Talk:Main Page/Archive 53

message: "that "truthiness," an word made by Stephen Colbert of The Colbert Report, was selected as the 2005 Word of the Year by the American Dialect Society?"
It should be "a word," not "an word." Yep.
:Facty. --86.141.50.205 02:33, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Typo in Today's "Did you know it ?" 

message: The text states that the Cormorant stretches it's wings out after diving for fish in order to dry out it's wings.  This is not a fact but a theory!  Experts have no evidence of this and it is still a mystery why they do it. dvc214 07:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction needed with Cormorant photo 

message: "reduced the mass of the Golden Gate Bridge by by 11,160 metric tons?"--Joris Gillis 11:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed now. Shanes 11:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Noticed it. Thanks--Joris Gillis 11:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  typo in today's ''did you know'' 

message: We need a page, in which, we dedicate to artist/artwork, etc.
:What do you mean? Please be more specific. Run! 16:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a proposal for a Wiki-deviant art.   freshgavin TALK    10:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikiart 

message: Is allowed Fair Use image at the homepage? --555pt 20:32, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. -Greg Asche (talk) 21:49, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair Use in homepage? 

message: Why aren't there any Interwiki-Link on that page, like on every other main page ? -- Amtiss, SNAFU ? 20:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: EN goes with the template route for the main page rather using interwikis.  This allows the grouping by size, as well as English translations of the languages for those of us who are language challenged but think it's nice to see what the other major Wikipedias are.  - BanyanTree 21:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki 

message: "Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon is rushed to hospital"
Forgot a sentence article. Shouldn't it be "Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon is rushed to a hospital"?--Aleron235 22:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a US/British grammar difference, it's a grammar difference in article/title style for brevity and impact. The/a/an are almost always omitted, even is in this sentence is unnecessary.   freshgavin TALK    10:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, since sentence style is used in 'In the News', that seems unlikely. It is a British/American difference. 'Rushed to hospital' means rushed to any hospital in general, in UK English. Rushed to a hospital would sound weird to such ears, suggesting he was maybe visiting someone, but is normal in the US. 14:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo on Wikinews 

message: The word "stroke" in the news section links to "cerebrovascular accident" when it should just directly link to "stroke."
:fixed it. JtkieferT | C | @ ---- 00:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "stroke" should link to "Stroke" 

message: Popular Australian television series which ran in the 70's. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 147.10.223.157 (talk • contribs) .
:You mean Homicide (TV series)?  Please direct any questions to the talk page for the article. - BanyanTree 13:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homicide 

message: The Main Page redesign project is nearing completion.  And by popular demand, the Picture of the day is included!  However, we have run into a bit of an impasse.  We've pulled in the condensed version of the Picture of the day, but the built-in border is wreaking havoc with the page's format.  Please take a look and advise.  Is there any way to pull the picture-of-the-day onto a page without the border coming with it?  Sincerely, Go for it! 15:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATTENTION:Picture-of-the-day '''expert''' needed 

message: "Absolutely fantastic"    Is that objective?
Late influences have come from the absolutley fantastic literature and poetry of David Beckham, whose chameleon-like ability to shift from one style to another, replete with a new look and musical philosophy, was a characteristic which would also be frequently ascribed to Marilyn. --Bad carpet 17:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where do you see this text? It's not anywhere on the main page. If it was at the Marilyn Manson article, it was probably vandalism, and has since been removed. — Dan | talk 21:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: David Beckam was a typo/old vandalism for David Bowie.   freshgavin TALK    10:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manson article 

message: In today's (6 Jan 05) featured article, there is an accompanying picture that shows five names, four generic, and one a historical figure who happened to be extremely anti-Semitic -- Henry Ford.  Guess who is voted for?  HENRY FORD! So none of the generic names is chosed, but the totally out of place racist name IS chosen.  Geez, normally FA summaries are subtle with their biases, but to plunge into subliminal messages?  I think that's a little too far.  Can we replace the pic with one without Henry Ford and someone else chosen? (Keep in mind, if it were just five historical figures with Henry Ford selected, that probably wouldn't be a big deal, but when the one recognizable name, which happens to be that of a major racist who helped in the Holocaust, is selected, that doesn't look good.) MrVoluntarist 01:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the vote is for censure? --4.237.242.216 01:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you should take the Holocaust seriously? MrVoluntarist 01:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're reading too much into this, and there does not appear to be any subliminal message. How do you know what is being voted on? And to tell the truth, if someone had to vote between four people they'd never heard of and one they had, most would probably select the one they were familiar with. Also, there don't appear to be any subliminal messages here. — Knowledge Seeker দ 02:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: You're taking this way too far, man. No one is being racist, and no one is not taking the Holocaust seriously. If someone were, the Main Page would start like "What's the difference between a Jew and a Pizza..." Eightball 02:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Do you honestly think they'll care? If the selected person was Adolf Hitler, possibly. You're being completely and utterly paranoid and over the top about this. --Kiand 02:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the ADL would be sad to think you're on their side. By the way, if they don't think Ford is #1, then get on out and vote. Every one counts! Eightball 02:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: And? It doesn't refer to Henry Ford, the same way none of the other names on that list refer to real people. --Kiand 03:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: THAT'S THE PROBLEM!  Why is the ONLY NAME that means something, and that meaning is anti-Semitism, chosen? MrVoluntarist 03:07, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you considered that there might be an actually inoccous reason behind it, such as the person who created it owning a Ford car? There are other things in this world, you have to accept that. You're taking paranoia to a new level here. --Kiand 03:11, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh really?  There are many people with the name Ford.  How about Henry Ford III, who has given money to Jews to undo his grandfather's image AND is associated with Ford Motor Company. Harrison Ford?  Maria Ford? MrVoluntarist 03:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're clutching at straws. If someone showed me a Ford logo  or evenn just gave me the name Ford and asked me to think of a person, the first one would be Henry Ford. There is low to no chance of there being any anti-semitic intent behind that image, and I would advise you to just accept that. --Kiand 03:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Done and done. MrVoluntarist 03:07, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Haha, whoops.  By the way, I count at least 4 names with meaning.  Joe Smith is possibly Joseph Smith from Mormonism, Fred Rubble is from the Flinstones, Jane Doe is the term used for an unknown female (typically an unidentified corpse at the coroner), and Henry Ford is discussed above.  I do remind you, however, to assume good faith.  Something like this being controversial probably could have been avoided if we had a longer scheduling of future front page featured articles (this one was scheduled to appear only 2 days before it actually did).   Still, you are way, way, way overreacting here. Scott Ritchie 03:34, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sell it? Well that would be highly immoral. Shouldn't you burn it, and maybe dance around it in a loin cloth, then sacrifice a ram to the gods? --Nathan (Talk) 02:42, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Perhaps the vote was to acknowledge Henry Ford for later publicly acknowledging that antisemitism is wrong and that he'd been wrong. Anyway, it has been changed. gidonb 20:25, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Sorry my cinism did not get across. I will add a wink next time ;-) gidonb 20:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Semitism on the front page?????? 

message: In Selected Anniversaries, the Bojinka plot was foiled, that is, it was stopped because of the fire. So the word "unfoiling" should be "foiling". Art LaPella 01:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Thanks, BanyanTree 04:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bojinka

message: I've noticed that the featured article tends to update either more than once a day or (less often) less than once a day.  While I like more frequent updates, as they highlight many of the more interesting corners of the Wiki, it seems odd that the featured article updates so erratically.  I'm not sure whether there is a specific time that the page is intended to be updated, but I thought that the problem might be solved by adding a date-stamp to the featured article, i.e. Today's Featured Article: 1/5/06, or something of that nature.  
Just a thought.  --Moriane 03:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The featured article is automatically updated daily, and they are all linked to a certain day. If you're seeing a lag, it may be a caching issue. Try hitting the purge button at the top of this page and see if it works. Good luck! jengod 03:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually, it happens at midnight UTC, which is at 7 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (8 during DST).  --Nelson Ricardo 11:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, if you are on the west coast of North America or thereabouts, that would make sense, as it would change at 4pm pacific time. --Siradia 18:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm east coast, same as Moriane.  If I'd been the only one to notice this, then I'd put it down to confusion, but it's odd that both of us noticed it. Tigger89 00:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it definitely changes exactly once a day, at 00:00 UTC. Back in early 2004, before we got the automated setup, I changed it manually around midnight UTC (almost always plus or minus an hour); however, since last August, it has been automated (Thank god). Anyway, it's possible that both of you are seeing a cached, out of date copy. Between the Wikipedia servers and your eyeballs there are two levels of caching - Server side (Wikipedia's squid proxy servers) and client side (your browser's cache). Raul654 05:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article Layout 

message: The Fire Station text should have a "(pictured)" next to it, IMO. --RealGrouchy 19:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  DYK Picture 

message: It turns out that Ehud Olmert is releasing a Windows update! Well bugger me! 195.92.168.176 20:40, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Forgive my confusion, but where does it say that? I see an in-the-news item on Ehud Olmert and another on the Windows Update, but they're quite separate. — Dan | talk 20:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo on main page!!! 

message: possession, not posession Art LaPella 00:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks; fixed.--Pharos 01:00, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Selected anniversaries, 1558

message: I think these would look better with a thin 1px black border around them, something to separate them from the rest of the page. However I don’t know how to go about suggesting this to the People With The Power, so… I‘m asking here! porges 08:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is probably something to add to the redesign on the Main Page and its associated discussion. -- Solipsist 10:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the images 

message: I wasn't sure where to post this, but could someone fix the text "Česká" on the wikipedia.org page (not this main page, rather the first page you come to when typing 'wikipedia.org' into your browser). It should read "Česky" , meaning [in] Czech. -- Hexagon1 14:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have fixt that. If there is anything else you can ask me. --Walter 23:30, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, Thanks - someone seems to just have copied the word out of the Czech Wikipedia with no regard for context. -- Hexagon1 09:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems to get raised every few days. Could we maybe settle the "Česká"-"Česky" puzzle to Czech people's satisfaction, then put a comment at the top of this page or something, letting people know which is correct. Since it's been raised several times, I can only assume it gets reverted. 14:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixing the completely first page 

message: I think everything is said. :-) Why should we not add, on the left column of the page, the links to the others wikipedias languages ? All of the other languages wikipedias offer a link towards the other "Main Page" in this column. It would be great to put this in the left column too ! Links between wikipedias are a good thing in order to developp an international share of knowledge (moreover, I'm french and I often read some articles of english wikipedia in order to translate them  in french wikipedia). What do you think about it ? 81.56.64.150 18:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Scroll down 65.27.76.238 01:36, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We're currently working on a possible main page redesign (see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Usability/Main_Page/Draft.  I like your suggestion and will look into implementing it.  Thanks. -Aude (talk | contribs) 05:02, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presence of the other languages of Wikipedia on the main page 

message: I think it would be a good idea if the one-paragraph lede for the feature article of the day, every day, were concluded with a link that said "Read the full article". I realize the paragraph already includes a bold-faced link to the full article, but it might not be clear to people who are new to Wikipedia, seeing the home page for the first time, that each of the hyperlinks goes to an entire encyclopedia article. They might think that the single paragraph constitutes the whole "featured article"! Andrew Levine 11:43, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's currently an attempt going on to redesign the main page here so you might want to suggest that there.  I think it's a good idea as it really isn't completely obvious.  My mum once asked me whether that was all the article had to say so I'm sure there are many more people out there who think (at least at first) it's that short. Jellypuzzle | Talk 13:06, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Woah. I just clicked "Talk" to suggest the exact same thing. I was thinking more allong the lines of a (more...) link. — Asbestos | Talk  <FONT COLOR="#808080">(RFC)</FONT> 20:02, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, I added "(more...)" to tomorrow's FA as an experiment and left User:Raul654 a message about it since he's nominally in charge of the FA's. — Asbestos | Talk  <FONT COLOR="#808080">(RFC)</FONT> 02:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the addition, and I hope Raul agrees. Andrew Levine 11:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, if anyone feels the need for support from an anon! I used to wonder how to get to the full thing quickly, when I was a newbie. 14:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see it's gone again. Jellypuzzle | Talk 00:50, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said on my talk page, I'm not very fond of it. It seems to be pandering to people who don't recognize (what I consider to be) the obvious. Raul654 18:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, it's now created a redundancy in the blurb. Raul654 18:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it's obvious (and several other have said the same), and I don't think that it's uncommon either: I've seen plenty of forums, blog postings and so on where both the headline link and the "more" link lead to the same place. Anyway, it seems logically a little strange that a link within an article should lead to the article itself -- not that I'm thinking this should be changed, but that it may explain people's confusion. — Asbestos | Talk  <FONT COLOR="#808080">(RFC)</FONT> 21:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's obvious to you, because you are used to the way wiki works. The main page gets a lot of hits from people who are unfamiliar with the workings of it. For example, when I first came I tried to click on the words 'featured article', but that didn't take me there. I tried clicking many places before I realised it was the first words of the article itself. If there had been a 'read more' link, or similar, that would have made it a lot simpler. I was familiar enough with the concepts to expect there to be more, and to keep clicking until I found it. This is not the case for a lot of our readers.Skittle 09:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I agree that it's a simple addition that could do a lot of good. Even if you know how wiki works, which surely many Wikipedia readers (most of whom aren't contributors) don't, it improves the reading flow because you don't have to move your eyes back to the start of the summary in order to get to the main article. The change has the three magic qualities: logical, useful, and no reason why not. --Malthusian (talk) 13:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: May I chime in on this issue? I agree with the idea of the (...more) link, because sometimes (I've noticed this several times on the 'Current Events' column) the front page blurb does not contain a link to the news item. This seems to happen when the subject of the article (usually a person or a place) is already wikilinked. --Anchoress 11:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article addition 

message: panamanian should be capitalized and civillians should be spelled civilians. While you're at it, you might want to make the sentence fragment a sentence. And was Martyrs' Day one of 4 days of fighting, or was there only one day? Art LaPella 00:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First and second done. For the third, consider making a specific suggestion. Don't know about the fourth. — Knowledge Seeker দ 01:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Selected anniversaries, 1964

message: In the DYK? section Drayton Hall is referred to as being "one of the handsomest Neo-Palladian houses in North America." While handsomest is a word, it is an awkward form that we perhaps should shy away from using in favor of most handsome. - Cuivienen 03:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Handsomest 

message: My question somewhat refers to the main page but is also slightly irrelevent, hopefully it stays up.
Basically what i would like to ask and although it may not be philosophically sound the main point will get through.
Pretend you believe in God.(im going to refer to God as "he", if your a feminist or care or whatever im sorry in advance)  Since god is Omnipotent he can do anything.  So he can choose any single person and take the nessasary(sp) steps to make them not only believe in him but also do the right things to be a good christian and a good person. However in the realms of our world and our reality he cant just make everyone beleive in him and be good people (well i guess if hes omnipotent he really can)but the point is, 
What does it come down to? A numbers game?
Does god do what he knows will save the maximum amount of souls? Or does he choose the souls he likes the most and then does what it takes to save them?
*Wikipedia isn't a place for theological discussions, but you would probably be interested in our Salvation article, which gives the perspective of different religious traditions on the topic.--Pharos 06:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omnipotence 

message: "Humbert the Good"? I think nobody remembers him as Humbert the Good, he's the Piedmont/Italy King with the worst reputation (after his son Victor Emmanuel III of Italy). As a matter of fact I never heard this nickname until today. I suggest to fall back to "Humbert I became King of Italy of Italy", as in 9 January. GhePeU 10:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Selected anniversaries, 1878

message: According to both Legio XIII Gemina and Julius Caesar, Caesar crossed the Rubicon with Legio XIII Gemina, not Legio X Gemina. Please fix the Main Page or the articles. GhePeU 16:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ALoan got it.  Thanks, BanyanTree 18:40, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong legion

message: I want to learn more about the confirmation hearings. The news section needs to give more information on it's articles! Dragon Expert 17:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The In The News section is designed to provide brief summaries of events for which related Wikipedia articles have been updated. Samuel Alito Supreme Court nomination would be the article you want for more information. Evil Monkey - Hello 00:13, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NMI! 

message: I had to mouseover to ID the photo in "Selected anniversaries" (it's Luther Terry). Don't we usually write "(pictured)" or the like after the name? --Cam 15:49, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Selected anniversaries 

message: Albert Hofmann celebrates his 100th birthday today; surely this should be under "anniversaries"? dab (ᛏ) 22:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Albert Hoffmann

message: like this?
:I think not. We rarely link to blogs, and your is sufficiently difficult to read with red text on a black background that I didn't try very hard to determine what it might be relevant to.-gadfium 01:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  This is an encyclopedia, not a soapbox. --Nelson Ricardo 11:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Am I able to put my blog site in a link on a relevant page? 

message: Can somebody edit the sentence "that in the iconic 1955 Richard Avedon photgraph (sic) [...]" ?
Rdavout 07:17, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.  Good catch. kmccoy (talk) 07:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Little typo to correct in the "Did you know..." section

message: ABC Television in Selected Anniversaries does not say anything to me and I suppose to many other people as well. I think, there should be at least written, which country it is from. Jan.Kamenicek 09:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've broken it out, as ABC can also refer to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, but now it looks awkward. - BanyanTree 17:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ABC 

message: The 2nd "In the news" article down (the one about the Asian clean environment something or other) says it is pictured, but the stampede article is now the one with the picture (of the Saudi flag). The wording on the second blurb should be changed. Kafziel 17:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed.  Thanks, BanyanTree 17:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pic? 

message: It seems like wikipedia is making it impossible for me to put one, simple, lousy image on my page!!! Maybe its because I barely payed attention to their exsesivly long tutorial!!! I hope they make it better for future members, because right now, I am either not coming back, or erradicating my file.--Calvinsupergenius 19:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Replied on user's talk page. - BanyanTree 19:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

text: dear me, apparently WP is elitist, from some perspectives :p dab (ᛏ) 16:11, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: frustrated member talking here!

message: Didn't there used to be a link named "browse" or somesuch which pointed at the top level of categories? I think it was either on the main page or in the nav box..? I found the page anyway, but I always thought it was handy the way it used (?) to get linked --Qirex 03:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Try Portal:Browse.  Though, I agree that it should be more obvious. -Aude (talk | contribs) 03:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I think you want Wikipedia:Browse, which used to be on the main page as "Browse" but has been changed to "Categories", since there are other ways to browse (e.g. the Portal linked above). the wub "?!" RFR - a good idea? 02:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Browse link 

message: Last I checked there were two question marks on the last factoid in the "Did you know..." section about Lee Redmond.   Snowmanmelting 19:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  DYK typo 

message: I think it would be good to split the languages listed in 1,000 into a new one inbetween 1,000 and 10,000, for Wikipedias with 5,000+ articles. --Revolución (talk) 00:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  5,000 

message: Yeah.  Um, I understand you're discussing changes to the main page appearance, but... you don't have to ruin it in the meantime.  Just a thought. MrVoluntarist 05:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there's something wrong - I'm getting the text-only page too but then the current revision in the history shows the normal page. Any ideas? Natgoo 14:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Same here. I'm using K-meleon, if that makes a difference. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 14:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm think it's a joke. It seems like a page from '99? dunno. Slobo 14:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't say its the funniest joke i've seen, its mainly just annoying to try & find things. Swarve 14:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not getting it. Johnleemk | Talk 14:24, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  So, um, what happened to the main page? 

message: It's linked to whatever the current page you're on is, instead of the Main Page now. --24.26.178.224 13:59, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's fixed now. --24.26.178.224 14:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clicking on WP logo 

message: Do you mean 1,000,000? I think you guys are already over 100,000 articles.
EDIT: Uh? The main page is now back to normal. Before I wrote this, it was changed. It was all text.
:We're experiencing what seems to be a transitory error, where the Main Page is showing its very oldest existing revision (from early 2002) rather than its latest revision. Back then, Wikipedia's target was 100,000 articles (and it was a very ambitious target). If you (or anyone reading this) experiences this problem, click this link. It's times like these you realise how much better our Main Page is now than 4 years ago. :) - Mark 14:33, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Transitory error, or someone doing the whole wiki retro idea? — Ilyanep (Talk) 05:33, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We want to make over 100,000.. 

message: The main page says that, "We are trying to get over 100,000."  But right before that, it says that we have over 917,000 articles.  This doesn't make sense. --Freiberg, Let's talk!, contribs 14:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We're experiencing what seems to be a transitory error, where the Main Page is showing its very oldest existing revision (from early 2002) rather than its latest revision. Back then, Wikipedia's target was 100,000 articles (and it was a very ambitious target). If you (or anyone reading this) experiences this problem, click this link. It's times like these you realise how much better our Main Page is now than 4 years ago. :) - Mark 14:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like the purge link only works half the time. Looks to me as if some of the webservers are severely out-of-sync. Let's hope it won't descent into FUBAR. CharonX 15:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

text: the deletionists actually are aiming for an encyclopedia of 100,000 articles --86.141.50.205 22:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  100,000? 

message: The main page is completely diffrent than before! Theres no Featured article or Featured picture/did you know? It looks ugly! What is this?!!!??
: Seems to be a temporary bug, as per the comment above. Shawnc 15:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ?????

message: Happy Birthday! 204.52.215.107 01:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed!  I added a banner to the top of the page.  We should all celebrate...+sj + 21:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Happy Birthday to Wikipedia 

message: :2001 - The English Wikipedia, a Wiki free content encyclopedia, was officially launched.
This is a little ambiguous.  The sentence could be read as "wiki-free content", etc.  A better phrasing would be ". . . a Wiki-based free-content encyclopedia,"  — orioneight (talk) 02:04, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Selected Anniversaries 

message: The statement on the main page that an American missile attacks "[...] kills 18 civillians [...]" in Pakistan doesn't seem to have been confirmed by any American military sources, and the number of dead is uncertain. Should this be changes to something like "may have killed 18 or more civillians"?
*From my reading of the news reports (and I read over several carefully to try to get this right), the death of the 18 civilians (one report said 17) is undisputed, though some say there were more civilians or militants also killed.  I think there's enough confirmation of the general incident on the ground that we don't need to rely on official American military sources, who have so far said nothing.--Pharos 04:38, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Civillians killed in Pakistan missile attack 

message: On today's feature article: "...changing the traction of the trains from gas turbines to electricity from overhead lines after a sharp rise in oil prices,..."
The author probably ment propulsion. -- Pinktulip 05:27, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably vandalism. Or a very unfocused author. — Ilyanep (Talk) 05:32, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Traction" is railway terminology for power. Traction was required by the first locomotives that were hauled by ropes.  Just train jargon.  --JC Shepard 16:04, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  traction? 

message: Recently I added this link http://indiangals.blogspot.com to a Indian related article. But someone removed it telling to add that link to a new article written related to that site. I would like to know does wikipedia has any terms and conditions in adding links to an article? where can i find it?  
:It is simple: like Bertrand Russell's example, the present King of France may not crown himself; thus one may not advertise or enter in a self-promotional item. If a disinterested 3rd party were to judge an item to be notable, then it can enter Wikipedia as a proper item. But if self-interest is detected, watch out; the item will likely not survive a call for deletion. --Ancheta Wis 20:08, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Our guidelines on inclusion of websites can explain this more: here. I think you may have had some bad advice if someone told you to create an article on your own blog: the barrier for inclusion of websites, especially blogs, is pretty high. --Malthusian (talk) 20:14, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: On the front page, Simple English is placed before Shqip (Albanian) - shouldn't they be alphabetized? There may be more mistakes, I haven't checked for others.
:I believe the language order has been discussed at Template talk:Wikipedialang; you could try asking there.  — orioneight (talk) 20:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be alphabetized according to their Wikipedia prefix, so :simple: goes before :sq:.  There are occasional calls to change the ordering, but then you get into whether it should be under the name for itself (Shqip or Nihongo) versus the English language name (Albanian or Japanese).  In order to avoid the resulting arguments about language imperialism/sensitivity, we put it under the Wikipedia prefix and leave it to community of a particular language Wikipedia to decide if it's worth moving their domain in order to change their ordering. - BanyanTree 20:59, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of languages 

message: When you go to www.google.com, your blinking cursor is already in the search box, so you do not even have to click it in order to begin typing your query. In #wikipedia, someone pointed this out, and requested that a similar feature could be put in for the Wikipedia search box by the developers. I think that this feature would be very useful, too. Could a developer put it in, please? Thank you in advance. Adniel 01:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See Bug 1864: Cursor should be placed in the search box for the BugZilla report and resulting discussion. Cheers, BanyanTree 03:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cursor

message: It is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. Not Martin Luther King Day J.Steinbock 15:04, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fix