Talk:Main Page/Archive 102

message: I find this image associated with this article to be emotionally distressing.  I do not like to see something so awful, where those men are literally in the act of dying.  It is not visually graphic in the classic sense of gore and violence, but it most certainly is graphic to me, because I cannot help but imagine what they were going through at that point.
I doubt, if the featured article was for example suicide, there would be chosen an image of someone actually killing themselves; it would be considered obviously offensive.
Being on the main page, however, I have been *presented* with this emotional experience, without any choice; which I reject.  Certainly articles themselves can contain graphic imagery, as necessary to their subject; but travelling to an article requires reading the article title which I have always found sufficient to give me choice over my decision.
However, I must be able to go to the main page without the risk of such unpleasentness, because it is impossible to reconnaitre the main page before viewing!
AS SUCH, I have removed the image from the main page.
Toby Douglass 05:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And so I discover the main page cannot be edited, nor it is immediately apparent how one goes about making the request.  Toby Douglass 05:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not censored.  Corvus cornix 05:49, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

text: And just so you know, Toby, the Main Page (along with a few other things) are permanently protected in order to prevent constant, highly-visible vandalism. --Dreaded Walrus  t c 05:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You should also see our content disclaimer.  Specifically, "Wikipedia contains many different images, some of which are considered objectionable or offensive by some readers."  ShadowHalo 06:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually Wikipedia is censored to some degree.  We don't want to have gratuitously offensive imagery on the Main Page.  For example we wouldn't have Goatse as the featured picture.  The problem is drawing the line.  In this instance I would say that the image is acceptable, especially as it is so small as it appears on the main page.  violet/riga (t) 09:42, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Comapared to what ends up on the news, this is not even all that bad. On the news and cable channels, one can regularly see car accidents, plane crashes, shootouts, crime scenes, etc. There are TV advertisemnts that include videos of the 9/11 tragedy or the Kennedy assassination. The main page is about as censored as cable news networks. While we may have somethings like I mentioned, we would not have anything like pornography or anything unnecessarily obscene on the main page. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 16:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Anyone commenting here on the appropriateness of the picture should be aware of the discussion above (from WP:ERRORS#Errors in the Main Page summary of Today's featured article) as to whether the image has appropriate licensing in the first place. As far as the actual content goes, I have no problem with it; It illustrates the subject of the article, and it's not deliberately shocking or gory, either of which would be inappropriate for the main page. -- Gavia immer (talk) 17:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

text: You could use one of the alternative main pages that don't have pictures.  If you found that image distressing, there are many, many more featured articles that might similarly disturb you.  --TotoBaggins 00:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Toby, I know exactly that feeling. Each and every times this happens to me, I use a simple trick that works just about every time. Whenever I feel some emotional distress due to a picture on the Wikipedia Main Page, I simply click on the back button of my browser, and the source of my distress instantly disappears from my computer screen. The great thing about that trick is that I can use it as many times as I wish without affecting the other people who may have different reactions or perceptions as mine, as I know I am not the only one visiting this website every day. Let us know how this nifty trick works out for you. Sincerely. Numero4 12:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article - B-52 Crash 

message: Shouldn't something about the Petrol Rationing riots in Iran be included in the 'In the News" section?  I've created an article about the riots which I edited into the reference to the riots on the Current Events page. Life, Liberty, Property 18:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh, the news is often a bit scattered in relation to events; we can't post a blurb about everything happening in the world right now :). Jmlk17 01:06, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: ITN works on suggestions, the reason something is not included is either because no one has suggested it yet or because the Wikipedia article on the subject does not meet the inclusion criteria. Most importantly there needs to be an existing article on Wikipedia that has been recently updated with a substantial amount of information on the subject. The place to suggest a candidate would be here. However I'd suggest that the above story would possibly not meet the criteria (I could be wrong). --Monotonehell 01:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent suggestion! Jmlk17 01:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Given how often queries of this kind comes up, I'm surprised no-one's made a -style template to standardise responses. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 15:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iranian Petrol Rationing Riots 

message: Don't you liberal Wikipedians know that putting a picture of a women in a bra on the main page will scare any child for life! Wikipedia is obviously run by liberals, trying to destroy children's innocencr and Jimbo Wales probly gives all his money to Hillary Clinton!--208.19.13.102 06:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you know anyone who's hotter than that woman, take a pic of her wearing a wonderbra then upload it here. That pic is too wholesome to shock even newborns who breastfeed all day. --Howard the Duck 06:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: You forgot the mandatory "SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN" line. Borisblue 06:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You just killed two dozen of them Raul654 14:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: THANK YOU WHOEVER CHOSE THIS PICTURE, YOU JUST MADE A YOUNG MAN VERY HAPPY 213.48.15.234 06:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: GLAD I COULD BE OF SERVICE. Raul654 14:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Yesterday, it was rock 'n' roll, today it's sex . . . Do we get the drugs tomorrow? — Brian (talk) 07:58, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, worse.  It's a space station.  The Flat Earth Society is gonna be pissed.  ShadowHalo 08:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not just any space station. A commie pinko space station. Further proof that Wikipedia is communism. --- RockMFR 16:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then the next day is the New Jersey Devils OMG!!!! DEVILS on the main page!  Go to conservapedia if you don't like it :) PlatypusToby 20:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immoral Liberals! 

message: Just thought you might be interested to know that Wikipedia was featured on the June 27, 2007 Daily Show, during Lewis Black's segment.  He was humorously commenting on conservatives either buying perceived left wing organizations or starting alternatives, and used Wikipedia's contrast with Conservapedia as an example, citing each site's article on homosexuality.  There also was a picture of the main page.  DoomsDay349 14:23, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw Slayer, so you know they taped it yesterday :) Raul654 14:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: July 27? That's impressive. Why not add it to Wikipedia:Wikipedia on TV and radio? 193.82.16.42 18:38, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about the typo on the month :)  I'll look into adding it there.  DoomsDay349 19:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: More interesting than, that, this is the first time I've edited from an internet cafe. It seems that a few weeks ago, there was a sock puppet in this room! See the IP address when I sign. I'll have to remember to add this IP address to my user page and claim these three edits or so that I've made! 193.82.16.42 20:06, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia on Daily Show 

message: Do you think this is too much or do you think that in the in the news it should mention that Tony Blair is stepping down from being prime minister today? (Not a typo above). 147.197.215.15 12:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but I am British. I'll look into the matter now. J Milburn 12:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, it's listed now. -- Gavia immer (talk) 15:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He did not step down. He had converted to catholicism in secret while visiting the Pope and the MI5 had him sacked because of that. Catholics have limited right in the islands. 82.131.210.162 08:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 82.131.210.162, this is not the place for such discussion. ffm ✎talk 18:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tony Blair 

message: My compliments on the fine advertisement for Wonderbra. I suppose we shall soon be seeing an article on Victoria's Secret PINK (TM). Writtenright 03:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We can only hope! ;) Jmlk17 03:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, we won't be doing any product placement in the near future.  If you're interested though, you can ask Raul654 about getting your product on the Main Page; if you'd just like to troll though, I'd recommend Wikipedia:Sandbox.  ShadowHalo 03:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We should've gotten a better pic. --Howard the Duck 03:58, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So find some Wikipedians (preferably female) who would be models.  Dragons flight 05:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Models with big front bumpers. --Howard the Duck 06:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Theresa Knott surely has a nice pair of tits.  (Then again, they're rather Britocentric...) Joe 21:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you'd have Brits on the Main Page, can't we just get Keeley Hazell? --Howard the Duck 02:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Don't forget Frank Klepacki. The talk page is one giant flame. ShadowHalo 05:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ooh, found it.  It was Maraba Coffee. hbdragon88 05:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget the April Fools article  George Washington. --293.xx.xxx.xx 12:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm waiting for the day that Jenna Jameson graces the Main Page, if that day ever comes.  ShadowHalo 05:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a featured article so I hope so. Kind of interesting that people complain of adverstisement when articles like wonderbra appear but don't see any problems with Excel Saga or Final Fantasy VI. Garion96 (talk) 06:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are old vidoe games – hell, FF6 never even came stateside, ever.  They are also very niche products.  On the other hand, these articles are of commerical products that are still being sold, with a fairly wide audience, which is why people raise a ruckus when they appear on the front page. hbdragon88 06:35, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to nitpick, but FF6 never came stateside?  Sure it did.  The article says it was released in North America on (SNES)Oct '94, (PS) Sep '99, and (GBA)Feb '07.  You may be confused because it wasn't called FF6 when it first came out.(I'm pretty sure the GBA one that came out this year is correctly titled, though.) 69.95.50.15 12:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Ok, then I'll go for Slayer. You can still buy all their albums, also in the States. Garion96 (talk) 23:11, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: But they're boys. And nerdy boys. So they use those products, which means they're not advertisements. Get it? Atropos 07:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are also very niche products. On the other hand, these articles are of commerical products that are still being sold, with a fairly wide audience, which is why people raise a ruckus when they appear on the front page. hbdragon88 06:35, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Well you shouldnt have had the picture fullsize on your screen and your hands in your pants then. 213.48.15.234 12:48, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I think it may be time for you to start working then. Numero4 13:06, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: From memory the most recent comparison is probably with Baby Gender Mentor. Although in that case as I pointed out, the company who makes it would be particularly silly to want that article featured since it basically revealed their product is likely a load of crock (indeed even the main page blurb suggested it from memory). Also the current availability of the product is unclear Nil Einne 19:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrific Wonderbra Ad 

message: Anyone else find it odd that real bombs go off daily and kill dozens, but an unexploded one makes all the news? — BRIAN0918 • 2007-06-29 12:51Z
:Not really. It's a question of location - real bombs do not go off daily and kill dozens in London, but because the IRA used to conduct London bombings, there's enough sensitivity there to cause a big kerfluffle about it. Also, there's always going to be a media bias toward cities large and important enough to have large, important media organizations headquartered in them. More to the point, something that happens (semi-)routinely isn't going to be added to ITN because it won't have an article or update associated with it. -- Gavia immer (talk) 13:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should Wikipedia endorse the "kerfuffle" and the "media bias"? ITN requires more than an updated article.--cloviz 13:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia isn't a news service. Please visit Wikinews if you want news on a wiki model. The purpose of the ITN section is to highlight current events articles that have recently been updated. Borisblue 16:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Criterion number 3: "It should be a story of an international importance, or at least interest." And I believe that the original post was a comment on the weird selectivity of media and the society rather than a complaint about the inclusion of this story.--cloviz 16:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was responding to your comment, not Brian's. I'm sorry if the indentation wasn't sufficient to make that clear.  Borisblue 17:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unexploded bomb 

message: Between "Sections at bottom of page" and "Interwiki strapline" there seems a lot of unnecessary code:
-----------------------------Sections at bottom of page------------------------------>
== Other areas of Wikipedia ==

== Wikipedia's sister projects ==

== Wikipedia languages ==
</div></div>__NOTOC__  __NOEDITSECTION__
I suggest most of the two empty divs, and the hidden messages to which they refer be removed for a quicker loading time. If it breaks it, you can always revert - 82.16.7.63 17:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As well as the two empty 

text: Not done Those aren't empty divs, but the closing of a div higher up the page (an empty div would be ). (It's not entirely clear to me, or presumably to whoever added the comment before them, exactly which div it is that they close, though.) The empty comments are used to comment out line breaks so that the edit screen can be made more readable without changing the appearance of the Main Page itself. The comments have no effect at all on the rendered result of the Main Page; the 'quicker loading time' effect you want wouldn't be achieved by removing it (it would give the page a microscopically quicker parsing time, but the main page is only reparsed at midnight UTC (for the change in the day's FA, etc.), when someone edits a template transcluded on it, or when someone purges the page; these events happen much less often than views of the Main Page. --ais523 17:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or untill the cache is purged, which can be done as many times as desired, if I understand how the WM cache system works. ffm ✎talk 18:10, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I did mention that at the end of my comment. Yes, purging can be done as many times as desired. (Thanks for giving the link to the appropriate page, though; I forgot to link the relevant word in my comment.) --ais523 09:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simplify code 

message: On the line at the top:
Overview · Editing · Questions · Help	
Contents · Categories · Featured content · A–Z in
there should be a little dot between help and contents, like between all the other entries on the line.
:There's no dot because the first four are left-aligned and the last four are right-aligned.  ShadowHalo 05:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The omission of the dot creates confusion because without the dot between help and contents it is not clear that there are two entries, "help" and "contents" as opposed to one, "help contents"
76.80.92.186 05:43, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: That's only an issue when running at really low resolution, or viewing the Main Page from a very small window. Pretty much anything above 640x480, and you have the first four on the left of the page, and the other four on the right. --Dreaded Walrus  t c 05:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Then we need some fixed blankspace added there to separate 'Help' from 'Contents' for people with small screens. --74.13.124.157 09:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small error on page 

message: My best regards for feature the exquisite "Starry Night" as POTD. Kudos to everyone! --ŴôôḌẼĿF 06:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rule of thumb - if you can see it in the sears catalogue, it's probably not porn. Raul654 21:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: This is porn. This definitely isn't. ffm ✎talk 21:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Depends on intent I guess. If this photo were part of a series leading up to the model removing the garment in question, I supppose it'd be categorised as pornography. Since it's not, it's not :) GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 23:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One person's porn is not necessarily another's, have a look at the attempts to define pornography in the law over the past few decades. It's fun to watch legislators squirm while constructing legislation. --Monotonehell 10:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are we acting so immaturely? It's as if no one's ever seen a bra before. And if you haven't, that only shows how uncool you are—go out and gape at some RIGHT NOW!!!! --ŴôôḌẼĿF 17:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Picture of the Day 

message: plz put hatshepsut back in. i dont wanna see some ugly britain.--Studytheearths 19:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nasty joke aside, I really can't see why the image was changed. This diff claims its a "freer image", but being that :Image:Hatshepsut at Deir el-Bahri.jpg is under GFDL and CC, I'm not sure why it was deemed invalid.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed it. Borisblue 19:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Technically a public domain image is IMHO freer from a copyright sense of view (although I'm sure some GPL/GFDL fans may beg to differ) however I agree the change was inappropriate and unnecessary (and also against policy). Any free image is suitable and when the image is clearly free there is no need to consider which one is 'freer'. In terms of ITN and probably all of the main page, there should never be the need to replace one image with a 'freer' one since an unfree image should never be on the main page Nil Einne 20:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Should've reported this at #Main page error reports above. --74.13.124.157 09:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ITN img 

message: Maybe it should be changed slightly? It reads "Two attempted car bomb attacks in central London are foiled by the Metropolitan Police." - is 'foiled' really correct? In my mind, that would mean that their intelligence lead them to intercept both cars before anyone else reported anything...as it was, one was an eyewitness account (of a smoking car? I'm not quite sure), and the other was towed away before the company realized there was a bomb inside.
It doesn't really sound like the bombs were directly stopped by the police at all. --Joewithajay 10:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bomb news summary 

message: I do not know if this was discussed before (god I hope it was). Aren't fair use images disallowed on the main page? So why has one used in Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 23, 2007? Is it allowed or was it an innocent accident? -- Cat chi? 12:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not allowed. Pilotguy 13:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

text: From memory, the discussion about disallowing fair use images on the main page hadn't quite reached consensus at that stage which may have been why the image was allowed at that time. Nil Einne 13:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: March 23? That was about the time when the discussions about disallowing fair use images on the Today's featured article templates began. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 14:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which means that there will still be a number of fair use images on the FA templates dating before March 2007 because nobody has yet bothered to go through each one in the archive and remove them. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 14:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah ok. They are protected so only admins can fix them.I made this inquiry as a sanity check. Thank you. (I feel sane yes :P) -- Cat chi? 17:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use images on main page 

message: I think that perhaps we could have a note on the Concert for Diana in the news section. This is a huge concert airing in over 140 different countries with some of the most famous singers in the world performing. Eagle Owl 16:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggestions for "In the news" can be made on WP:ITN/C. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:00, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that tonight? NastalgicCam 22:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concert for Diana 

message: When you search Chris Benoit on Google, his image comes up about the edit thing. Has wikipedia been notified about the Benoit edit thingy? Kashakak 01:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I assume that it was actually Wikipedia editors who first noted what happened. See Chris Benoit: Wikipedia controversy for what we have on the situation. zafiroblue05 | Talk 01:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chris Benoit controversy 

message: Has anyone ever heard of a book called Strike of Lightning by a Randy Prince? I've read it and it is a good book for young children. Do you think a page for this book can be put on Wikipedia? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.136.216.44 (talk • contribs).
:If you want it, Create an account and make the page yourself. 68.101.123.219 19:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If not, you are more than welcome to suggest it at Articles for Creation, but this page is really meant for discussion of the Main Page. Thanks for the suggestion, though. Batmanand | Talk 19:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strike of Lightning 

message: Not to spoil anyones fun, but is it really appropriate to make fun of ethnicity on the main page? I am referring to the 'yump' line in the caption to the featured picture. I can think of several other ethnicities other than Swedish who would not be amused by a similar 'yoke' being directed at them. And no, it does not bother me, and if it is up to me, do keep it there by all means, but do give the matter some thought. Is it appropriate in this case but not in some others, or is it not appropriate equally no matter which ethnicity is being made fun of, good naturedly or not. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 14:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Check out Yump, it has nothing to do with Sweden: "In rally culture, such jumps may be called a "yump", and are sometimes referred to as such in official literature." - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

text: What racial slur were you referring to? I can't find any info on yump as one. You might want to add it to wiktionary Nil Einne 17:05, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I am willing to stipulate that 'yump' is a term of art (though the mention of it as such does not appear to have a source), and not intended as a slur. But I would definitely bet it has an etymology related to the scandinavian languages, and specifically how English-speakers perceive them. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 17:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not so sure about that.  I bet it has very little, if any etymology of racism.  I'm interested to see if you can find a source on that.  Jmlk17 17:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The OED lists it as an "Alteration of JUMP v., repr. the supposed pronunciation of it by Swedish speakers or the Norw. jump jump (n.), jumpe jump (vb.).", which I suppose could be interpreted as mocking the Sweidish accent, although I'm not sure it is particularly offensive (and isn't flagged as derogatory in the OED).ReadingOldBoy 07:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not to be politically correct but,... this *is* the main page... 

message: In the Bush commuting Scooter Libby's sentence, can you put a link to the page that has the story? All the links are for other stuff.
:The subject is covered in the Lewis Libby.  If you want an article only about commuting the sentence, you're looking for Wikinews.  ShadowHalo 05:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bush commuting Scooter Libby's sentence 

message: Which is the correct form in English (as oppose to the Serbian Monika Seleš)?
:There is no correct form, what is more important is A) What she prefers and B) What is the most common form used in English language publications. In any case, this should be discussed elsewhere like Monica Seles, not here Nil Einne 19:40, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monica Seles/Seleš 

message: The way things are rendering on my end, the FA is taking up less space than the news, thus leaving a noticeable gap under the DYK. This could be easily changed by adding an item to DYK, but the DYK headline wouldn't align with the On this Day... headline. Bringing this to someones attention to see if it merits correction, and if so how to do that. -Andrew c [talk] 00:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but its like this very often. It changes once a day (more than that in DYK's case), so there's not really any point bringing it up. Atropos 01:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spacing 

message: Please put that Alan Johnston has been released and it's breaking news!
Hurry and watch here. (Windows Media Player required)
BBC News 24 - Live Broadcast. --96.224.7.204 01:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This should be discussed on WP:ITN/C. --74.13.130.35 03:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alan Johnston released... and nobody cares? 

message: Surely more important that some reporter who was released??!???!58.104.61.196 02:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or some government official having his sentence commuted. Evil Monkey - Hello 03:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Using my admin powers (muahahah), I've added it. Evil Monkey - Hello 03:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Not to the reporter, his family, his employer or anyone who believes in journalistic freedom.  Corvus cornix 03:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

text: This should be discussed on WP:ITN/C. --74.13.130.35 03:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  America' Cup 

message: The spanish version of Wikipedia finally reaches 250,000 articles - can someone update the languages part at the bottom of the main page of English Wikipedia?  ¡Muchas gracias!  Dazissimo 21:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, and congratulations! Borisblue 21:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Español Wikipedia reaches 250,000 articles 

message: I noticed that on the main page said that "1776 – The Continental Congress of the Thirteen Colonies in British North America approved a Declaration of Independence" which is wrong, technically the Declaration of Independence was 'approved' on July 2, 1776 not July 4, 1776 (which is independence day). Also the word 'approved' should be ratified. Thank you, -- (Cocoaguy ここがいい contribstalk) 22:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right in that July 2nd is the date when it truly happened. That said, the fourth is the "official" date, even appearing on the Declaration itself. OTD policy is usually to keep things to one date per event, and under the circumstances, the fourth really is the better day to list it.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  On this day... July 4, 2007 

message: Does anybody know how many Pacific WW2 battles are featured articles?
Sixteen.
That's out of about 20 featured articles that are about WW2 battles.  This isn't including WW2 military strategy and personalities, just battles.  Does anybody else believe that this is grossly unrepresentative of the importance of the Pacific side of WW2?  I know it's a contraversial thing to say, but some think that the crux of WW2 was the German Eastern front.  That is, the fight between Germany and the Soviet Union.  Certainly nobody could seriously contend that the Pacific theatre was the more important than the European one in terms of the nature and outcome of the war.  So why the bias of featured articles towards the former?
Don't get me wrong, the Pacific war was important and deserves to be extensively convered, but I think it is wrong to have so much of it, when there are many many other great articles that can be featured.
I don't want this to descend into yet another dull bun fight over systemic bias within Wikipedia, but I think it is worth considering that too little correction is being made for the fact that many more good articles are centred on the Western world.  When choosing the 'featured article' consideration must be made of whether, because of the uneven distribution of technology, internet access and population in the world, such a bias might emerge.
Whatever the reason, I really do think that sixteen an out-of-proportion figure when compared with the proliferation other, similar, featured articles.193.60.159.61 08:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now is time for you and your mates to improve other battle-related articles. --Howard the Duck 08:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Featured articles are chosen for their quality, not their subject. The day's featured article is selected from those which are featured.. Sheesh... we've already had this discussion twice on the current incarnation of this page alone. I dread to think how many times it's been dragged out and beaten to death in the archives. (Anyone feel like making the above big text into a template?) – Gurch 11:30, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nonsense, the article about Samuel Adams was pure coincidence? I think not! Daimanta 17:40, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it was not a coincidence -- it was specifically requested for that date. Raul654 17:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

text:  Wait a second, I think if you read the original post here its argument is that we ought to select articles based on their content and that the content's bias ought to be minimised.  It's one thing to state (in large, shouting letters, very immature) that this is how it's done, but it fails to answer the point that it ought not to be like this.  That's like saying "it's ok to break the law because people break the law": it's not an valid argument.  Maybe the way the featured article is chosen is broken.  It's a good point and brought up in the right way.  Even if you don't agree you shouldn't pout and stamp your feet in the babyish way that Lurch did.62.56.123.51 20:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I wasn't signed in when I posted that.  It's me; I'm not hiding.Alun 21:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This discussion has also been developed and is in fact more suited here. GizzaDiscuss © 23:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet another Pacific battle featured today 

message: Please, consider featuring Frida Kahlo tomorrow on her 100 birthday. 
I was looking for a better place to submit this proposal but I couldn't find it. Thank you.  RC, New York.
:The article is not up to that standard, and tomorrow already has a featured article. --AxG @ ►talk 15:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe RC meant a mention of her birthday in the Selected Anniversaries section, not the TFA section. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 17:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frida Kahlo's 100 Birthday tomorrow, July 6th 

message: How do you do this, as accents have been missed off a name. These occurrences in the text have been rectified but I do not know how to rename the article in general.
:This is done via the move function, although you'll need a registered account to do it.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 18:24, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming articles 

message: There is something about the line,
"The 2012 Summer Olympics bids comprised bids by nine cities to host the 2012 Summer Olympics."
that dosen't sound right. I think it should be "comprised of bids by nine cities". Aiden Fisher 09:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would actually be wrong. It should be either '<plural noun> comprised bids' or '<plural noun> were comprised of bids'. Which of those is preferred is a matter of choice, but generally active voice is preferred over passive. --86.150.19.126 11:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Nine cities participated in the 2012 Summer Olympics bids." seems a bit simpler. Bazza 13:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Bazza's sentance is better as the words, 2012, Summer Olympics, and bids only appears once in the sentence. Aiden Fisher 00:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tomorrow's featured article 

message: Is it possible to make Wikipedia Main Page your Homepage?
Please get back to me on my Talkpage user talk: krummy2
Krummy2 14:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The most recent discussion on that subject is here. --Dreaded Walrus  t c 20:09, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Home Page? 

message: Could some folks please keep an eye on Sochi, currently a high-profile article? There have been a few edit wars going on, revolving around whether Sochi is a Georgian or Russian city, and the addition of a biased and unsourced criticism section. After doing a little research, I can be reasonably certain that Sochi is in Russia, and I have removed the unsourced section. But I do not want to get involved in an edit war, nor do I want to protect a page that I have edited recently. Thanks all, Fang Aili talk 15:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This sort of request is more suited for the village pump or wherever as it has nothing to do with the main page Nil Einne 20:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is linked on the main page, in first news story. Therefore I posted my message here (as well as on WP:AN). --Fang Aili talk 21:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm aware of that but it still has nothing to do with the main page Nil Einne 06:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Sochi]] 

message: "1887 – King Kalākaua of Hawai'i was forced to sign the Bayonet Constitution, stripping the Hawaiian monarchy of much of its authority as well as disfranchising all Asians, most native Hawaiians, and the poor."
"Bayonet Consitution" isn't the name given to the article, which says it's a name adopted by the opponents.  Not endorsing the consitution, just saying maybe this anniversary item should be rethought in light of NPOV. --Samuel J. Howard 11:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd just change it myself, but I can't figure out how to edit the main page or whether I can.--Samuel J. Howard 11:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason why you can't change it, is because you are not an admin, only admins can change the Main Page. --AxG @ ►talk 12:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV?