLai 18:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

forgotten username

I am a member but I forgot my user name, i wish to continue to contribute content to this section of Yahoo but I cannot sign in. Please help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.11.12.188 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 2007 April 17 (UTC).

If you remember what you've previously edited, you may want to go back to those articles and check the edit history.

Please feel free to start a new account. You are also welcome to edit in Wikipedia (not Yahoo) as an anonymous contributor. If you need further help, you may want to go to Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance). Good luck. --PFHLai 19:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Featured Articles

The US Marine Corps featured Article 17 April. This article reads like a schoolboy scrapbook. Too much padding and obscure detail whilst missing key points. Much of the detail could be packed off to separate pages eg badges of rank. More pertinent information required eg the Corps problems with homosexuality, narcottics, war crimes and poor training so readers can benefit from Wikipedias ability to be up to date.Everef 21:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

As stated in the banner at the top of the page, "This page is for discussing the Wikipedia page 'Main Page'." If you have comments about an article, please discuss it at that article's talk page. ShadowHalo 22:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The point is the standard for Feature Articles main page, has deteriorated considerably and the selection criteria seems to be nothing but 'is it good enough'. Why is the Wii on the front page? Are people really that uninformed about an electronics product that was released within the last year?--Dacium 02:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes. I have had no inclination to find out about it at all up until now, but, thanks to the FA, I know more today than I did yesterday. Bazza 12:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The only real criterion for a page to be the TFA is that it be a featured article. The whole point is to show off Wikipedia's best written articles, not the most interesting.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Dacium, if any of the featured article candidates is not up to your standards, please voice your opinion there, and please be encouraged to edit them to your satisfaction. This is a wiki. --PFHLai 18:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

They are up to standard, what I am saying that the main page shouldn't simply be a featured article. It should be an article about something of considerable encyclopedic value. Wii Information can be found anywhere easily. Information that is sources from books etc. is hard to find online. WP:Featured_articles, certain sections (namly Computers and video games) get to much attention. Consider all of world history and look how many history articles are featured... what 100 articles from all of world history, while video games have just about as many? Its really quite sad, but I guess that is the nature of a computer based encyclopedia, but it is surely the reason why academics don't take this site seriously, because you come to it and its featured article is Final Fantasy or Wii...--Dacium 21:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It is easier for people to write about what they like than to force people to work on something they don't. aka Systematic bias. The Placebo Effect 21:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Look on the bright side: Wikipedia is pretty strong in fields that are not traditionally academic fields, and at the same time, we have many FAs on academic topics. I don't think Wikipedia is set up to cater to academics, but for the general public, or anyone who has internet access. Let's not worry about the few closed-minded academics up in the ivory tower. If you really think it's a problem, please be encouraged to work on articles in academic topics and get more of them featured. We'll read them, too. :-) --PFHLai 01:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Mayor of Nagasaki dies after being shot

This should be added to the news section. --Kalmia 03:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

A request has already been made to WP:ITN/C. However, the relevant article, Itchō Itō, has scant information. - BanyanTree 04:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Salicylism

Salicylism syndrome results from mild chronic intoxication of salicylates (e.g. aspirin, diflunisal etc.). It is characterized by headache, dizziness, ringing of the ears (tinnitus), difficulty in hearing, dimness of vision, mental confusion, lassitude, drowsiness, sweating, thirst, hyperventilation, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea.

Timoy Pacis, RPh —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.161.158.242 (talk) 04:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

This appears identical to that described by Salicylate sensitivity and I have redirect Salicylism and Salicylism syndrome as such. - BanyanTree 04:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

"Start a Wikipedia in another language" link

It's outdated. It currently points to m:Help:How_to_start_a_new_Wikipedia, which itself states to be obsolete. I'd like someone to change it to m:Meta:Language proposal policy since that is currently the correct policy. -The preceding signed comment was added by Nazgjunk (talk • contrib) 07:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the note. - BanyanTree 08:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Supre Court Decision in Partial-Birth Abortion Ban

Just a question: where would a discussion about putting this current event on the main page take place? Here or in the article concerning the federal ban itself? I think it's important enough to warrant inclusion on the main page.--Swattie 16:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

You can use WP:ITN/C. --Howard the Duck 16:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Main Page editable

A Wikipedia error occurred at approximately 8:00 PM (+10:30 GMT) resulting in the Main Page being editable. However, so many people were editing it that it was very much a "the quick and the dead" sort of thing. ThirdEchelon 10:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

So what exactly is being done about this? Marijuanarchy 10:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

How should I know, I'm just a lowly editor...? ThirdEchelon 10:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Basically, the account of an inactive admin was hijacked and compromised. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 14:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

HEELLLPPPP!!!!! SOMEONE'S REPLACED THE ENTIRE MAIN PAGE! SOMEBODY PLEASE (pardon my language) DAMN HIM FOR ETERNITY! --Ryanasaurus0077 10:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Wow... Who unprotected the Main Page? All things considered I think maybe it wasn't the best idea... Piet | Talk 10:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

It's fixed now. --60.228.55.167 10:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Erm...

Where IS the main page? It says it doesn't exist... Michaelritchie200 10:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Rogue admin? :O Mgiganteus1 10:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Im suing for emotional distress.--293.xx.xxx.xx 10:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

There is a main page, it just happens to only consist of one word; Niggermayor.

I think someone's taken over an old account and is mucking around. Maybe a admin account as well, which makes it worse... Sentinel75 10:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

What happened? I've never seen this. --zrulli 10:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

My guess - Your Wikipedia A Splode. 212.219.142.161 10:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Even Portal:Main_Page is shot... whoever did it (assuming it was someone and not software going wild) knew what they were doing. Utopianheaven 10:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

"how long can i keep this up" I like this guy :P(Mrutter 10:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC))

It's back, but the "edit this page" tag remains. This is what happens when you let people write stuff! Someone is always going to take advantage! Michaelritchie200 10:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I think we are under attack

I hope the admins know about this

How do we tell them? Now back to normal but unprotected. Sentinel75 10:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Did Stephen Colbert tell his fans to vandalize Wikipedia again? --293.xx.xxx.xx 10:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

some one is messing about!!

All is fixed now. --60.228.55.167 10:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Admins!!

No admins around???? Are they asleep? Madhava 1947 (talk) 10:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'll keep watch over the page and revert any vandals. Karrmann 10:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I just reverted it back to an unvandalised state. Meh. Idiot vandals. Darkmind1970 10:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I reported him to WP:AIV --zrulli 10:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

And David Levy saves the day!!!

good work man the attack was resolved in under 15 minutes thats nothing to be ashamed of

15 minutes seems incredibly long for the ******* main page... Piet | Talk 10:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The reason it took so long is because we don't have enough people who can respond to admins going crazy, because many people in the community feel that we "already have enough" b-crats and other similar positions. — Deckiller 10:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

So Who Watches the Watchmen? --293.xx.xxx.xx 10:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The stewards watch the admins.--cj | talk 10:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Bureaucrats can't revoke the sysop bit. This required a steward. —David Levy 10:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah, that's right. Darr. — Deckiller 10:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't fix the problem. Jon Harald Søby did. —David Levy 10:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Is it regular practice to desysop admin's accounts soon after they've left? Sentinel75 10:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Not necessarily unless they request it. Will (aka Wimt) 10:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Future policy suggestion, then... Sentinel75 10:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

It's been suggested (and rejected) in the past. The general consensus was that a current admin's account is equally likely (if not more likely) to be hijacked than an inactive admin's account is. —David Levy 10:36, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I guess this isn't really the place to discuss such a matter but I for one think we should at least encourage admins to voluntary put their adminship on hold (with the option to request it to be 'unheld' without a VFA). While it may be true that an active admin's account is more likely to be hijacked, it's obviously a fact that the more admin accounts, the more targets we have. If we reduce the number of available accounts, there will be fewer targets and since it doesn't cause any harm, why not? Obviously this won't stop this kind of thing as there are still other accounts and a more sneaky person might be able to con people into reinstating the adminship anyway. But the way I see it, if we reduce the risk by 1/10 it's well worth it. Nil Einne 11:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Demoting inactive admins and Wikipedia:Inactive administrators for some previously rejected proposals. Note that neither of these would have affected a user who left the previous month. - BanyanTree 00:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Link to the request.[3] ElinorD (talk) 10:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

So is there always a steward active? Is there a big red button somewhere to call them? Piet | Talk 10:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I couldn't find a Wikipedia page about Stewards, only Wikimedia. Are all Stewards cross-Wiki roles? How do we go about suggesting we need more Stewards? --Dweller 10:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

• Perhaps we should propose that b-crats be given the powers to remove adminship status. That would be a very controversial proposal. — Deckiller 10:35, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah the list of stewards is at meta:Stewards and they operate across Wikimedia. Will (aka Wimt) 10:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Jon was notified about the incident through IRC (it seemed like a pretty good excuse to compromise my wikivacation). There was a lot of consternation at #wikipedia and yelling about finding an admin or steward, but apparently all one needed to do was to join #wikimedia-stewards and state the problem there. Seems like that's the closest we have to a Big Red Button right now, so maybe it should be better advertised.

Peter ^Isotalo 11:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

(Edit conflict.) There is (or should be) always a steward or a developer online that could do emergency desysoppings like this. Go to #wikimedia-stewards, then write !steward, and someone should react within a few seconds. If they don't go to #wikimedia-tech and tell them about the problem. There is no need for more stewards at the present. Jon Harald Søby 11:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Just far the sake of the complete examination of the situation: given that there was a significant time gap betwen User:Robdurbar retiring from wikipedia and this burst of vandalism, is there any way in which we can tell if he did it? Has he been asked? Could his password have been compromised? Could his account have been hacked? If he ever wants to rejoin the project these are meaningful questions.--Anthony.bradbury 11:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

There has been a checkuser request made - that might give some clue. Will (aka Wimt) 11:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

He does mention that he can be contacted via the "Email this user" link on the side. Trouble is....would the reciever be the previous user or the vandal? --293.xx.xxx.xx 11:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Wait, so admins can unblock themselves?[4] I never knew that and doesn't that defeat the purpose of an admin being blocked for 3RR or another rule that gets them a short block. I'm guessing admins are under an honor system that they will not unblock themselves or face de-desyoping? 128.227.57.24 16:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Pretty much, "wheel warring" ie the repeated undoing of admin actions by two or more admins, is seriously frowned upon and has in some cases resulted in desysoping--VectorPotential^Talk 16:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Uh, anyone know what's going on [5]? Looks like an oversight removed one or more edits. Can someone explain, or has this been mentioned? Also, should there be a checkuser to determine who hacked it? Explanation, please? PS.me no time to read I have to go. – AstroHurricane001^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)(+sign here+How's my editing?)} 23:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

They were just lost in the deletions and undeletions of the page. They were only regularly deleted, not oversighted, and are back now. Prodego ^talk 04:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Archive 100

Out of interest, what are we going to do when the number of archives of the main page talk reaches 100? It will do so in a few weeks - do we expand the box, add a page or... what? —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 15:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Just expand the box to include 101 through 110--VectorPotential^Talk 16:53, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually if you look at the code for the box, it's already there. It just has to be uncommented or something Nil Einne 17:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I added the next line in after we were on archive 94 or so, IIRC. ffm ✎talk 00:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

What do you expect ? The same thing we did for the 1 000 000-th article ? :-) --74.14.18.233 11:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Party like it's 1999! Vanderdecken: don't worry the issue is at hand. But the question to ask is when will long be too long? When will the archive box outgrow this talk page? --Monotonehell 13:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I guess we will just have to archive the archives! We will just have to put a link to Archives 1-100 or 1-50 at the top, and the rest will stay like it is. ffm ✎talk 13:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

No National High Five Day mention?

Today's the day, after all... :) Oh, and apparently it was recognized by the City of San Diego in 2005: [6]. Mdiamante 23:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

... Well, not anymore, I suppose. Mdiamante 00:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not have any information on National High Five Day. So there isn't a wikiarticle on this to put on MainPage. This also seems to be too minor, imo. --PFHLai 15:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

My contributions weren't copied

Hi I've recently been usurped, and my contributions weren't copied. I was wondering if an admin or beurocrat could fix this. NOTE: My discussion page was copied, but not my contributions (EDIT: Well they were sent to User:Kkrouni, not Kkrouni usurped). (I was Sony trademark vs dell trademark before)--Kkrouni (usurped) 23:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Kkrouni! Just so you know, this isn't the place to post this. Try Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations. ffm ✎talk 00:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

This is Madness!

where is "Adolf Hitler is born" under "on this day" 65.1.27.111 04:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

We don't do birthdays on the WP front page (unless it's a nice round number, like Leonhard Euler's 300th last Sunday) Otherwise, all the birthdays we would have to put on would dominate "on this day". Borisblue 05:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

See April 20#Births. --74.14.18.233 11:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

According to the guidelines for selected anniversaries/"on this day", births and deaths can only be used on centennials, etc. Hitler is only 118 years old. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 11:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Home Page Question

I was wondering if someone who had athority here could put somthing about how this is a reliable site on a page here becasue teachers say that this is not reliable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chessmaster3 (talk • contribs) 12:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC).

Your teacher has a point, if he or she is saying that you shouldn't cite it in papers. See Criticism of Wikipedia. - BanyanTree 12:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

And indeed, this is NOT a reliable site... It might refer to reliable sources, but this is NOT a reliable SITE. Oh my God! - irrªtiºnal 16:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

It's an encyclopedia. You shouldn't be citing encyclopedias at all. The Wikipedia is very helpful for giving you a general idea about a topic and for pointing towards reliable sources, though. The References section at the bottom of many articles is great. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Did You Know - Laki eruption

_{moved to WP:ERRORS by ffm ✎talk on 13:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)}