Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 13

message: "Did you know"'s handling of pictures is inconsistent with "On this day" and "In the news."
"On this day" and "In the news" both used (pictured) recently AFAIK, while "Did you know" recently used (pictured) or (pictured) or ommited it altogether.
Could "Did you know" use (pictured) consistently, please? --Kjoonlee 03:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Pictured" and italics 

message: I'm a little confused about the selection of Harbhajan Singh, which even weeks ago was far from a stub. Has the policy or its interpretation changed, or was this just a one-off? I'm just wondering whether I should submit other articles which have simply had a few paragraphs added to them. Stevage 09:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion of non-stubs 

message: I'm pretty sure that "speciemens" should be "specimens" in the "Did you know..." section of the WP main page. Please see Banksia epica and http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/speciemen. Walter Siegmund (talk) 18:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  DYK 

message: I know this issue has been discussed before, but I'd like to bring it up again. It seems a bit unfair that editors should put a lot of work into an article - with the prospect of having it featured on the front page providing at least part of the incentive - then having it dumped simply because administrators can't be bothered to update. Surely it should be possible to update the DYK more than once every 24 hours? Eixo 22:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like a lot of people are away on weekends. I myself update on weekdays but am away on weekends. Seems like Samir is also away on weekens. So we need people on the weekend shift.Blnguyen | rant-line 23:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I appreciate the work admins do, but maybe the process could be better organised, to avoid this from happening? Eixo 13:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you suggest? Unlike FA, we can't even queue up articles very far in advance, as they would be stale, we have to do the updates manually at the time (or so it seems so far). The process takes a lot of time. Perhaps it's time to refloat the notion of a team effort, that is, having someone else do the article talk page bannerizing and notifying (those can be done after the fact and could even (not desirable but COULD) pile up if the selected noms were saved. I did some .js automation to help with the placing of banners which helps a little. But I haven't done an update in weeks, have been too busy on other wikitasks... ++Lar: t/c 14:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates 

message: This message was originally posted on Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors.  Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, how about "most impressive remains" and NPOV? I am afraid the updating admins are becoming overly careless, not forcing the nominators to work on the wording, pithyness etc. of the DYKes but rather copying them as they are. I know it is a lot of repetitive and tedious work to update DYK every time, but I believe that since it is a Main Page item, we have to maintain high standards! Bravada, talk - 18:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about at least requiring that the articles be here for the fucking reader rather than for the author's vanity or the chip on his shoulder? Today we have Poverty in Pakistan and Stereotypes of animals. Please come forward, all of you ready to defend these as the hand-picked contributions of a user valuable to Wikipedia's front page. Guys, it's a website, and one 10,000 people are working on. If you find some task unworthy of your careful attention, odds are you can find someone willing to do the job for you. --einexile 11:26, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quality of entries on DYK 

message: Here is the data from the last week: User:Samir (The Scope)/DYK.  All new articles are at the top (70) and all stub expansions (regardless of initial stub size) are at the bottom (24).  Five administrators edited the template in the past week, and all put stub expansions (24/94 = 25.5%) on the main page.  Mind you, this is all stub expansions, not the ones that were stubs.  -- Samir धर्म 23:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry 25/95 = 26.3%.  I missed Onion dome -- Samir धर्म 23:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Data