Talk:Main Page/Archive 77

message: Kidspediais at the moment a mini wiki wich is going to be a kids vershon of wikipedia. The link is part of an atempt to stop it having 1000's of unfinesht pages.
Plase reply on the kidspedia discoshen page. I cant get a link but just go to the scrchcard bit on wikia and you will find it on all mini wikis. JosephK19 17:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that there's a link, it won't be happening.  It's a non-Wikipedia Foundation site with only 9 articles, and none of those have any content. — ceejayoz talk 20:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Dosen't the simple english 'pedia fill that purpose? Pacific Coast Highway (blah • I'm a hot toe picker) 02:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Simple is also meant for those not proficient in the English language, including adults who may not be interested in articles on toys or other things kids care about. The content's emphasis is different. BTW, this section has nothing to do with the Main Page and should be remove from Talk: Main Page. --64.229.228.195 12:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: link To Kidspedia On Main Page Recest

message: I'm generally a massive fan of the featured article, but I thought this one was far below the usual high standards. It reads very much like an advert or some sought of promotional blurb.
Regards,
Smiffy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oismiffy (talk • contribs) .
:You want "some soft of", not "some sought of". YRTE. Also, if you don't like the writing, participate to make it better. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In a similar manner to the way in which you want "some sort of", not "some soft of".  81.132.80.88 19:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Eek - I thought that about the correction but didn't like to say it.  Just proves anyone can make a mistake in the excitement of the moment!!  Anyway, thanks for the pointers - I don't really have a problem with how its written, just the content.  I take your point about getting involved - I know the featured articles are strongly scrutinised and discussed, hence my dissapointment that this made it through.  Maybe I will put my money where my mouth is. Regards.  Oismiffy 20:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's comprehensive, concise, and clear, even if it doesn't "sizzle". Is that enough for featured? I dunno. --Dhartung | Talk 23:26, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First people complain that it sounds like a marketing blurb, then they complain it doesn't "sizzle". Yeah, like, let's have it both ways or something. The cool thing about Wikipedia is, you just tell people what you want and they make it for you. Must feel like paradise. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 17:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article - Ubuntu 

message: I have noted this plenty in the past, but this one is just too easy to have a light-hearted go at.  Is it not possible for the pictures to be formatted to be inline with the news bullet that it is exemplifying?  We currently have the top headline of:
"Spanish cyclist Oscar Pereiro Sio claims he is the true 2006 Tour de France winner"
Across from that we have a picture of an ageing man with a beard, who, on closer inspection, is a notorious president/dictator (delete as appropriate).  I am not sure if Castro could win the tour de France - but I doubt it!
Is it difficult to align the picture with the bullet?  I know the (pictured) text is used, but to the casual viewer it just looks wrong (and in some cases, such as this one) makes WP look a bit embarrassing/daft.  Apologies if this was covered before during the redraft discussions at the start of the year, but I can't see any technical reason why the pic could not move up and down as appropriate (thus I am guessing this is a stylistic choice). SFC9394 00:27, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This has come up several times. There was an attempt at a solution a few months back that gained support but was never implemented and more recently there was an a period where an attempt was made to at least have a flag or some logo related to the top item. But people kept complaining that a flag was boring... Perhaps we should just keep the pictured item on top? --Monotonehell 02:05, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It has never bothered me. Newspapers often have strange juxtapositions of photographs and news stories, too. --Dhartung | Talk 21:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't newspapers normally have a caption under each picture though? Also, you should never hold a newspaper up as an example of good page layout. ;) --Monotonehell 01:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, the picture should carry a caption below and prevents confusion to the reader. Let's not make Wikipedia's main page a sloppy one, because an encyclopedia is well organized and most newspapers are that way. The Libyan flag isn't the issue, this is the country's official flag and to remove it is illogical like for one to remove the Sri Lankan flag in recent main page news articles. --Mike D 26 12:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In the news pictures 

message: I realise this is too late—but why didn’t Mel Gibson make it onto the Main Page?! Its dominated the news far more than some of the other things listed. But ah, well… it’s in the past... the incident that is and not the ramifications.--Greasysteve13 03:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It maybe newsworthy but this is an encyclopedia. Try Wikinews. --Monotonehell 03:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, I was just surprised Mel Gibson didn't make it in the in the news section of Wikipedia's main page. Who does he have to kill?--Greasysteve13 05:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: lol how'd you find out about that? I thought Mel's people had that all hushed up? ;) I was a bit terse above, sorry, what I mean is items featured in ITN need to be of encyclopedic value, have an article that has been substantially updated with the new information and (finally) be nominated for inclusion. --Monotonehell 08:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay.--Greasysteve13 11:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, the in the news section isn't just for US news, but worldwide.  Entertainment gossip isn't exactly high profile news world wide. --lightdarkness (talk) 04:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't suggesting that the in the news section was just for US news but this Mel news in general has been heavy in a lot of Western news, thats not to say Eastern news insn't just as Important. And it may surprise you all but I am not American.--Greasysteve13 05:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Say, isn't Britney pregnant again? --Dhartung | Talk 21:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who cares?! If she was it never garnered signifigant media atenttion--Greasysteve13 04:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Mel Gibson]] 

message: Big ups on today's selection which put the FA in phat!  w00t?! --70.209.187.182 07:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  go go Azeri peeps! 

message: Should the 40th birthday of Jimbo Wales be mentioned in the Main Page tomorrow? Hardee67 18:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Shanes 18:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto. Maybe when he is 100 we will :-) --HappyCamper 18:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess this means that his birthday should not be mentioned on the main page. Hardee67 18:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the birthday needs to be intrinsically notable for it on the main page. For example, if we go by our article on Preident Bush, last July 6th would have been his 60th birthday, but this was not announced on the main page as we can see here. --HappyCamper 19:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: President Bush is not the founder of Wikipedia however. The birthday of Jimbo Wales is different, in that he's the found of the Wikipedia project which is this encyclopedia. Hardee67 01:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He's made it clear in the past that he should recieve no more or less attention than any other subject with regards to items about him. --Monotonehell 01:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Oooohhh!!! Wikipedians - look at this! Well, you gotta admit, spontaneous birthday wishes are pretty sweet. --HappyCamper 19:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Jimbo Wales may not prefer not have his birthday on the main page, this is his decision...and Wikipedia rules forbids birthday announcements. I may want to greet him anyway, but doesn't mean I place it on an article. Check out the link Happy Camper placed above and feel free to greet him. --Mike D 26 12:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  40th birthday of Jimbo Wales 

message: Every time I see the main page in the last month, I've learned about a new airstrike by the Isreali military and how many "people" it killed, with no distinction between civilians, soldiers, terrorists (ok, sorry, militants). I've never seen one bit about any attacks by Hezbollah, which many people can assure you are on-going and more often targetted at civilians. Why is it we only need to hear about the casualties caused by the democracy? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by B. Phillips (talk • contribs) 22:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To help us, please identify (or write up) a decent article on a recent attack by Hezbollah and post a suggested headline on Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Thanks. -- 199.71.174.100 00:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  stereotypical progressive bias in Israeli-Hezbollah news 

message: You should give a contact link. I recently edited my entry - SHANE BRIANT - recently. You took me out of the main encyclopaedia for doing so. BUT EVERYTHING WAS VERIFIABLE - all you had to do was check with the IMDb (Internet Movie Data Base).  I did it only because your entries showed my worst work (hooro films) and omitted my best work (the other 30 films). I thought it would be of interest - if you are an encyclopaedia - to have on record that I am a prolific novelist too. Also easily verifiable.
I did it only because my friends in America pressed me to do it - not because I have a big egos. My Google links are currently over 74,000. But I do not appear right now in your Encyclopaedia.
Kind regards
Shane Briant
sbriant@bigpond.net.au
:I think you should write this at the talk page or the one who moved the page (User_talk:RHaworth). While it might be bad practice to edit an article about oneslef you didn't create the article, so I think that your complaint is valid. But the best course of action is to contact RHworth before doing anything else. 83.227.141.19 23:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, I would suggest asking RHaworth to move the article back. Moving an article to userspace in this way is effectively speedy deletion, and as the biography asserted notability, it doesn't seem to have been eligible. If you don't get any joy from him, try deletion review to get the decision reviewed. --Sam Blanning(talk) 23:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (Actually looking at Shane's talk page he may be ahead of me.) --Sam Blanning(talk) 23:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complaint 

message: The main pages doesn't seem to have a category.  Maybe it should have one?-70.92.246.98 02:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about CatAgory:Main Page or CatAgory:Pages people complain about ;) *snigger* If you're serious I think a category on the main page would be a bit redundent and clutter it somewhat. --Monotonehell 06:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category? 

message: Israeli is misspelled Isareli. Please correct, TewfikTalk 03:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Copied to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. If you notice errors or ommisions in the future please post them there. Thanks :) --Monotonehell 06:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misspelling 

message: I've written an atticle on Kfar Giladi. Could someone please link it? --PiMaster3 talk 14:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry could you be more clear with regards to what you want? "link it"? --Monotonehell 15:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume he's talking about the second news item, which refers to Kfar Giladi. I've turned it into a wikilink. --Sam Blanning(talk) 17:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I'm not an admin so I couldn't change it myself. --PiMaster3 talk 22:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kfar Giladi 

message: Most users will just think there's a problem with the image for the Libya FA.  Are there no free images of the countryside or Tripoli or something? --Nelson Ricardo 00:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the simplicity of Libya's flag should prevent it from appearing on the Main Page. Perhaps those readers unfamiliar with the Libyan flag will click on it or open the article and learn something they didn't know before. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 00:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't mock other cultures, but: "The top right corner of the flag represents peace, the top left represents life, the bottom right represents faithfulness to the country and the bottom left represents unity" (Flag of Libya). Say what you want about that there green rectangle, but it sure is pulling its weight. --Sam Blanning(talk) 00:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If they think there's a problem with the image for the flag, I guess they'll be pleasantly surprised when they learn something --taking another step away from ignorance and into the insatiable beast that is knowledge (or some other gobbledygook) --Bobak 00:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We could use a map of Libya though; that represents Libya just as wlel as its flag. —Cuiviénen 00:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm actually skeptical about the 4 corners thing. It sounds like a joke. Not that the flag doesn't look like a joke, of course... --Kinst 01:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IIRC, the green on the flag is mainly for the Green revolution, but I will check out my flag books later and get back to yall. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I sent an email to the Libya Embassy in the US, should expect an answer by the end of the week. My flag books debunk the four corners theory for now, and even my boys (FOTW) are scratching our heads, since not much flag info comes from Libya. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I just swapped out the PNG image for the arms, but as Raul said before, let's stick with the flag. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Wikiality strikes again! Frankly I'm filing that under 'if it isn't true, it should be'. --Sam Blanning(talk) 12:12, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ***GASP!*** ...did you dare use a Colbert reference in the rest of Wikipedia?  Be careful, the "anti-colberrorists" may burn you for spreading the "virus". --Bobak 19:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Worst flag ever 

message: "Libya is slightly larger in area than Alaska, the fourth largest nation in Africa, and the 17th largest in the world" makes it sound like Alaska is in Africa. Can it be changed? --194.217.191.10 09:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See the next section. Graham talk 09:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd Phrasing 

message: I'd put this up on WP:ERRORS, but it might deserve some discussion, so here goes. I have a problem with the following sentence:
 "With an area of 1.8 million square kilometres,
90% of which is desert, Libya is slightly larger in area than Alaska, the fourth largest nation in Africa, and the 17th largest in the world." 
Firstly, it's badly worded and it could be interpreted to say that Alaska is the fourth-largest nation in Africa. Secondly, as an Australian, I don't find comparisons with the area of Alaska helpful, and they probably wouldn't be helpful for people outside North America. The sentence should be changed the way it was in the actual article to:
 With an area of 1.8 million square kilometres, 90% of which is desert, Libya is the fourth largest nation-state in Africa by area, and the 17th largest in the world. 
Hmmm, I see someone was also confused at WP:ERRORS, so I'm not the only one. I'll redirect any discussion here, because this is a more suitable place for discussion. Graham talk 09:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it to match the article. You may need to purge your cache in order to see the update on the Main page. Raven4x4x 10:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks; that clears things up a bit. Graham talk 11:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition, the usual comparison in cases like this is actually the size of Wales (Yeah, I know it's not really outside of the British media, but when else am I going to be able to link that article in a context that makes sense?) :) GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 19:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison of Lybia's area with Alaska 

message: - Libya article:   
-    
- "Libya is led by revolutionary Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi, whose foreign policy has often brought him into conflict with the West."   
-    
- Main page:   
-    
- "Libya is led by revolutionary Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi, one of the most infamous political figures of the 20th century."   
-    
- Clever vandalism, but vandalism all the same. Can this be fixed?   
-    
- 84.70.148.10 12:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Try WP:ERRORS. --64.229.228.195 12:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Vandalism? That was the original wording of the summary, as can be seen here. The word vandalism shouldn't be thrown around so lightly. In fact, if you look at the history of what happened, you will find that Raul summarised from the article that he saw at the time, and that the article later got changed. Raul saved that summary at 15:37 on 31 July, and looking at the Libya article, the phrase "infamous" was indeed in the article at the time (Raul's minor edit on that day did, however, introduce the implication that Alaska is a nation in Africa, something that has been discussed elsewhere on this page). The phrase infamous was removed as POV with this edit on 8 August by Gazpacho, which claims the reference did not support the assertion of "infamous", but no reference was provided to support the "conflict with the West" assertion. Anyway, I hope this little bit of detective work helps clear up any confusion. Carcharoth 14:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for pointing this out. The "infamous" remark has been removed from MainPage. -- PFHLai 16:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:    Vandalism   

message: I think there should be a different picture for today's Article of the Day. It surprised me with a square of green until I realized it was actually the country's flag. Maybe a map of the country would be more suitable. schyler 16:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see above #Worst flag ever. --PFHLai 16:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Libya 

message: Is it my impression, or did the numbers before the items Today's featured article, Did you know..., In the news, On this day..., Today's featured picture, Other areas of Wikipedia, Wikipedia's sister projects, etc. Wikipedia languages disappear and re-appear (possibly a few times) over the past months?
For what it's worth: I like the home page so much better without the numbers. – Adhemar 20:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never seen numbers. Perhaps a browser setting? --Dhartung | Talk 07:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is controlled via a setting from Special:Preferences.  Under the Misc tab is the option to "auto-number headings."  —David Levy 08:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Confirmed – Logged out, I don’t see any numbering, neither on the home page and in the articles. Logged in, I do see the numbers. In the main articles, having the headings numbered makes sense. It gives a structured impression. But on the Main Page (and some other special pages) I hate it thoroughly. So I am going to switch them off completely, no matter how much sense they make in the articles. Thanks, David Levy, for pointing me where this can be controlled. – Adhemar 19:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbered items 

message: Perhaps we could get a few more items for In the News to balance out the extra-long Featured Article of the Day excerpt. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 00:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  —David Levy 00:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imbalance 

message: Someone needs to write a news item on the connecticut senate primary. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.63.22.47 (talk • contribs) 04:09, 9 August 2006.
: Please see Connecticut United States Senate election, 2006. And please note that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news service like Wikinews. --199.71.174.100 04:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lamont 

message: In todays fetured article it reads "Shotguns, though initially popular with the middle class as much as the poor, became a symbol of poverty in the mid-20th century, but opinion is now more mixed, with some the targets of bulldozing due to urban renewal". 
It wasn't until it spoke about bulldozing I realised it still meant the houses. I think the word 'houses' needs to be added after shotguns. --194.217.191.10 10:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dude, the blurb starts with "The shotgun house is a type of house".  I don;t see how much clearly it can be put in context.  --Nelson Ricardo 10:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Simply by adding "houses" it is 100% more clear. --Monotonehell 12:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  In addition, the sentence immediately follows one talking about shotguns (the guns), so in order to switch back to talking about shotguns (the houses), it is necessary to re-introduce the phrase "shotgun houses". This is manifestly a clear and necessary change. Anyone arguing against it needs to stop and reconsider. Carcharoth 12:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear meaning in the featured article 

message: I would like to protest against the American bias in the Wikipedia news. 
*In the Dutch news, it became apparent that the Mexican elections were probably fraudulent. A description as 'Alleged electoral irregularities' when one million people are occupying the city centre of Mexico City seems unappropriate to me.
*The Israelis are inflicting far more casualties in Lebanon then vice versa, so it would be more appropriate to mention the Israeli atrocities first.
*The Tour de France has proclaimed Pereiro Sio as winner of the Tour, so instead of 'claims he is the true', it should be 'has become the true'.--Daanschr 14:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *He hasn't officially been declared the winner, so technically it is correct. However, I also thought the wording was not very good because it is not just himself who claims this: everyone now sees Perreiro Sio as the true winner. Piet 18:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * While I agree that Perreiro Sio is the true winner, I've taken this bit off MainPage as this is not an official result. And because this Tour de France bit has been on ITN for so long. It's getting stale. I've replaced it with a blurb about a controversial dam in Turkey taken from the ITN candidates' page. -- PFHLai 18:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It's just you. WP:FAITH is just a acronym. It is a official policy that says that wikipedians should assume good faith while editing wikipedia. dposse 19:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I should've typed in WP:AGF..... --PFHLai 19:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope you realize I was joking? dab (ᛏ) 20:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, dab. I saw your emoticon. ^_^ --PFHLai 20:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text:  Don't forget to include Connecticut United States Senate election, 2006. It's the biggest news item ever in some circles. -- PFHLai 22:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Shotgun houses?  I am offended!  Bias puts the camera in America! --Bobak 21:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Daanschr, you're stereotyping Americans, that's anti-American bias. Wikipedia is about keeping a WP:NPOV, not any person, or groups point of view(be it American, Russian, the EU's, the UK's, the UN's, NATO's, OPEC's, the World's, etc.). --ᎠᏢ462090 10:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: American bias

message: I am an avid reader of the wikipedia.  I use it regularly to get more knowledge.  One of the main problems that I face with it is that it is not using the full screen width to display the article.
A left navigation bar which is mostly less than one tenth of any article's height uses atleast one third of the screen thus making users scroll almost twice more than necessary to read the full article.  This will result in more repetitive stress injury to the wrists due to the increased scrolling necessary.
Could you not put the left nav bar links at the top so that the article, which is what we concentrate most on can take up the full width of the window?
Shankar.
61.17.178.163 22:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please create an account / sign in and select another skin under "my preferences". Try Nostalgia or MySkin if you prefer not to have a left nav bar. Hope this helps. --PFHLai 22:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Once you log in, you can click this link: link, and add this to the page that the link takes you to:
/* Wider content */
.portlet { display:none; }
#column-content, #content { margin: 0 0 0 0 }
.
GeorgeMoney  (talk) 23:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: You are welcome. --PFHLai 20:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please use the full width of the screen 

message: A discussion is underway concerning the redesign of the sidebar which is displayed on every page of Wikipedia.  See you at Wikipedia talk:Village pump (proposals)/Sidebar redesign --Nexus Seven 00:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sidebar redesign discussion 

message: There should be a link on the Main Page to make Wikipedia your homepage, if there isn't already. I don't see one. --Macarion 00:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That varies from browser to browser. It's simpler to allow the end user (you) to select it from their menu. --Monotonehell 04:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia should also join a webring, and if Wikipedia will put my home page on the front page, I will put Wikipedia on mine. --Dhartung | Talk 01:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Larf. Behave you. (Wikipedia is in my top ten friends) --Monotonehell 09:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Homepage

message: Manchester City's on the front page of Wikipedia!  Yes!  Take that United, we finally won something big! --Taoistlumberjak 01:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As a Manchester United fan, I am disappointed that the article in question is not even a featured article to begin with. --Siva1979Talk to me 04:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you know what to do ;) —Cuiviénen 06:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

text: However, shouldn't it be Manchester City Football Club is an English Premier League football club based in Manchester? --Surukai 06:22, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, It was my english that was lacking ( Singular and plural for nouns) --Surukai 07:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yes!  Yes!  000!  Yes! 

message: :Moved to Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/August 11. -- 20:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spork? 

message: There was a typo in the article, which is now featured on the main page.   Sulphurous acid, not sulphuric.
: This has already been fixed. (Not by me.)  Next time, please report errors on MainPage to WP:ERRORS. Thanks. -- PFHLai 23:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Danae 

message: Why is the Article of the Day changed at around 4:00PM? Shouldn't it be changed at midnight? I sometimes click out of the internet for a while at around 3:00PM, and at 4:00PM, it is changed. 
*Hi!! The article is changed at midnight according to UTC time, which is the official Wikipedia time. Sfrrrose (talk) 21:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Phh... see the section on "Blatant UK bias" above; why don't they just make HRH the Queen our ceremonial figurehead?!  Actually, I initially assumed Jimbo was English because of that.  Of course, how many people out of the American South are named "Jimbo"? --Bobak 22:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the "Englsih encyclopeadia" i dont see it anywhere saying the "American.." hehe. Matthew Fenton (Talk | Contribs) 08:21, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I thought Jimbo came from Wales, so we use Wales time in Wikipedia. No ?  (Hahaha.)  -- PFHLai 23:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Don't be silly.  If we were on Cardiff Mean Time we would be using UTC - 12mins 44secs, not UTC. :-P -- AJR | Talk 02:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

text: That would be the joke going WAY over your head. —Cuiviénen 14:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

text: or 1am.  violet/riga (t) 15:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

text: What the heck is UTC time? I read Wikipedia's article on it, but it doesn't make sense. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.121.73.22 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You might know UTC better by its former name, Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), (which was renamed in the 70s). Raul654 23:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think that this subject needs to be discussed here. Obviously the coding of the Wikipedia system would have to be changed on the whims of a Wikipedian wanting new articles at his midnight time. Just live with the current timing. Also (as an american) I think the UK bias is not that previlent, and that UTC time is a standard used for many websites and organizations. Besides let the brits have there time zones, we americans will be policing the world with our wealth and power... hahaha --superman 21:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Article of the Day should be changed at midnight 

message: I don't think it's been discussed here but obviously the languages on the bottom of the main page have been trimmed recently.  The English names for the languages were also unfortunately trimmed.  Having the English names next to each language wasn't too pretty but it was very functional.  I'd like to see them return.  Ziggur 07:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You "don't thinked" wrong. ;) It's been discussed recently at length including here, here and here and possibly one more place that I can't find. The resu,ting consensus (which was a bit contested) was to remove the translations as they are redundant for people who speak/read a particular language anyway, if someone wants to see the complete list they can go here. The reason for the reformation was to make it look less like a jumble of text. There were those against the change entirely and those who wanted the list removed completely, either with a link to the wp.org homepage only or with the list moved to the sidebar as per some other language versions. --Monotonehell 07:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That was a dreadful misjudgement. This is the English language Wikipedia. There is a great arrogance and snobbery in not talking to people in their own language: "If you are too ignorant to understand, you don't matter anyway". As the list is now intimidating and largely useless to most English speakers it would be better to remove it altogether unless it is restored. Merchbow 20:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Languages section 

message: 68.72.116.165 has made some redirects to articles in Romaji form. I doubt someone would search "Burajiru" or whatever it was to get to Brazil articles. --FlareNUKE 08:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really to do with the main page, I don't see the harm in these redirects if they help people who can't remember the "english name" of something. WP is not paper and these redirects don't cost much. No harm? Any other opinions? --Monotonehell 09:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I thought they were harmless as well. Titoxd(?!?) 09:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unneeded Romaji Redirects 

message: While I do agree with the 25k and 50k article sites, could there still be the 100k list still including the 25k and 50k lists? Pronoun 14:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There isn't much reason for one; most of the Wikipedias with more than 50k articles also have more than 100k (only Russian, Finnish, Swedish and Chinese do not, and all are rapidly approaching 100k). —Cuiviénen 19:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  100,000 article sites 

message: Just a suggestion that maybe the boldfaced words in the blub shouldn't be West Berlin but rather Berlin Wall, as it's the anniversary of the Berlin Wall construction after all!  --Canuckguy 00:20, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  And if West Berlin is gonna be bolded, oughtn't East Berlin be bolded as well? -Elmer Clark 01:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Done. Evil Monkey - Hello 02:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  On MainPage, the boldfaced links indicate featured wikicontent. On TFA, the link to the FA is bolded. On ITN, the link to the wikiarticle updated with the news materials is bolded. On DYK, the link to the new article is bolded. For Selected Anniversaries, the bolded link must refer to an article with the date in the text (one of several rules in editing this section on MainPage).  Berlin Wall, West Berlin & East Berlin fit the bill here. However, the Berlin Wall page is slated to be featured on the anniversary of the destruction of the wall. To avoid double-featuring the same article within the same year (another rule), "West Berlin" was bolded on today's template on the anniversary of the construction. "East Berlin" could have been bolded, too, but one is enough for each line. Perhaps we can alternate each year till one of them becomes a markedly better article.  This year, there are only 4 events on the template (a mistake on my part), so I've bent the rules and bolded both East & West Berlin. -- PFHLai 21:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On this Day entry for Berlin wall construction 

message: Can we add the Eight-Nation Alliance occupation of Beijing in 1900 for "On this Day" of Aug 14? I guess I don't have the authority to do it. Thanks. Pseudotriton 04:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *The main article for the topic is Boxer Rebellion, which is pretty solid (though not FA ready). --Dhartung | Talk 07:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the suggestion. This is not on MainPage because I couldn't confirm the date. In the first paragraph, the Boxer Rebellion article says "The brutal uprising crumbled on August 4, 1900 when 20,000 foreign troops entered the Chinese capital, Peking (Beijing)". Scroll down a bit, it says "The International force reached and occupied Beijing on August 14."  I question both dates. The equivalent article in Chinese Wikipedia has August 14th as the date the Eight-Nation Alliance (minus the Germans) reaching the outskirts of Peking, taking the city gates on the 15th, and occupying most of the city on the 16th. So, was it August 4th, August 14th or August 16th ? We need references. A "safer" anniversary to feature the whole Boxer Rebellion would be the anniversary of the signing of the Boxer Protocol. (The date is on the document, available in Chinese Wikisource.) -- PFHLai 12:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Eight-Nation Alliance on Aug 14

message: The death toll has risen to 114 in Zhejiang, according to CTV Newsnet. JodoYodo 05:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the reminder. Actually, the article on the typhoon says 214 (+2 more in the Philippines). I've changed the text on MainPage to "more than 200". Hopefully, we don't need to update the number anymore. BTW, please use Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors next time you propose similar minor tweaks of MainPage contents. You may get a quicker response there. --PFHLai 12:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Zhejiang Death Toll

message: I think that the XVI International AIDS Conference, 2006 that started last night in Toronto, Canada, warrents inclusion in the "In The News" section. It's the largest conference on HIV/AIDS ever and this is an event that affects the whole world. Jeff 11:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the suggestion. Please make use of Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates if you really think this is major international news that should be on ITN. (I ain't so sure, unless they announce a new treatment and we have a wikiarticle on it.)  -- PFHLai 12:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: AIDS Conference

message: The planet Pluto should be featured on the wikipedia or wikinews front page, because this may be the last time you can do so. Right now there is an astronomical congress in Prague going on, with 3.000 top nerds, who get to decide whether or not Pluto should be demoted to a space pebble and cease to belong to full-glory planets.
See the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4789531.stm
 
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.70.32.136 (talk • contribs) 12:16, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the suggestion. When such a decision has been made, please update relevent wikiarticles and then propose a headline for In The News at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Don't forget to update Current events. Thanks. -- PFHLai 12:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I feel like crying :( Ok, enough of the chatroomesque talk page...)--Howard the Duck 13:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Somehow, I get the feeling that even after Pluto is properly classified as a Kuiper belt object, we'll be able to put the article on the front page. --Dhartung | Talk 16:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

text: You may want to contact the Featured Article Director for this. -- PFHLai 19:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Prrrrffffff. They think they can tell me what to call things now? Sod that!! It screws up the mnemonics, millions of textbooks will have to be changed for the sake of one pathetic little pedantic moan. To me Pluto will always, until the end of my days, be a *planet*. Thankyou, and tune in next week for another rant on the anally-retentive and methods of bowel-washing. Lady BlahDeBlah 19:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Pluto or not to be, that is the planet 

message: Why in the world is VJ Day not mentioned on the main page in any way? It's quite significant for August 14th. What's the deal? AJFederation 20:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hang in there. Victory over Japan Day will be on MainPage tomorrow, i.e. in about 3 hours. --PFHLai 20:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In case any one is confused, V-J Day from the point of view of North America is the 14th, but from the point of view of people in the Pacific was the 15th.  Dragons flight 20:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The International Date Line has a well-known POV bias. --Dhartung | Talk 04:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  VJ Day Not On "On this Day..." 

message: I tried to click the metawiki icon but my IE browser couldn't open it: it suggested a download of an "unknown" filetype. Maybe an admin oughta have a look n fix it.--Steven Fruitsmaak | Talk 21:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what the problem was. I clicked on the icon and meta's MainPage showed up on screen as expected. Perhaps someone has fixed it already. -- PFHLai 21:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metawiki 

message: I saw a I.P. edit the main page.How can this page be edited by non-users when it's fully protected? --Scott3 03:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As a joke, Drini unprotected it on APril 1 2006 (it was reprotected 15 minutes later). Guanaco did the same thing later in the day, and it was reprotected 4 minutes later. Raul654 03:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It wasn't always protected, either. Back in 2001 there wasn't frequent vandalism so it wasn't protected. - Mark 03:27, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How can this page be vandalised 

message: Could the main article also be changed just at midnight EST?
Just want to know.
Thanks
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by K09 (talk • contribs) 20:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia goes by Coordinated Universal Time, not EST. Please see above #The Article of the Day should be changed at midnight.  --PFHLai 20:48, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Why is the eastern United States more important than the western United States, let alone the rest of the world? — ceejayoz talk 02:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's server time?  (Which isn't a good reason to change, of course; but merely an explanation of why EST might be regarded differently from another arbitrary timezone.) Kirill Lokshin 15:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time of main article change 

message: As of today, the Russian version of Wikipedia has 100,000+ articles. That should be observed at the main Wikipedia portal. Camptown 17:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't have a 100,000+ section on our MainPage.  www.wikipedia.org is not part of English Wikipedia. You may want to bring this up with 'Meta-Wiki'. --PFHLai 17:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Top 10 actually. :-) Prodego talk 20:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian Wikipedia (www.wikipedia.org)

message: Could we possibly have a "Did you know" segment without a Eurovision contest factoid? They seem to be getting obscure and uninteresting, and frankly it's getting old. --Jquarry 22:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The DYKs will be more irrelevant each day! We can't expect interesting facts in new articles everyday; after all we have 1,322,000 articles already! I don't mean there's nothing else interesting to write about, but it gets harder to find it for every day.--Cloviz 23:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So fix it. Read some new articles and make some suggestions.--Peta 23:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok here's one: "DYK the Eurovision song contest has featured in more DYK segments than any other Wikipedia article?".... sorry couldn't resist! :P  --Jquarry 00:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Dood, I think you need to lay off the Red Bull :) --Jquarry 00:55, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just coming here to say the same thing! We need to lay off the Eurovision, circus animals, and medal of honor winners for a while. In part its because very few editors know how to get an article trhough the DYK process before the five day timeline expires, and they seem to have very focused interests. savidan(talk) (e@) 02:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What would you suggest we put in their place? GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 04:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You know, it's hard to say, being as these articles haven't been created yet. Generally speaking, though, I'd like a little more variety. savidan(talk) (e@) 05:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some people actually enjoy Eurovision. *hugs all 4 EV albums*--Lady BlahDeBlah 14:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eurovision 

message: I just want to say to the FPC people, beautiful selection. Too bad we couldn't have run it on US Memorial Day. Daniel Case 00:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And then we would "run" allusive pictures in every country's Memorial Day or similar anniversary? Hehe.--Cloviz 01:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you did not know, the picture of day is basically selected in the order that the images were promoted to featured status. This is unlike the featured article of the day where users can make suggestions. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's mostly true. Sometimes I put them on specific days upon request. For example, the Malé image was put on Maldivian independence day and the Map of India was put on Indian independence day, but those were only a few days different than what they would have been. howcheng  {chat} 15:55, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It was promoted less than three months ago.  The detail is not that great in full res but keep in mind that that res is twice the minimum requirement. Redquark 13:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beautiful pic of the day 

message: Brian, your footer doesn't work when people click on (+) at the top of the page to start a new section. -- 64.229.228.143 16:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main page footer 

message: Why is the front page only editable by administrators? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ali'i (talk • contribs) 20:42, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia:Main Page FAQ#Why am I not able edit to the Main Page?. Hope this helps. -- PFHLai 20:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Please sign your posts using ~~~~. Eleven minutes after you asked this, someone replaced this whole page with the message "HACKED". To avoid this happening on the main page, it is only editable by administrators. Piet 20:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, duh. Next time i'll pay closer attention to details. --Ali'i 21:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

text: People would vandalize it a lot, unfortunately. <FONT COLOR="blue">'FLaRN'</FONT> (talk) 19:21, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why can't I edit?  

message: I hate to be copyright paranoid, but perhaps :Image:Queensbridge.jpg would work for Featured Article of the Day on the Main Page. Even though it's not as representative of the subject as the current image, it's not fair use. -- tariqabjotu 00:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use Image on Main Page 

message: It was completely unaccessable. Anyone know what happened? 66.0.5.4 20:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The rumor is the people who supply the IP addresses put them back into circulation... --Monotonehell 20:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would also like to know what happened. Mathiastck 20:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I heard on the IRC channel that the IP address was removed. dposse 20:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Indeed, they did. See this email for details. Titoxd(?!?) 20:32, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What - only people with AOL IPs were allowed to edit? Um, hello, weird? Natgoo 21:10, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Although I don't know what that says: Thank You. -- Hopiakuta 20:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone know why wikipedia was completely unaccessable for the last four hours?--Taida 22:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: True, but they also seldom update and correct themselves after publication. ;) -- Vary | Talk 01:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Bahhh- the nerve of that ISP to issue an IP re-numbering on Wikipedia (If that's in fact what happend.)  ;-)  My ISP has had the nerve to stymed a few of my contributions by renumbering me in the middle of an edit. :-o CaribDigita 02:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happend to Wikipedia for the last four hours? 

message: THat comma doesnt look right does it?--Light current 07:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Any comma in particular? GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 08:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It's right. If you read the whole sentence (over the two lines), it will read "Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.". Daniel.Bryant 11:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It looks fantastic. Imagine how the sentence would look without a comma there! --Oldak Quill 17:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm convulsing just thinking about it! -81.132.224.87 20:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comma 

message: I recently uploaded quite a few photos and put them on their respective pages. Soon after, they were taken down because I did not provide the URL for them, etc. I would like to upload the pics again, but the right way...so what do I do? At the upload page, do I simply just put the URL of the photo? And another thing...I don't understand this: "Images found on websites or on an image search engine should not be uploaded to Wikipedia." How's that make ANY sense? Where else would you find photographs ON THE INTERNET to put ON A WEBSITE?
--RattleandHum 19 August 2006
:You either produce them yourself or ensure that their licence is compatible with Wikipedia. 99% of images you came across on a website or found in an image search are not. --Cherry blossom tree 16:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia: Image use policy. Hope this helps.--PFHLai 17:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image Upload Help 

message: we are all about new zeeland right now.  that's cool, though.
:it is fantastic (and it is spelt New Zealand).  Although, get ready for another when (in a few days time I would think) we get: "The King of Tonga, Taufa'ahau Tupou IV dies in Auckland, New Zealand ending his 41 year reign."  --210.86.87.240 07:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately,  New Zealand is still outshone by Australia, which has a featured article and a featured picture! :P --liquidGhoul 07:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All to the good, I say: English WP can seem Brit- and US-centric Bedesboy 08:23, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Both NZ and Aussie both have a current DYK entry as well.  Australasia finally gets its spotlight! --Midnighttonight Remind me to do my uni work rather than procrastinate on the internet 09:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: get ready for tomorrow's featured picture as well.  oh, and in the current DYK is another (although most people wouldn't know Featherston is in NZ) --Midnighttonight Remind me to do my uni work rather than procrastinate on the internet 21:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  a lot of new zeeland 

message: Missing a · between "Help" and "Categories"? Or is there a reason for that? Dunno if this has been asked..thanks. Aranherunar 07:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At most resolutions and font sizes, a large gap exists between the two links in question.  ("Overview ·  Searching · Editing · Questions · Help" appears on the left side of the screen, while "Categories · Featured content · A–Z index" appears on the right side.)  At a relatively low resolution (such as 800x600) or large font size, this is less obvious.  —David Levy 07:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm so that's why - I used the largest font size. Thanks. Aranherunar 08:06, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing "·"