Jump to content

Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts

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 18:13 on 26 November 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 because this is not a talk page. (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

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

Today's FA

[edit]
  • "is it really possible to say that this is one of our best articles when it has no visual depiction of the animal it's about": Yes, of course it is. We're constricted by our ridiculously constrictive rules on images which lack any common sense on the point, but that doesn't stop it being a top quality article.
    "can we remove it and just have no image: yes. I suspect it was added because we sometimes get complaints when there's no image at all, even if there are some of secondary importance in the article. If someone can remove it, please do so. - SchroCat (talk) 07:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Done thanks.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:28, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems to me entirely appropriate to illustrate both article and blurb with the host species of this parasite. It has no other known host and one of the interesting aspects of the parasite is that it has this unusual host. The host will be unfamiliar to most readers and of interest to them. JMCHutchinson (talk) 08:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Then you will have to get the policies and guidelines surrounding the use of non-free images changed, because at the moment it is not possible. Policy says "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose". The fact that the worm still exists and it is, therefore, technically possible to obtain an image, which means we cannot use a non free one. And no, JMCHutchinson, we could not include an image with the blurb with a non-free image; that falls under a different part of the policy, but it's still policy. - SchroCat (talk) 08:45, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think you misread the above comment. --58.8.159.59 (talk) 10:40, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, indeed, you have completely misread what I wrote and accused me of advocating copyright violation. SchroCat, please could you strike your comment or change to whom you are addressing it. Thanks. JMCHutchinson (talk) 11:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You are right: I did misread it, and apologies for that. I won't strike it, as there is no "accusation" of anything. - SchroCat (talk) 13:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Featured articles sometimes simply don't have images. For instance, I've written a featured biographical article whose subject I could not find an image of for the life of me. In this case, barring the idea that Mary E. Spencer Jones happens to have photographs lying around which she didn't publish to the journal article and would wish to release under a Commons-compatible license; that Springer would be willing to waive their copyright to a free-for-commercial-usage license; or that someone wants to track down a South African mole, examine the rectum for worms, capture images via SEM, meticulously ensure the worm is actually Heptamegacanthus, and then provide it under a Commons-compatible license, there's nothing that can be done here. I think it still doesn't stop it from being a top-quality article. It totally sucks, but I think 'Featured' should denote professional-level quality, and I imagine even Britannica would have a rough time of this without greasing the wheels ($$$) to license the image. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 14:56, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The lack of an image is usually not really an error, it's working with what we got. There are areas in which we do not have a luxury of images. If FAC passes them, unless there are exceptional circumstances dictating don't run the article, we look at them as eligible to run Wehwalt (talk) 15:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, I agree here that the lack of an image doesn't automatically fail FAC 3. One thing I might do is reach out the author to hear her thoughts and see if she may have something, as in review of both featured article nominations, nobody explicitly mentions having done so (although this is suggested at two points by Esculenta. Update: I have since contacted the author and am awaiting a reply. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 15:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tomorrow's FA

[edit]

Day-after-tomorrow's FA

[edit]

Errors with "In the news"

[edit]

Errors in "Did you know ..."

[edit]

Current DYK

[edit]

Indonesia tea item: 'largest exporter of tea outside ...' so they weren't the largest at all, they were third largest. This should be rephrased as 'third largest exporter of tea, after' I've made the equivalent fix in the article itself. Modest Genius talk 12:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And why do we have the current name for one, but the colonial name for the other two? Fram (talk) 17:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
minus Rephrased to: "that during the colonial period, the Dutch East Indies was the third-largest exporter of tea after the British Raj and Ceylon?"  — Amakuru (talk) 17:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next DYK

[edit]

Next-but-one DYK

[edit]

Errors in "On this day"

[edit]

Today's OTD

[edit]

Tomorrow's OTD

[edit]

Day-after-tomorrow's OTD

[edit]
[edit]

Friday's FL

[edit]
(November 29)

Monday's FL

[edit]
(December 2)
[edit]
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

[edit]

Tomorrow's POTD

[edit]

Any other Main Page errors

[edit]

Please report any such problems or suggestions for improvement at the General discussion section of Talk:Main Page.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors&oldid=1259709299"