Talk:Main Page/Archive 26

message: Can someone explain me why the number of dead for the September 11 are shown on the mainpage while these of the Chile Coup and the Pinochet Regime are not ? Are dead Chileans not as much worth mentioning as dead US-citizens ? And why is the crucial information concerning the CIA missing ?
--------
1973 - A military coup in Chile headed by General Augusto Pinochet and heavily supported by the CIA toppled the elected Socialist government of President Salvador Allende. During the Pinochet regime over 3000 people were killed or disappeared and many more were subject to torture. 
------------------------------
I would be pleased if someone could exchange the current version with the one I have written. 
Turrican
:Were the victims of the Pinochet regime all killed or disappeared on 11 September? I think not. Therefore it is not directly related to 11 September as a historical anniversary. Details about the Pinochet regime are available in the relevant articles. By the way, not all of the people killed on 11 September 2001 were US citizens. --Michael Snow 19:08, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Chile Coup

message: I just looked at an archived version of the front page (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&oldid=3076580) Any change that the months with featured articles could be listed as before?
:It never had that actually. That version is from back when it used Template:Feature. Goplat 21:19, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wayback 

message: Ivan is currently a Category 4 hurricane, per the 1 PM CDT (0600Z) National Hurricane Center advisory. Advisories are released roughly every 3 hours at 0600Z, 0900Z, 1200Z, etc. for main page editors. Link is here: http://www.nhc.noaa.gov.
---Rob 18:42, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hurricane Ivan 

message: Can you guys add a section to the main page designed to help new users get started with their contributions? — Wikipedia Administrator 19:06, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers is linked from the main page. -- Schnee 19:12, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: Oh, and on a side note, you should probably change your username. Names that have "administrator" in them etc. are against Wikipedia's username policy. ^_~ -- Schnee 19:18, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: The best place for questions like this is the help desk. Perhaps you could add a section there explaining exactly what it is that you don't understand, and I'm sure somebody will be happy to help. As for your username, I'll try and discuss that on your talk page, as you requested. - IMSoP 19:33, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: It's confusing. Someone who sees it, especially a newbie, may think that it means you actually are an administrator, when in fact you aren't. As for namespaces, see Help:Namespace for more information. -- Schnee 19:36, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: The time's not the same all over the world, you know - the server uses UTC time (that's why it says "UTC", too). As for namespaces, see the link in my reply above. -- Schnee 19:54, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help For New Users Like Myself 

message: Please can we end all this 'dispute' tagging of articles, it's a vile one liner that just ruins Wikipedia. Can we not just sort these articles out - decide one way or another - then either delete or keep?SimonMayer 19:21, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we could use this strategy to achieve world peace, too?  Seriously, who gets to make the decision to "decide one way or another".  What happens if 50% of people agree and 50% disagree?  An article is typically in dispute because two or more groups of people feel strongly about the issue but have opposing viewpoints.  Perhaps you should consider who made the decision to choose one viewport over another next time you read a newspaper or traditional encyclopedia.  The fact that an issue is in dispute is important point to bring to the attention to a reader - that is, read this with a grain of salt, look at the discussion page and form your own opinion.  --JackPorter 03:30, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: that said, we could focus on reducing the number of disputed articles. Many people will be ready to accept a compromise, if it is proposed fairly and patiently. dab 07:11, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: Talk:Main Page is for discussion of the main page, not general topics. I suggest you take it to the Wikipedia:Village pump. -- Cyrius|✎ 05:09, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: It is disputed whether anyone other than God and the author will care about this comment

message: Why isn't the Paralympic games article mentioned on the main page... 2004_Summer_Paralympics and I quote "The Paralympic Summer Games are the second-largest sporting event in the world, after the Summer Olympic games". If this is true, it would pretty low to have a high amount of publicity for the 2004_Olympic_Games and not for the Paralympics... wouldn't that just be discrimination to those who are physically disabled... would it or wouldn't it ? squash 08:19, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)
:No. The Olympics was the camel's nose. We're not doing it again for the paraolympics or anyone else. →Raul654 08:26, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)
::It's not the size that matters.  Very few people are actually interested in the Paralympics.--Nelson Ricardo  >>Talk<< 02:09, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)
:::Exactly - The BBC have only got about 1.5 hours of coverage per day on the Paralympics ; it might be the second largest event in terms of participants - but very few people actually care ; note the lack of work that has gone into entering substantial results for the events. -- Zaphod Beeblebrox 07:56, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: What's to sniff at about 1.5 hours per day?  If (and perhaps this is a bigger if than I think) it receives 1.5 hours a day in every country that's represented, that's a lot of coverage.  It would certainly put it on par with a lot of less global issues that get main page attention. -- Tlotoxl 08:00, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The 2002 Football World Cup got more than 1.5 hours a day coverage in Australia, and no-one here cares (sadly) about football (soccer football) (sadly).  We haven't had a team even qualify for it in a long time (at least 20+ years).  How sad, greatest sporting nation on earth, doesn't even compete in the biggest single-game sporting event on earth. :( -- Chuq 06:47, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Paralympics 2004 Athens

message: Just thought I'd mention that Holy Prepuce has 23,000 page views this month, which makes it our 7th most popular article (after Hurricane_Ivan_(2004), Goatse, Sexual_slang, Goatse.cx, OS-tan, and Jennifer_Hawkins). That's almost 5x as many page views as featured articles normally get. So I guess some people must have found it interesting. →Raul654 08:11, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
:Looking at per-page stats  is certainly interesting.  We've gotten roughly 200,000 page hits per day but the average featured article got only 5000 hits.  That's only 2.5%; the featured article is less important than I imagined.  Also, it's not surprising to see that Holy Prepuce was so popular since the most visited articles are mostly about either sex or American politics. --Redquark 11:20, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: One article is about 2.85×10-7 of Wikipedia (by article count). So when that article gets 2.5% of traffic for a day, I think it is a huge amount. --mav 19:47, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I didn't make myself clear.  I meant 200,000 main page hits per day, and the main page itself only forms 1% of traffic.  2.5% of the people who visit the main page go on to the featured article, not 2.5% of traffic on Wikipedia goes there.  So in fact 0.025% of total traffic goes to the featured article.  It's not huge. --Redquark 21:43, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Holy prepuce got 23,000 hits for the month. It's safe to assume that virtually all of them were in one day. So for one day, it got 10% of the people who were going to the main page :) →Raul654 07:59, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)
I wonder what % of the day's vandalism does the featured article suffer? Filiocht 14:00, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: A simple note

message: I want to download this website template...where do I get it?
Search needs to be better and faster
Nice.  where do i get translation?
Firefox dosnt work for wikis for some reason
shuaibao, editor
 <style type="text/css" media="screen,projection">/*
 <![CDATA[*/@import"/style/monobook/main.css"; /*]]>*/</style>
 <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
 media="print" href="/style/commonPrint.css"/>
:did you notice the donation link? if you donate a couple of servers to WP, search is likely to become faster. dab 11:58, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template Download...Search...Translation...FireFox 

message: A reporter and a librarian have written back to me to say "I went to wikipedia's site but couldn't find any ref to the press release!" and of course they're right.  Added a banner, perhaps just for the next two days as initial word gets out.  +sj+ 18:18, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clear link to press release 

message: Does anyone actually know what the one millionth article was?  --ScottyBoy900Q∞ 23:04, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No, and it would be very difficult to find out. MediaWiki isn't really set up to make that task possible. -- Cyrius|✎ 02:25, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: That sucks   — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 02:26, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: Yes. It was wikispam and has just been speedy deleted. Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 02:45, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  1,000,000th Article 

message: On the Main Page, "visit our Community Portal " starts up the edit page. Ancheta Wis 23:59, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but _why_ does it start up the edit page?  There doesn't seem to be any reason for it.  When was this change made, and may I change it back? Jwrosenzweig 00:31, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Wtf man? What's going on?   — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 02:26, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "visit our Community Portal " starts up the edit page 

message: I'm using IE-6.0 and I see a strange box just above the disclaimers with overlapping text/numbers? What's that?? Awolf002 20:52, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Those seem to be links to Categories and new pages. In Mozilla it is also present, but the font is so small it looks like morse code. It comes from Template:Newpagelinks, which was changed today. andy 20:57, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The cell it's in on the Main Page has "font-size: 10%" in its style. Probably a typo, some of the others have 100%. Goplat 21:03, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems to be intended - see the above section Search engine rank test. andy 21:07, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case, it should be made truly invisible, with display: none Goplat 03:07, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Invisible would be ignored by a search engine. They are aware that text which is invisible is sometimes used to add lots of key words of search phrases which won't be seen by humans. Hence the need to make it somewhat visible, though in the least prominent place I could find on this page. Jamesday 09:45, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's that? 

message: It says "this is an example".  Not sure why it says that but it could be taken as offensive, for example -- the terrorists made him an example.  Remember that in some browsers the alt text comes up if you hover the mouse over the image.
It should just say "Picture of Eugene Armstrong, from CNN.com"
Can someone please fix this in respect for the deceased -- Main page not editable by Joe average user.  Thanks.
: Is this picture not a copyright violation? How come it can be used here at WP?? Awolf002 02:15, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt that the "authors" of that image will try to file suit... But your point may have some obscure legal interest dab 11:04, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: I hear what you are saying, but it seems to me that Al Jazeera took over the copyright. Awolf002 11:24, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like an almost certain copyvio. Filiocht 11:29, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: ok, the terrorists tape the beheading and put it on some islamist website. al-jazeera pulls the image from the website and "takes over copyright"? cnn gets the image either from al-jazeera or from the same website, and we get the image from cnn. Q: how can al-jazeera "take over" copyright like that? did the perpetrators grant that? would that even matter? Couldn't we just dig up that obscure website (nobody is linking to for obvious reasons) and get the image from there? would that give us the same rights to the image as al-jazeera? maybe it would be worth to research this and put together an advisory on "images of a criminal act taken by the perpetrators themselves" (the Abu Ghraib pictures would seem to fall under the same category) dab 11:52, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hey! Alt text of [[Eugene Armstrong]] is wrong! 

message: Please change the color of that bar. When I see the orange, my first thought is 'Oh! I have messages' which is obviously not true.
:Someone changed it to #lightgray, with the border being #darkgray. This is invalid HTML and displays wrong on some browsers. (The # is for hex colors only, not named) Goplat 17:06, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  1 mil articles bar 

message: It might just be the way I say it, but isn't 'squi-rreled' two syllables?
--uvarov 05:56, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
*Only one syllable in my ideolect.  RickK 05:59, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
**It's pronounced skworld, like "world" with "sk" at the beginning.  One syllable, as RickK says.--Nelson Ricardo  >>Talk<< 06:10, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
Please see Talk:List of the longest English words with one syllable for a longer discussion. --Heron 09:09, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did You Know - One syllable words 

message: Hello,
As an editor for the French Wiki, I'm wondering on two links in our Voltaire page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaire
The two last links refer to mirror sites, which have little relation to Voltaire.
The problem is the title of the last link :
H. Duthel: «Allez-y, dites-moi que je suis un vieux con !» Oui? alors vous-etes de connard"
I think I should not translate this piece, because it's very insulting : "C'mon. Tell me I'm an old bastard ! Yes ? Then you're an a..-hole".
I don't want to edit this piece as I'm not too sure of the reasons why it's here. The other links are perfect !
Cheers
Power.
Hi: Thanks for this. I've removed these links as they are fairly clearly inappropriate for the article. Filiocht 13:50, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voltaire 

message: I have noticed that many articles that aren't visited often tend to have more inconsistencies and inaccurate information than the articles that are visited more often. What can be done about it?
Please feel free to comment on this issue. --Logariasmo 06:33, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: A better place for question like this is probably the Wikipedia:Village Pump. I've noticed the same trend, but one answer is that we don't have to do anything explicitly — eventually, the articles with inconsistencies and inaccuracies will get fixed by visitors, just more slowly than the more popular articles. Many decent articles started out as rather useless stubs, but they improve with time. — Matt 08:17, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

text: Perhaps we should try to direct more traffic to random articles: for example a front page "random article" link from the front page, from a manually edited pool of articles refereshed by hand? -- The Anome 08:30, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  The problem of less visited articles 

message: Per the Manual of Style, shouldn't this be formatted as "Yesterday" rather than Yesterday?  13:15, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format for today's "Yesterday"