Talk:Main Page/Archive 115

message: can i have a list of the wildlife in israel?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.220.90.190 (talk) 14:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See :Category:Biota of Israel Laïka 15:02, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

text: For future reference please take all questions like this to the Reference Desk TheGreatZorko (talk) 15:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  israel.. 

message: Today's DYK includes the entry "...that Google's knol project is widely seen as an attempt to compete with Wikipedia?". This entry seems very out-of-place, in that while it does not fail Avoid Self References, the way it is worded seems to denigrate knol ("an attempt to compete"), and the phrase "is widely seen" feels weasel wordy. Perhaps a better alternative would be "...that Google's knol project has been variously compared to Wikipedia, About.com and everything2?". Laïka 14:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree there are problems with the current phrasing but has anyone actually compared knol to everything2 or about.com? Most of the articles I've read and I'm not talking about stuff on wikipedia have referenced wikipedia and/or talked about Google's continuous rise in controlling everything on the internet Nil Einne (talk) 15:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reading the article it appears it is indeed the case. Now that I think about it I may have read a reference to citizendium altho I can't recall if this was in an article or a user comment somewhere Nil Einne (talk) 15:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or veropedia. --74.13.124.202 (talk) 16:31, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ugly self-reference 

message: A motorcyclist?  Why?  Just about the most boring photo ever... 194.105.120.80 (talk) 09:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also found the editorializing out of place and non-encyclopedic. —Nricardo (talk) 11:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Meh, the text wasn't brilliant, but the pic passed FPC. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 16:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

text: It is rather boring - if the rider were coming more towards us it would be much better.  Shame that the FP is based on technical excellence rather than actual interest.  violet/riga (t) 19:10, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the FP criteria is "It illustrates the subject in a compelling way, making the viewer want to know more." I would say it fails on that. Evil Monkey - Hello 20:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I also find the motorcycle picture to be too boring. The criteria for a feature probably should be made more stringent. sriks8 (talk) 20:55, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anybody is free to participate at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. If you're seeing pictures pass you don't think meet the requiements, that would be the best way to address the concern. If you'd like to see the critiera changed, the best place to raise that would be Wikipedia talk:Featured picture criteria.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 21:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Picture 

message: Gotta love this first line "Bupropion is an atypical antidepressant that acts as a norepinephrine and dopamine reuptake inhibitor, and nicotinic antagonist." Yeah...perfectly understandable to the majority of the population, that's right. My impression of what Bupropion is is that it is a drug located in a shrine, it has been involved in a doping scandal inolving incubation, and it served as the antagonist in a story about nicotine...how close am I? Benjamin 02:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What I basically read is "Bupropion is an unusual antidepressant that acts as a WUT and WUT, and acts against nicotine" It's standard to explain terms exclusive to the field of study, and since the article doesn't do that, I'm questioning its status as a featured article. All other chemistry-related articles don't explain terms, so maybe it's some kind of standard not to bother with explanations. --Teggles (talk) 02:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is odd that it doesn't explain what is being said. I mean, at least half of the people that go to Wikipedia today are going to be like, WTH is this s***? Something about anti-depressants? I think that something should be done about that...can someone with the appropriate knowledge explain for vulgus out there what all of this means? Benjamin 04:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, the nature of the article means it's probably somewhat difficult to summarise without be so generic it's meaningless. You might want to try reading the whole article and the wikilinks and see if that helps. Nil Einne (talk) 08:11, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was perfectly understandable to me... but then again, I'm a chemistry person.  Just because its not an article about common knowledge doesn't mean that it can't be a good article.  Sbrools (talk . contribs) 22:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Basically, when a neurotransmitter is released into a chemical synapse (which is a junction between neurons) it acts on receptors to pass the message from one neuron to the next. To stop this action (so the response isn't prolonged) the chemical synapse is either degraded, or taken back up by the neurone that released it. A reuptake inhibitor stops the neurotransmitter being taken back up, therefore prolonging the response. Hope that sort of helps you understand it! Ryan Postlethwaite 22:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro to FA 

message: ...that Rudyard Kipling wrote a short story about a group of World War I soldiers who were committed Janeites, that is, fans of Jane Austen novels?
 
What is the name of the short story?? --DelftUser (talk) 08:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's mentioned in the Janeites article- it's called "Janeites". MorganaFiolett (talk) 09:04, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No I didn't know 

message: they should have a best user page part on the main page or a most active user part you know what i mean? --ジェイターナー ✉／✐ 13:07, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (Edit conflict) The first suggestion is against several long established policies and guidelines like Wikipedia:Self-references to avoid, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (a social networking site) & Wikipedia:User page. User pages are intended for communication between users in the process of building a better encylopaedia not to 'show off' your 'l33t' user page. Besides that there is unlikely to be any way you can find consensus on the best user page. The second suggestion again has the same problems and it also risks encouring Wikipedia:Editcountitis which we want to avoid. But there is Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits if you are interested. Nil Einne (talk) 15:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to mention such awards would inevitably lead to drama....-Wafulz (talk) 16:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose people would save there edits after every letter that they put in, lol.--ジェイターナー ✉／✐ 12:25, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best user page! 

message: I believe it deserves a place on the main page news. It has to be the first time a first nation has seriously declared secession from the United States. Zazaban (talk) 08:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: News items are to be suggested at WP:ITN/C. Please make sure it meets the criteria (such as having an updated encyclopaedia article about the event. In your case, I would suggest improving Lakota people#Independence movement or even creating a separate article about it). Thanks! Puchiko (Talk-email) 10:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lakota Secession. 

message: I guess the page has only 247 characters and i wonder how it got itself nominated under the DYK criteria ?
:According to the ever reliable Microsoft Word, it has 1,548 characters (1,305 if you exclude spaces), excluding references, surpassing the 1,500-mark standard for DYKs. --Howard the Duck 14:46, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You got a result of 247 because you accidentally did a word count instead of a character count. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oops..I mistook characters as a criteria to be words. Anyway, what is the rationale behind 1500 characters as the threshold ? sriks8 (talk) 17:25, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So that it is considered large enough to be put on the main page, and so that someone looking at it, would have a decent amount of information to go by. <DREAMAFTER> <TALK> 17:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Energy elasticity]] page in DYK ?? 

message: Do you think we should include a news entry for the annoucment that she is pregnant? Cryo921 (talk) 23:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Way. ITN is not a tabloid.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree, when a 16 year old star of a nickleodeon show gets pregnant it is pretty newsworthy. Although your point is a good one. Cryo921 (talk) 23:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It shouldn't be featured. "It should be a story of an international importance, or at least interest." It does not have international importance and is common for 16 year olds to be pregnant.--Richard (Talk - Contribs) 01:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was featured in our local early evening newscast, the last place you'd see Hollywood gossip. Try WP:ITN/C though. --Howard the Duck 04:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Local news has to sell, just like anything else, so I wouldn't say gossip is beneath a local newscast, only a huge amount of it. MMetro (talk) 20:59, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

text: The Earl of Wessex had a baby (well his wife did).  Thats much more significant.  Merry Christmas from Sasha 06:25, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not news. --Howard the Duck 07:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Didn't say it was, just trying to show how irrelevant spears is.  Merry Christmas from Sasha 21:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Irrelevancy doesn't appear in the ITN criteria, if I may add. It has to be posted on Portal:Current events, an update on an article and must be "of an international importance, or at least interest". The JLS case seems to have met all of the criteria I've mentioned, except for the portal one. I've heard about Keisha Castle-Hughes pregnancy a year(?) ago but not on our local newscast, while the Earl's new baby wasn't even mentioned, heck I didn't even see it on the major news channels. As for 16 year olds getting pregnant, they're like elections, they happen everyday. --Howard the Duck 12:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I've heard more about it then the Jamie Lynn case tho. I only heard about Jamie Lynn on some tabloid link whereas the Earl case may have been one of the headline items in my local evening news IIRC. (I'm not in the UK) BTW there are many similarities to when the virgin Mary's pregnancy was annouced last year. And no, I don't think that should have been on ITN either. Edit although if (big if) tabloid rumours are to be believed, Jamie is going to be a single mum unlike Keisha.. Nil Einne (talk) 10:35, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO, neither is newsworthy enough to be on the Main Page. Sorry. As for Ms. Spears—like Richard said, it is not unusual for 16 year olds to be pregnant (has been since, let's see, forever). The fact she is a notable 16-year-old does not make her being pregnant particularly notable, and this is certainly not a world-altering event. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only times pregnancies (or births) are notable enough to appear on the main page are when they have a wider effect on society - ie, it's not the pregnancy that is notable, but the events surrounding it, eg: a) The child belongs to a high ranking member of royalty and is directly in line to the throne (eg, when Princess Akishino was pregnant with Hisahito, or if Kate Middleton had become pregnant by Prince William). b) the pregnancy marks a massive scientific discovery (eg a radical new fertility treatment, proven human cloning etc.). Laïka  —Preceding comment was added at 15:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly Nil Einne (talk) 08:08, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

text: What? Absolutely not. The day a junk tabloid story like that appears on the Main Page is the day that hell freezes over and I hang up my tools in shame. GlassCobra 08:12, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it should be in ITN, but FYI it's on the front page of the NY Times today. Calliopejen1 (talk) 08:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: By comparison, I haven't even seen it in the British broadsheets. Not that it means much- the elections which are (rightly) on ITN are often barely mentioned by the British press. At the end of the day, this pregnancy just isn't important to the world as a whole. J Milburn (talk) 14:49, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jamie Lynn Spears? 

message: Where I can report "one side" (not neutral) Admin ? The guy gave me warning for "personal attack" while other user called me "antisemitic" ! I didn't do anything to get a ban.
--Greetings Krzyzowiec (talk) 23:04, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The best thing to do if you think a specific admin has acted badly would be to politely raise the issue with them on their user talk page. I see you've already posted there, though. You can post at WP:AN/I if there truly is a problem, but if you do so, be prepared to make a very clear case for what you're saying, backed up by diffs. You can also ask at WP:Help desk if you have further questions about Wikipedia process and so forth, this isn't really the proper place for such things.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

text: 'F you're looking for how to do those userboxes, go to, for example, User:Krzyzowiec/Userboxes/Something, insert your code, and save.  Then put  onto User:Krzyzowiec/Userboxes.  If you want to put one of those boxes onto your page, you put  onto your page. 68.101.123.219 (talk) 23:50, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "One side Admin" 

message: Hi everybody,
i'm from the haitian wikipedia and i'd like to add the link to the homepage of our wikipedia into the left panel. Tell me how to proceed or what information is required to proceed.
Thanks in advance ! --Masterches (talk) 21:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello. Unfortunately, only Wikipedias with at least 20 000 articles and a minimum depth of "5" are included (source: Template:MainPageInterwikis). According to meta:List of Wikipedias, the Haitian Wikipedia only has 7 154 articles and a depth of "3".  Puchiko (Talk-email) 22:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ok thanks for your answer Puchiko, i didn't know. I continue my contributions :-) --Masterches (talk) 22:44, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Haitian creole homepage link 

message: This is the shortest I've seen the Main Page discussion in a long time!  It's quite disconcerting in a way.  violet/riga (t) 14:05, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I'm mostly to blame for that. I removed the four or five WP:ERRORS-style sections which contained queries that had already been answered. Since they'd've been long gone had they been placed in the correct area, I didn't see the point in letting them clutter the page up. Enjoy the minimalism while you can. On a side-note, I'm surprised there's been no outcry yet on the appearance of one of the Gwen Stefani FAs as Today's Featured Article. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 15:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah now you've gone and jinxed it! :) Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 16:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Not blame, GeeJo, you're mostly to thank. (I usually get vandal-warnings on my usertalk when I do the same deletions on this talkpage.) --74.13.131.101 (talk) 21:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small page 

message: moved to WP:Main Page/Errors Nil Einne (talk) 17:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor error 

message: Apparently, as early as...
Maybe this is just silly, but: the title of Main Page is conform [sic] to the Wikipedia naming conventions; the P should be small (just like "Current events","Bug reports","Special pages", etc.). Jheijmans 07:22 Jul 24, 2002 (PDT)
68.101.123.219 (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah this has been brought up quite a few times, some, including myself, are of the opinion that it should be moved to Wikipedia:Main Page and have an article about Main Pages here, with a link at the top pointing to the wikipedia main page, but others say this will be too disruptive.--Srmagnetismo (talk) 19:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly would be, if consensus to move this to another main space is even gathered, this will likely need to be a redirect. — xaosflux Talk 19:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would love to move this to a non-article namespace. SInce we are not putting Fair Use Images on the Main Page anymore, that reason for keeping it here is invalid. Only reason, so far as I can see, is Tradition and precedent. The Placebo Effect (talk) 19:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point about the Fair Use Images actually, its much more appropriate on the Wikipedia name space now. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 23:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I think setting up a redirect would be a bad idea, I know there's many link to this Main Page around the internet, but having a link to a link would be pointless, the links to the Main Page would correct themselves in time Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 23:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Remember the capitalisation - Main page could exist as an article while Main Page could be a redirect.  As there is no pressing need for an article by either name we may as well have redirects.  violet/riga (t) 23:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Of course if this does ever happen (and I am also a supporter of such a move) it doesn't mean it has to be like that forever. For example 2-3 years from now we could re-evalutate the situation and turn Main Page into a disambig if it's clear not many people are using it to go to Portal:Main Page or whatever the MP ends up being Nil Einne (talk) 08:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

text: True, that layout would work fine. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 18:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I only wish they'd fixed it all those years ago... ~user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 21:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I must say that person was asking that it conform to "Wikipedia naming conventions", so there was some sort of dispute that far back... altho it might or might not have been the current dispute. 68.101.123.219 (talk) 18:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who's been complaining about the Main Page being in the wrong namespace? 

message: Wikinews has put up an extended quiz, see here. It'd be great to have that as well as - or in place of the "Wikinews" link in the news section for the next 24 hours. Thoughts? --Brian McNeil /talk 18:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok it's great thing we can do --Osamahw (talk) 18:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just for now/the 1st 

message: hello..why we do not do a painting or a ward have "Happy new year" it is just for 1 day.--Osamahw (talk) 10:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We had a huge discussion whether the main page should be decorated for holidays, and we decide not to. Please see Talk:Main_Page/Archive_115#Change_it_for_certain_days_like_Holidays for the discussion, it just boils down to which holidays should be picked. Puchiko (Talk-email) 12:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Correction:We didn't decide not to, we're just waiting for someone to draft the proposal. Sorry about the mistake. Puchiko (Talk-email) 12:24, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, quite frankly, this is an encyclopedia, not a forum, there are already too many children using this site, we shouldn't cater for them any more. Now bugger off and take this proposal with you. 78.146.65.175 (talk) 16:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This site is for everyone, children and adults alike, we cator for all, and don't be so rude to other members. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 17:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ptoject: Happy new year 

message: 'Twould seem that now that "When Wolverines Attack!" is petering out, the theme of DYK seems to be gays...Just a comment, meant as nothing more or less...an observation, one could say. Perhaps I should write a whole bunch of articles on...oh wait, I forgot, real life awaits me.  Benjamin Scrīptum est - Fecī 02:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay... Wait... No... I don't get it... What are you trying to bring up? Dreamafter ⇔ 02:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

text: It sounds like a criticism, as though something is lessening your enjoyment of DYK, but then you seem to disassociate yourself from the project... I have no clue what this supposed observation is to be honest... Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 02:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry I don't make any sense. It's way too late for me, and I sure as hell didn't get enough sleep last night. The observation was that it seems that we are having a high amount of gay-related articles relative to everythinge else: maybe it's just this batch, which has a lead off of Judy Garland as a gay icon, and then Marco Penette who was outed in front of his parents. I was comparing it to the inundation of Michigan Wolverine articles in a very poorly worded and horribly nonsensical attempt at expressing myself. It's not bothering me, I'm just making the observation that sometimes, there seem to be high numbers of DYK's relating to certain topics. I know that in OTD, they do 1 thing per specific country, nothing more than that 1. Perhaps something should be instituted for DYK? No more than 1 DYK for a certain area or topic so that people can get a variety of the new stuff on Wikipedia? I apologize if I wasn't clear before, which I'm sure I wasn't, and hope that I'm more comprehensible this time around. Regards,  Benjamin Scrīptum est - Fecī 03:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I get you now, don't worry about it, well basically the sections in DKY are picked at random from proposed facts that fit the criteria, and as any decent mathematician will tell you, true randomocity will include clusters :), having said that though, I imagine that if we imposed some sort of rule that when submitting a fact, you have to add which of the 12 base Categories of Wikipedia it falls under, it would be fairly easy to make sure that no one category gets more than its fair share. Ferdia O'Brien (Talk) 03:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The most common reason for multiple consecutive DYKs on the same thing AFAIK tends to be that someone or some group decides to work on new articles for something of interest to them. This has happened before with fish, cricket, and other things I can't remember but often peters out after a while. It's still happening for Michigan wolverines BTW. We do AFAIK try to avoid 2 or more hooks relating to the same thing appearing in the same update but obviously this isn't nor is it necessarily easy to say if two items are too related. (See Wikipedia:Did you know "Try to include items from varied fields of interest, time periods, and parts of the world.") Besides the gay icon and gay screenwriter thing we also have two items with some relation to the Hindu religion specifically one about a Hindu godess and another about Paul Bérenger being the first non Hindu PM of Mauritius. But in both cases I would say it's not clear whether they are related enough that seperation is really necessary. (Note that the gay icon thing relates to the perception of her among many LGB people whereas the other thing is about his sexuality which has nothing to do with other LGB people although both do involve people from the TV & film industry.) Also I don't think not more then 1/country/update will work at all since we simply don't have enough from outside the US due to systemic bias and other things. I count 3 items relating significantly to the US in the current update. In any case we don't AFAIK generally try to avoid inter-update article correlation probably because that will be way too complicated given the large number of hooks, the involvement of multiple editors in updating DYK etc. Nil Einne (talk) 06:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Themes on DYK?