Talk:Main Page/Archive 83

message: Did anybody else make this spoonerism while reading PotD?.. just me then? :/ --Monotonehell 09:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're not alone. In addition, because of the bright colours and the poor way Mediawiki thumbnails images, I thought the picture was a cartoon until I clicked to see it in full. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 09:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seady weed dragon 

message: Someone should archive this page. It's already over 129 kilobytes long... In wikipedia guidelines it states that a page should be archived at 32kb... I'm not good at editing so someone else should do it.205.188.116.138 23:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That guideline is for articles... not talk pages or non-mainspace pages. ---J.S (t|c) 00:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, what?  We don't archive articles at all.  --Descendall 01:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

text: That's more than Talk:Main Page/Archive 81.  205.188.116.138 is probably right.  —Wknight94 (talk) 00:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've moved most of the older talks from October to Archive 82. Hope this helps. -- PFHLai 05:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  archiving 

message: Did anyone else notice this $10,000 donation by the W. Glen Boyd Charitable Foundation, back on October 10th? Maybe we should have something on it in the Signpost... — BRIAN0918 • 2006-11-08 03:45Z
: In the Signpost ?  You may want to post at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions instead of here. Hope this helps. --PFHLai 05:34, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: $10,000 donation to Wikimedia

message: The current day in GMT is the ninth, but Tomorrow's edition of the main page shows today's featured content as part of its layout, ref today's featured article of Karen Dotrice and Tomorrow's of the same. Is this a fault, and if so, is this fixable? I'm not sure if this has been the case before now, but. Bobo. 06:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Clear your cache. (Ctrl-F5 on a PC, Apple-F5 on a Mac.) --64.229.178.41 12:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Please avoid personal attacks.--May the Force be with you!  Shreshth91 16:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh heh. Consider myself insulted. It's working better now. I blame myself for not knowing how to do these things. Thank you, 64.229.178.41. Bobo. 03:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tomorrow's Featured Article - a fault?

message: Today's (11/9/06) DYK includes "..that Kadambini Ganguly (pictured) was one of the first female graduates in the British Empire and the first female doctor (allopath) in South Asia?"
Any chance we can change "allopath" to "M.D." or an equivalent? "Allopath" is held by some to be offensive.
: This old DYK has left the Main Page. Next time, try WP:ERRORS. --64.229.178.190 14:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  At the time I posted it was up. AND it was changed before it went down. My mistake for not signing/putting a timestamp on my comment 67.182.22.63 03:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Allopath" 

message: Having come across the debate again on a page of BJAODN a suggestion - if the image or equivalents appears in "local library" medical encylopedias, use it, if the disease/syndrome/whatever is only described, use a diagram. It might also be useful to have a "medical image some might find unpleasant" warning on the relevant pages with a diagram at the top (ie for those of us who just want to know what "xyz-ism" is but don't want the glorious technicolour images).
That said, there will always be a degree of subjectivity in the matter - we can all think of images we object to (for whatever reasons) - and some "objectionable images" will inspire people in a positive way. Jackiespeel 15:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Medical images and the main page

message: I see that Armistice Day is in the anniversary section of the front page. Would anyone support a change to Remembrance Day and Ode of Remembrance type thing (ie. solemn remembrance of past, present and future sacifices, rather than military history about the end of World War I? Carcharoth 00:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Remembrance Day is there already. --64.229.4.229 01:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh. Time to go to bed, I think! :-) Carcharoth 01:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I didn't mean to send you away, Carcharoth. I am sure you'll come back refreshed. Sweet dreams! --64.229.226.79 17:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remembrance Day 

message: It keeps displaying in the nostalgia skin. Is anyone else experiencing this problem? It's been like this for the past three hours. Floaterfluss 07:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The easiest way to change it back is to try this link to Special:Preferences, change your skin preference back to Monobook, and purge your cache. Titoxd(?!?) 07:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

text: THANK YOU SO MUCH!!! Floaterfluss 07:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia is all messed up! 

message: Euler the Toiler is my hero... long live generatingfunctionology! And Euler's Identity! And the Pentagonal Number Theorem! And gamma! And... oh, there's just too many to name. :-) --3M163//Complete Geek 14:03, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh, yes, another best FA ever :-) 

message: Donald Rumsfeld's resignation is nowhere near as noteworthy.  Past U.S. Presidents have gone through three Defense Secretaries in their terms.  The photo should be of Pelosi.
:Maybe this answers your question--thunderboltz(Deepu) 14:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is celebrating Rumsfeld's resignation just like it is celebrating the change in Congress. I'm sure these points will remain on the main page into 2008. Haizum 22:55, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Nancy Pelosi not the "In the News" photo anymore? 

message: Although Armistice Day is mentioned as taking place today, there should be a mention of it being the end of hostilities in World War 1.
Motorfix 14:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "1918 - Germany signs an armistice treaty with the Allies, ending World War I on the Western Front."  --  Zanimum 15:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On this day 

message: I want a wiki in which people are able to present experiment reports, preferably using the scientific method.  Call it wikiscience or something.  This will enable wikipedia to have a source for some statistics or facts. GstrOSx 09:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A little trick to introduce original research to Wikipedia? It seems this idea will be possible using Wikiversity: . Perhaps you could start a science project there, but I don't think it would be considered a reliable source for Wikipedia.--cloviz 17:08, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A new wikimedia subsituance? 

message: In works of literature, films, and video games, many events are incorrectly stated in past tense. As a work of fiction that is immortal, events are properly stated in present tense. It is suggested that users help correct this mild issue. (from a friendly user) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 170.211.117.7 (talk • contribs) .
:We are all editors here, including you. Be bold and make the edits you think are needed. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You might want to bring this up with WikiProject Television as they are the ones most likely able and willing to fix these problems. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Koweja (talk • contribs) 01:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

text: No that's not correct. to take two examples at ramdom, the Titanic sank when it hit an iceberg: you can't say " The Titanic sinks when it hits an iceberg" 90 years after it finished sinking.  Dinosouars roamed the earth two million years ago, not "roams the earth two million years ago". These things have happened, in the past, and have finished happening, that is why it is called the past tense.--Bilbo B 15:40, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither of your examples, though, are works of literature, or in films or video games; which is what the suggestion above refers to. Bazza 16:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, they are encyclopedic entries.  This is an encylopedia, and user 170.211.117.7 is saying, in effect, in fiction do as you please, on Wikipedia write in the present tense. (assuming "immortal" is a typo for "immaterial") (Or have i totally missed the point of their post?) --Bilbo B 16:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My reading of the comment was that it is suggesting a style to be used when discussing works of literature, etc. So (appropriately) in the article on The Lord of the Rings, After seventeen years of investigating, their old friend Gandalf the Grey revealed that the ring was in fact the One Ring, the instrument of Sauron's power, which the Dark Lord had been searching for most of the Third Age, and which corrupted others with desire for it and the power it held. becomes After seventeen years of investigating, their old friend Gandalf the Grey reveals that the ring is in fact the One Ring, the instrument of Sauron's power, which the Dark Lord has been searching for most of the Third Age, and which corrupts others with desire for it and the power it hold.. I'm actually not fussed one way or the other, but it's an interesting dialogue. Bazza 18:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

text:  Suitably cowed Bilbo retires, tail between his legs lolBilbo B 19:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  So, is there a policy or not? I'd say it was probably holds and not hold but otherwise... I agree with you. Blackjack4124 10:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is this Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) it mostly warns against writing about fiction as if it's reality. We must write the actual encyclopedic prose in past tense, so the above would only apply in plot summaries. --Monotonehell 12:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: My observation was not specific to Tolkien's works. I only picked the Lord of the Rings text as an example because it happened to be mentioned in the FA (and because I thought Bilbo B would appreciate it!). It could be applied to any work of fiction at all. Having said that, your points (1) and (2) are exactly right. I'm still not fussed — as long as an article is well written and an informative (and entertaining) read, it should be up to the author(s). Bazza 16:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems in tensing 

message: The entry for Penley is problematic.  Is there any way to link today' "Did You Know" to the Penley Polish Hospital section of North_East_Wales_NHS_Trust?  Thanks.  Eddieuny 20:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This old DYK has left the Main Page. Next time, try WP:ERRORS to suggest minor changes on the Main Page. -- 64.229.179.9 15:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Penley on DYK

message: I really like the short FA blurbs that have appeared the last couple days.  It forces the writing in ITN to be a bit more concise.  (I admit to having added clauses in ITN items just to make the section long enough to match the neighboring FA.)  It also increases the visibility of DYK and SA.  More please. - BanyanTree 00:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto. The FAs were sometimes becoming mini-articles in themselves. Bazza 18:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  short FA blurbs 

message: When I mouse over the picture of Nancy Pelosi, it says Robert Gates.  71.12.182.210 02:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed.  In the future, please report items like this at WP:ERRORS - BanyanTree 02:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robert Gates??? 

message: Today's FA is huge, and apparently each side of the Main Page is not evenly balanced. I reinstated a news headline at T:ITN, but it appears to not have done much. Can anyone remove a current DYK and use it for another day, if possible? The last one (Lucien Bianchi) is very long, and removing it would definitely put the page back to normal. Nishkid64 00:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Lucien Bianchi can get a spot in the limelight tomorrow. However, the FA is not exceptionally long; I think it is more that ITN is shorter than usual. —Cuiviénen 01:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about that. I'd updated DYK an hour before the Featured Article shifted over, and based the choices on the length of the FA blurb at the time. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 02:40, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The left side is still longer than the right. Please re-instate one more old news headline on ITN. BTW, tomorrow's FA is even longer! --64.229.231.116 15:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like unless the right side is made a bit longer, DYK'll only be able to hold two or three items instead of the regular six. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 16:25, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, we added Joseph Kabila to ITN, so I think removing the last one or the last two would fix balance issues on the Main Page. Nishkid64 22:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tomorrow's FA will be very long, so I've restored the US election-related news. After tomorrow, it should be time to remove it for good. —Cuiviénen 23:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Today's Main Page 

message: I am looking for togo civil war information.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Porks (talk • contribs) 19:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: History of Togo may help. Or, go to Wikipedia: Help desk. --65.95.107.92 19:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean Wikipedia:Reference desk. The help desk is for questions about Wikipedia itself. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 07:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  togo civil war 

message: :1817 - The Bank of Montreal, Canada's oldest chartered bank, opened in Montréal, Québec.
There have been three discussions on this topic on this talk page and countless discussions about it in the Wikipedia Community. At this point I will restate the basic fact that in the English Language, Montreal and Quebec do not take accents. These names are the native names used by the native Anglo-Quebecer population, who have lived in Quebec for hundreds of years. Let me clarify in point form:
:*Anglophones have lived in Quebec for hundreds of years, forming a basic part of Quebec society (see Anglo-Quebecer)
:*The Island of Montreal is over 20% Anglophone
:*There are numerous municipalities throughout Quebec and on the Island of Montreal which are majority English-Speaking. Their inhabitants are Anglo-Quebecers and not foreign English speakers.
:*Anglophones form a minority within Quebec but are linked to the larger English-Speaking cultures around them.
Seeing as how a sizeable segment of Quebecers are in fact native English speakers who write Montreal and Quebec without an accent, writing those names in this way reflects both the English-Language norms and the form preferred by the native community when speaking English (even francophones tend to write it without an accent in English). 
Montreal and Quebec are not names imposed on these places by modern day Anglophones Imperialists. In fact, calling them Montréal and Québec in the English language is disrespectful to both local customs and the native Anglophone Quebecer population. It is a politicized issue, and in choosing to write these placenames with an accent, Wikipedia's administrators show support for a contentious point of view which many Anglophones consider slightly offensive, demonstrating a lack of Neutral Point of View. 
This may be avoided entirely by using the proper English names of Montreal and Quebec, which are accepted in both the larger English speaking community and the native Quebec population (for use in English), and are not considered offensive even to ultranationalists who would prefer the complete removal or assimilation of Anglo-Quebecer population.
I ask, then, why the Wikipedia administration continues to insult not only the Anglophone Quebecer population (by disregarding their existence) but also the Quebec population at large (by imposing their outside view of how things should be written rather than how Quebecers prefer to write them). It is especially troubling that the Bank of Montreal (no accent, but written with an accent in French as “Banque de Montréal”) was founded by Anglo-Quebecers and was originally designed to serve this minority population’s trade interests.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.53.137.52 (talk • contribs) .
:Agreed.  Accent marks removed.  Not only per your explanation but because the article names don't include them.  —Wknight94 (talk) 01:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Please excuse my little diatribe. In fact I was only restating the reasons why the Wikipedia Community decided to use those names in the articles in the first place. --70.53.137.53 23:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Not at all on topic, it would make it easier on 'us English speakers' if we did use the accent marks. So we'd now the diference between late and laté... --Monotonehell 10:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the argument is that Montreal is not a loan word — it's the English language equivalent of the French name Montréal. The loan words listed above are spelt that way because there is no English equivalent. Btw, thought it was latte?  :-)  Bazza 13:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Shush you, it's also Italian. I just couldn't think of a real example at the time ;) --Monotonehell 18:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

text:   I always thought the accent mark is there for pronounciation purposes. --PFHLai 18:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, you made me think of one, I always stick an accent on resumé otherwise it's resume. --Monotonehell 18:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not for pronunciation purposes, though. Resumé is a loan word for which there was no English equivalent (like café, etc, quoted above), so it's come from French asis; whereas resume is more of a bona fide English word. Bazza 15:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Resumé is not "from French as is". Each E has an accent mark in French. Only the second E keeps the accent mark in English.  English equivalent? How about summary of work history? And coffee shop, spouse-to-be,... etc. --64.229.179.217 19:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

text: actually, i believe it's résumé Mowens35 21:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite right. Apologies, but I simply copied from the original talk. The point above — How about summary of work history? And coffee shop, spouse-to-be — is irrelevant. They are not single words themselves, but give the meanings of foreign words which are used as loan words in English. You don't go up to someone and ask how they met their spouse-to-be — you ask how they met their fiancé(e). And whilst the reply might refer to a coffee shop, it is also just as likely to mention a café. Those are both words imported as is into English, unlike Montreal which is an English word in its own right (the equivalent to the French Montréal). Same goes for cinema (cinéma), beret (béret), desert (désert), and many others. Bazza 14:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Montreal, Quebec 

message: There seems to be some disagreement about what to do with the 10k section of the links to other wikipedias that was removed by Raul because he felt it made the language links section too large.  The way I see it there are four options, enumerated below, and I think it would help to have people express their preferences and why.  Dragons flight 15:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 10k's 

message: *This is my first choice, because I like seeing Wikipedias seperated by size.  Dragons flight 15:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Include a section of 10ks in {{tl|Wikipedialang}}

message: * I think this is the best option. What does a Wikipedia's size have to do with where in the list it comes. Better to treat all WPs the same and alphbetise them (Quality vs Quantity). The only concern is the total length of the list, there we need an arbitary cutoff. We don't need this scoreboard, it's not very academic and does nothing as a KPI. --Monotonehell 03:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Include the 10ks in the {{tl|MainPageInterwikis}}

message: *This is my second choice.  I'd rather not have them in the interwiki bar, even though we have the space, because within an alphabetized list I think it obscures which Wikipedias are the largest (and hence most significant).  Dragons flight 15:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Include 10ks in both interwikis and Wikipedialang

message: * As far as I can tell, no Wikipedia includes both a bottom template and side interwikis.  The insertion of  has made  redundant, and  should be removed.  The length of the interwikis column should be set at "not vertically longer than the body of the Main Page".  For example of a decent size, see :de:.  For a too long interwiki column, see :es:.  I don't particularly care what the cut-off number is as long as the Main Page is compact. - BanyanTree 00:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove {{tl|Wikipedialang}}, set interwikis to page body 

message: Here's another idea.  Would take work to implement it, though.  Maybe only worthwhile if it can be automated:  below the list of about 33 languages and just above the "Complete list" link, have about 5 or 10 more languages listed.  These would cycle through all the other languages.  That is, each day (or each week) a different 5 or 10 languages would be listed there, so that even the very smallest Wikipedias would be listed sometimes.  By the way, I'm just tickled pink that my suggestion to put a link like the "Complete list" one was taken up, and implemented so fast.  What a great community Wikipedia is!  --Coppertwig 03:47, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Have 5 or 10 languages in the list each day that cycle through all the other Wikipedias 

message: The "on this day" entry -- "1988 - The Palestinian National Council declared the independence of the State of Palestine" -- links directly to an NPOV page on the so-called "Palestinian National Council". This is an obsolete, unelected body chartered by the Arab League and trotted out for special occasions. The declaration had no effect whatsoever, and was generally ignored by Arafat's Palestine Authority.
:Well, it's on the Main Page, so maybe some people will see it and try to fix up the POV issues for Palestinian National Council. Nishkid64 22:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Palestinian Propaganda

message: wWho visits Wikipedia more? Americans Or the English? Zabrak 00:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who cares? Koweja 01:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well said, Koweja. But I'll address the user's question anyway. If by English you mean people from Britain, then I would assume Americans visit Wikipedia more oftain than the Britons (since there are more people in America than in Great Britain). So...why does it matter, and since when was it an age old question? Nishkid64 01:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: It seems more than half Wikipedia users are American, white and male.--cloviz 04:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's apparent people think wikipedians are too white and nerdy... - Malomeat 04:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Groan*. In response to the original question, a supermajority of native English speakers are American (See this graphic), so Americans certainly predominate here. On the other hand, it may be that the average Brit visits Wikipedia more often than the average American. —Cuiviénen 15:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On the other hand, there is no reason to assume we should only count native speakers. There are a large number of second language speakers, especially in Africa and Asia (India in particular comes to mind). Of course, these people may not visit wikipedia that much because they tend to be in poorer countries with less access to the internet and probably less time to access the internet too Nil Einne 09:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's end this AGE OLD QUESTION once and for all shall we? 

message: Is today a sort of Polish day in this project? FA, DYK, and Selected anniversaries all start with Polish entries. By looking at Main Page, one may believe he has come to Polish wikipedia, translated in English. --Ghirla -трёп- 08:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I also want to complain about the Palestinian bias on 15 November, German bias on 11 November, American bias on 7 November, Malaysian bias on 4 November, Australian bias on 29 October and Sudanese bias on 28 October. Wikipedia is clearly biased towards nations. Piet | Talk 11:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to complain about the Terran bias on Wikipedia. As an English speaking native of Conventia I'd like to see more articles focusing on finger food. --Monotonehell 12:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I really don't see the problem. What if the main page contains a bit more Polish information today? Read the articles if you want to know a bit more about Poland. If not, wait until tomorrow and you'll have a new main page. It's not likely that there will be another "Polish day" in the next few years. There appears to be about a 99% chance however, that in the next couple of weeks some other country will - by chance - receive a more than average attention, and a 100% certainty that someone will be here to complain about "Bias". It's so tiring to hear the same remark over and over again - it's just based on nothing. It used to be U.S. bias, U.K. bias, Aussie bias, now it's another country and we get exactly the same complaints. Just accept it: the world is made of countries, about every subject can be linked to some country, now and then more than one subject on the Main Page will deal with the same country. Piet | Talk 15:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I think many admins try to control DYK to prevent bias. However with anniversaries, ITN and FA, there is little that can be done. FAs are decided well in advanced and indeed have occasionally been targeted at a special event. However if on the day of a FA, there is also news worth of mention in ITN (as occured with the 'Malaysian bias' when the new Agong was announced on the day we had the FA, AFAIK there were only two issues related to Malaysia) there is little that can be done. If you feel there is bias, you might want to consider what you can do to help. Specifically I suggest you become sort of evil maniac bent on controlling the world (like in movies and cartoons). If you can control world events, then you can prevent this 'bias'. Nil Einne 09:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish Day? 

message: Whats with the main logo being changed to a picture of some guy? Joshlmay 21:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where? If you're talking about the "In The News" section, that's something different. In the News usually has a picture of a person or thing recently in the news. Nishkid64 22:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Look, up there someone claimed to have seen the White Stripes; it seems this really happens. It would be fun to see it, wouldn't it?--cloviz 23:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What white stripes? --75.20.216.65 23:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Click the link that Cloviz added. Some user was saying they saw white stripes on the Main Page for a few days, but apparently it fixed itself. Nishkid64 00:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It isn't clear to me whether this was a reference to literal white stripes or to the musical duo known as the White Stripes.  —David Levy 00:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I assumed the duo because of the use of the definite article but who knows.--cloviz 02:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: i knows! it was indeed the musical duo who graced my main page with their pasty skin. --dan 19:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I mean that instead of the main wikipedia logo that is usually in the top left corner of the screen, there is instead (on my laptop at least) a small picture of an apparently Asian male. Doesn't sound like it's happening with anybody else, thats very strange.Joshlmay 01:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Asian male? Wow, that is pretty strange. Nishkid64 02:42, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't see the logo, instead I see text that says Wikipedia. Did you  guys kinda remove the logo?-02:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Can you upload a screen capture somewhere, Josh?  —David Levy 03:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Sounds like something's up with the cache to me. A user on a forum I frequently recently suffered similar random image replacements. Try clearing the cache then reloading and see if it goes away. Sockatume 03:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Main logo

message: The first topic in ITN, DYK, OTD and the featured picture all involve women! Clearly, Wikipedia is being run by a feminist cabal ;-) —Cuiviénen 02:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh no! Good thing we have the picture on ITN. (for now) Nishkid64 02:40, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would be more concerned about the pro-contributor bias of this encyclopedia if I were you. Not to mention the anti-vandalism views us users share. ;-) Tennis DyNamiTe (sign in) 02:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Female Bias! 

message: I think we should change the way Wikipedia searches a little.  Not a major change, just a small one.  We should make the search for "a" different than "a/an" or "i" different than "I".  And acronyms such as CAT scan (instead of "cat"), except if they are widely used with miniscule letters such as "laser". Randfan 00:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Or "justice" from "Justice". Randfan 00:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The go button is case-insensitive and does most of what you want. I've also changed your heading title to "searching" so my screen reader JAWS doesn't get confused with the actual search form on the page which has the label of "search". Graham87 02:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  searching 

message: So?  I'm sure if we post the same about Hillary Clinton in '08, there will be accusations of U.S. bias.  Also, why are we endorsing a candidate?  And don't tell me the piece is NPOV.  Just having it there is free advertising.  --Nelson Ricardo 11:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *This story is blatantly of international interest and the article was updated accordingly before it was placed on the ITN template. If you don't think that the update was sufficiently extensive so as to merit inclusion on the template then argue that point on ITN talk. Apart from that, there is no issue here. Badgerpatrol 19:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a news outlet. --Monotonehell 16:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ségolène Royal 

message: Can someone fix the serious front page vandalism already - the main article points to a vandalised San Francisco article! (C_California) (ok fixed now finally strange that a featured article was not locked.). Orbitalia 16:12/16:49, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia:Don't protect Main Page featured articles.  —David Levy 16:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured article vandalism

message: The featured article, first DYK and featured picture all have something to do with California. Wikipedia is clearly run by Californians.
:This joke is getting pretty old. Koweja 20:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm... the downside is that this probably isn't a joke. -- SmthManly / ManlyTalk / ManlyContribs 03:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You've got it all wrong. Wikipedia is run by midgets. Pacific Coast Highway {Gobble Gobble! • Happy Thanksgiving!} 03:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Jokes here are Bias biased.--cloviz 15:27, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Californian Bias

message: Please update main page, Czech Wikipedia now have more than 50.000 articles. :) --Ragimiri 19:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for letting us know. I have updated the template. Yay Czech Wikipedia! Nishkid64 20:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Czech Wikipedia 

message: I've noticed that the main page doesn't have all the interwikis of the main pages of other wikipedias not even of some of the bigger ones(<10.000 articles). Please someone with admin rights could change that . --Noumenorian 21:12, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With the idea of not making the Main Page too long, only Wikipedias with more than 20,000 articles are included. (Arabic is the most recent addition.) This is currently under discussion at Talk:Main Page#The 10k's, above. —Cuiviénen 22:02, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwikis for the main page 

message: In the blub on today's featured picture (cheetah) why does its acceleration have to be compared to two cars (aside from the fighter plane)? I can agree there is a progression from a car to a fighter plane (accelerates faster than a supercar or even a fighter plane), but isn't it redundant to name two cars? Does it really tell much except for the fact that the writer is a car-enthusiast? Just a thought... Cribananda 07:08, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's because those are the two equally fast fastest cars, so comparing a cheetah to only one of them might be considered bias. —Cuiviénen 16:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why two cars? 

message: The Swedish mainpage was recently moved to the portal namespace, because it is a portal, and not an article... Something to think about on enwiki as well? /Grillo 10:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kinda addressed in the Main Page FAQ. It's mostly still here due to historical inertia, but if it were moved it'd mean an awful lot of people would need to change their bookmarks :P GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 10:15, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: More likely, we'd have to keep a redirect at Main Page so that all the outside links didn't completely break — which means that a lot of new visitors would have a puzzling  "redirected from" message on the top of the first page they visit. Gavia immer (u|t|c) 18:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Though I'm pretty sure there'd be a clever CSS "hack" to make it invisible to the punters. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 18:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no redirected message at :sv:Huvudsida. Of course the redirect must stay! /81.170.235.234 07:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swedish mainpage 

message: I just want to thank whoever it was that had the brilliant idea to make a picture of someone's poo in a bowl one click away from the front page. :)
--Robbrown 22:30, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To be fair it links to the article which contains a small illustration halfway down the page. In an uncensored encylopedia when clicking on a link like human feces one can expect an  illustration. --Monotonehell 22:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Almost inspires me to see if I can get a good enough photograph of the subject to have it featured :) GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 04:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: How did you get there? Nil Einne 09:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yesterday DYK included the hook: ...that the primary disposal method for human faeces in the slums of Nairobi, Kenya, is the unsanitary flying toilet? GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 14:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poo 

message: Since these allegations of country-specific bias keep cropping up, it seems to me we have only one solution. We need to nominate someone to become an evil maniac bent on controlling the world (like in movies and cartoons). Any volunteers? Once this person is successful, he or she can prevent country specific bias by controlling world events. For example, tomorrow's FA is on some American comedy performance. So no events from America that merit inclusion in ITN tomorrow please. The next day it a Russian composer so no events from Russia. Alternatively, we can try asking these guys Bilderberg Group for help...?  Nil Einne 09:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We already have a Benevolent Dictator for Life, although admittidly he is perhaps more concerned with wikifying the world than controlling it. :-) -- AJR | Talk 17:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But do you see what I mean? If we had an evil manic, s/he could have ensured Alexander Litvinenko wasn't newsworthy either by preventing him from being poisoned or making such a big stories that no one would have thought of putting a Litvinenko story up. Now we just have to wait to tomorrow and Russian bias allegations appears... :-P Nil Einne 11:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need an evil maniac 

message: I notice that the View the Animation link on the main page takes the reader to the image page of the image, which includes all the notices associated with the image. Do we really need for the casual reader to read notices about temporary uploading and all the file links associated with it? Wouldn't it make more sense to just transclude the image into a clean and empty subpage which we link to from the main page, so the reader sees only what they expect to see, the animated image? NoSeptember 12:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I created a page for this purpose for today and future animations as needed. Does anyone object to using it? NoSeptember 12:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks that way.  That's how all image pages are set up.  Clicking on the image twice takes you to a clean page. drumguy8800 C T 15:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I moved the page to Wikipedia:Today's featured picture (animation) and deleted the cross-namespace redirect.  —David Levy 15:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks all for setting this up. Where should we add an instruction for future animated POTD's, so that this page and the main page link gets used properly? The next animated picture seems to be coming on December 3rd. NoSeptember 16:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Perhaps as a bullet in Wikipedia:Picture of the day#Guidelines? Koweja 16:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That was a good idea. I've refined a bit further by creating a subpage for today's animation and transcluded it into Wikipedia:Today's featured picture (animation) with a an  clause for days that don't have animations so that page can be dynamic. Hopefully that should work out. howcheng  {chat} 18:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Much better in the WP namespace. There should probably be an archive so that users can revisit old animations of the day. Gzkn 07:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to be bold in moving pages to the title and namespace you think they belong in. I brought this topic up here because I knew the idea would be vastly improved upon with many people considering it :). Yes, we should have an archive as you suggest. NoSeptember 08:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: View the Animation

message: You're all biased to people who bias bias. Nobody's removed a user's joke comment joke about a mediawiki feature planned to send all bias talk to /dev/null! This is atrocious. 80.41.251.238 13:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? What happened? Nishkid64 22:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias bias bias 

message: Just a simple request: I would very much appreciate it if the editors/authors would use a 'justified alignment' for the texts, it reads so much nicer! Thanks!
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by MStefSB (talk • contribs) 16:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Check your user preferences, MStefSB. --64.229.220.151 16:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Specifically, Preferences-->Miscellaneous (Misc). Nishkid64 22:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alignment request/tip: 

message: "The Russian security service denies any involvement." This is almost the same as saying that they are probably involved. After all the CIA will say they're not involved either but you're not mentioning this. Please just remove that line. Piet | Talk 13:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've shortened the news item to just plain facts.  Speculation about culprits and motivation is better left to sourced statements in the article. Zocky | picture popups 15:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russian security service accusation 

message: Is this kosher? Don't we have a policy of no unfree images outside of articlespace? - crz crztalk 16:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair use images have appeared on the Main Page before as well. This happens only when the TFA has no free image to accompany the summary.--thunderboltz(Deepu) 16:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Heheh... the main page IS in article space :) 80.41.251.238 11:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unfree image on the Main Page 

message: The link to Functionalism in DYK goes to a disambig page.  It should go to  Functionalism (architecture).  Can someone correct this? MrVoluntarist 17:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Try WP:ERRORS. --64.229.223.162 17:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't there be some buttom up top linking people there so they'd know to go there instead?  I didn't see one, but I could just be blind today. MrVoluntarist 17:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is a link near the top of this page, and one at the footer. --64.229.223.162 17:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

text:  No, you're not blind, MrVoluntarist. You just missed it. It's alright. The link used to be in a red box. Maybe we should restore the red box. --64.229.223.162 17:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I see.  I assumed he was talking about the main page, not the discussion page for the main page.  The problem is that once someone has decided to report an error, he (okay, me) will go to the discussion and then immediately report it, which is where that kind of thing has historically been done.  It would just make sense for the error-reporting link to be on the main page, at least for me.  Even here I have to read through a number of options.  It should be more prominent, since it's probably the most common thing that shouldn't go here, but people would think should go here.  Sorry again. MrVoluntarist 17:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's okay. No need to apologize. Maybe we should restore the red box with the link to WP:ERRORS. --64.229.223.162 18:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's okay the occasional person trying to report an error will go straight to the [+] button without looking for the help boxes, nothing can be done about that. As MrV points out, it's SOP on normal pages. The current header and footer catch a lot more people and send them to the 'correct' places than the old red box. The current header is the result of about a month's tweeking and interviewing people who continued to post here. It also stops inciting vandals who took the warning as a WP:BEANS. --Monotonehell 06:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I can see that in the DYK history. Try emptying your cache. --64.229.223.162 18:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Functionalism in "Did you know..." 

message: Surely a better article could be found than that? Calling what Colbert did as 'satire' doesn't adequately describe it. This was supposed to be entertainment, but was turned into an outright attack which amused only democrats...and not all of them. To say it was controversial, likewise falls short of the mark. Did someone pay to have this article featured? Brian Pearson 17:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I completly agree, I thought at first the Main Page was vanalised; an article whose lead uses words like 'mocked' has problems from start. The FA vote was 11:4, with significant objections not addressed; this should not be our Featured Article.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  18:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: People, please stop and think before you make comments like that. Some FA's may be controversial, but I assure you, all FA's have been systematically approved and proofread by several Wikipedia editors. It exemplifies some of Wikipedia's finer articles, and does not take into respect the controversiality of the article. Nishkid64 23:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Something I had read soon after this performance was over is in the article: Time magazine TV critic James Poniewozik thought that Colbert's critics missed the point. "Colbert wasn't playing to the room, I suspect, but to the wide audience of people who would later watch on the Internet. If anything, he was playing against the room." Poniewozik called the pained, uncomfortable reaction of the audience to Colbert's jokes, "the money shots. They were the whole point."[8] This is key to the controversy, that the audience was not in that room, but on the Internet. It was the perfect chance for the ultimate publicity stunt and advertisment rolled into one for Colbert to make money on a CD. Brian Pearson 03:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colbert as "featured article" 

message: I posted this on the Error page, but felt mentioning it here might be beneficial. There seems to be a lax practice on Wikipedia to refer to anything British as English, and link appropriately. After 1603 there's the union of the crowns, but it's still legally fine to refer to England and Scotland seperately. No problem there.
The problem is referring to events after 1707 as "English", and linking to England or such. There is no England as a sovereign entity after the Act of Union. No Scotland either. It's Great Britain.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kaenei (talk • contribs) 07:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The continued ignorance of the difference between England/Britain (and it really isnt that hard to understand) is one of my pet gripes on wikipedia. siarach 07:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: England and Scotland did not cease to exist in 1707, and many things can still be accurately described as English or Scottish. Zocky | picture popups 10:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your right but the above user is accurate. England did cease to exist as a sovereign entity. It doesn't mean it isn't an entity. The issue is not that things can't be described as English or Scottish but that people think English means the same thing as British which is simply not true and use the words interchangebly. Nil Einne 05:51, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect terminology 

message: Somehwat connected to the entirely valid gripe above - It should refer to British sailors, not English. siarach 07:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My pet gripe on wikipedia?  Too many people who don't read instructions at the top of this talkpage. The Error Report really isn't that hard to find. --64.229.220.196 08:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Blackbeard