Talk:Main Page

Main Page error reports

To report an error in content currently or imminently on the Main Page, use the appropriate section below.

• Where is the error? An exact quotation of the text in question helps.
• Offer a correction if possible.
• References are helpful, especially when reporting an obscure factual or grammatical error.
• Time zones. The Main Page runs on Coordinated Universal Time (UTC, currently 16:19 on 5 November 2024) and is not adjusted to your local time zone.
• Can you resolve the problem yourself? If the error lies primarily in the content of an article linked from the Main Page, fix the problem there before reporting it here. Text on the Main Page generally defers to the articles with bolded links. Upcoming content on the Main Page is usually only protected from editing beginning 24 hours before its scheduled appearance. Before that period, you can be bold and fix any issues yourself.
• Do not use {{edit fully-protected}} on this page, which will not get a faster response. It is unnecessary, because this page is not protected, and causes display problems. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
• No chit-chat. Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere, such as the talk page of the relevant article or project.
• Respect other editors. Another user wrote the text you want changed, or reported an issue they see in something you wrote. Everyone's goal should be producing the best Main Page possible. The compressed time frame of the Main Page means sometimes action must be taken before there has been time for everyone to comment. Be civil to fellow users.
• Reports are removed when resolved. Once an error has been addressed or determined not to be an error, or the item has been rotated off the Main Page, the report will be removed from this page. Check the revision history for a record of any discussion or action taken; no archives are kept.

Administrators: Clear all reports

Errors in the summary of the featured article

Please do not remove this invisible timestamp. See WT:ERRORS and WP:SUBSCRIBE. - Dank (push to talk) 01:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Current DYK

Typhoon Thelma

... that 1977's Typhoon Thelma was the most destructive event in Taiwan since World War II?

This just seems to be one person's opinion and that's not definite enough for a superlative claim. Consider the 1964 Baihe earthquake, for example. That had more fatalities and thousands of buildings were destroyed, not just damaged. And there have been more natural disasters since 1977 so the opinion is dated. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Anywhere else on WP we'd expect WP:INTEXT attribution, but DYK I guess allows using a WP:WEASEL word or at least quoting the opinion. Anything but in WP voice. —Bagumba (talk) 09:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Tavantius, Oldelpaso, Hilst, and Crisco 1492: Courtesy ping to hook participants.—Bagumba (talk) 09:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

In the citation, I'm not sure how the text file relates to the pdf link. The relevant quote ("Thelma, the second typhoon of the 1977 season, brought more destruction on Taiwan than any event since World War II.") only seems to be in the text file.—Bagumba (talk) 09:43, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

The PDF URL is erroneous as it's the 1991 report not the 1977 report as the citation claims. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:06, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

A quick search gave me the actual source of the text file, this 1980 NASA report. The relevant quote can be found on page 173. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 11:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

That's page 6.5-1 using the doc's internal numbering system. The confusing part is the WP article says the quote is from "a member of the Joint Typhoon Warning Center". Is it one person's opinion, or does it represent the organization as a whole? If the latter, is the hook OK in WP:WIKIVOICE. The complexity is that the hook is a paraphrase of what's in the source, so it's not as simple as the usual hook trick of just adding quotes. —Bagumba (talk) 11:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Wait wait, I was wrong. Here is the actual 1977 report, with the World War II comment on page 29 (22 on internal numbering system). As far as I can tell, it doesn't say who wrote what bit, but the foreword does say that it is "prepared by the staff of the Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC)", which leads me to believe that the quote does represent the opinion of the entire organization. I'll update the article to fix the citations. – 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) 13:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

It's sounding as if the WP article should strike "a member of" from the lead and body, i.e. ... prompting a member of the Joint Typhoon Warning Center to state ... Then it's a matter of whether the agency's statement can be reasonably contested and whether the hook should be in WP's voice or not. —Bagumba (talk) 14:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Don Bragg

• ... that the Korean War allowed Don Bragg to set a UCLA basketball record for the most rebounds by a varsity freshman, which stood for almost 40 years?

This fact is not given in the article and is SYNTH. If you look at the nomination, source one says that due to the Korean War freshmen could play varsity sports and source two says Bragg's 1952 rebound record was broken in 1989. The causation presented here is completely OR. Vladimir.copic (talk) 13:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• In addition, this blurb is incomprehensible to anyone unfamiliar with college basketball. At minimum, please link 'rebounds' to rebound (basketball) and link 'varsity freshman' to an article that explains that term (I couldn't find one). Modest Genius ^talk 13:58, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

  I’ve taken care of wikilinking Rebound (basketball). Schwede66 14:32, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

  I'm ambivalent. On the one hand, some DYK copyeditors routinely remove links as "the details are in the bold link" (and entices a click), while at ERRORS complaints are that links should all be in the hook.—Bagumba (talk) 14:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

  Freshman refers to a student in their first year at college (university), while the varsity team is an institution's top sports tier. In those days, freshman were not allowed on the varsity basketball team, but an exception was made for the Korean War. —Bagumba (talk) 16:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

FWIW, "source one" explains the Korean War exception specifically w.r.t. Bragg. Still, DYK hooks are routinely sourced from multiple sources, where the entire hook is not explictly stated in one source. This higher bar for DYK "OR" would need wider consensus.—Bagumba (talk) 14:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Next DYK

• Q1, 2nd hook "Ojców, a 1897 Polish adventure and travel novel" - pls tweak to 'an' 1897 JennyOz (talk) 06:47, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

   Fixed – Schwede66 07:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Next-but-one DYK

• ... that the lyrics of Gigi Perez's "Sailor Song" were criticized by far-right conservative Christian communities?

Two sources describing the critics. The Official Chart Company uses that language "Given its central queer love story, the release of Sailor Song drew criticism from some far-right, conservative Christian groups online for the line "I don't believe in God, but you're my saviour." [1] but Billboard says the critics were "religious tiktokers" [2]. I don't think objecting to that quote makes you far right, and isn't this really plagiarism? It's certainly a quote. Secretlondon (talk) 14:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

@Launchballer, Mrfoogles, MaranoFan, AirshipJungleman29, and Crisco 1492: Courtesy notifiction to nom participants. —Bagumba (talk) 16:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:LIMITED, I wouldn't regard this as plagiarism. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:13, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Precisely. I can't readily think of a ready way to express the concept succinctly without using those words, at least without changing the meaning.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(November 8)

Monday's FL

(November 11)

Errors in the summary of the featured picture

Notice to administrators: When fixing POTD errors, please update the corresponding regular version (i.e. without "protected" in the page title) in addition to the Main Page version linked below.

General discussion

Turquoise protection lock

A protection symbol should be added to the top right corner of the main page, because the page is cascade-protected.(turquoise lock for cascade or gold lock because page is fully protected too.) RaschenTechner (talk) 14:12, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Mostly it isn't there because we don't want it there - this is a special page. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:33, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

This page is not labelled as a special page, it is just the "Main Page" RaschenTechner (talk) 12:38, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be formally marked as special to be special. 331dot (talk) 13:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

But usually, all protected pages that are not formally marked as special have protection locks in the top right corner, even redirects. Except for the main page. RaschenTechner (talk) 13:48, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

The main page is not a usual page. It is not an article, and does not need a lock icon. CMD (talk) 14:01, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

But non-article pages also have protection locks (like Wikipedia policies). RaschenTechner (talk) 14:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Why should a padlock be permanently displayed on the Main Page when it doesn't need to be? Many who arrive there are casual readers and won't know what that means. If you really want to be formal about this, consider it an WP:IAR exception. 331dot (talk) 15:44, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

But this rule doesn't prevent you fom improving or maintaining Wikipedia. RaschenTechner (talk) 11:35, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Please tell us how your idea improves Wikipedia. Again, Why should a padlock be permanently(because this will never be unprotected) displayed on the Main Page when it doesn't need to be? Many who arrive there are casual readers and won't know what that means.

If you want policy to formally state that the Main Page doesn't need a padlock icon, then go to the policy talk page to propose that(but not everything needs to be written down, see WP:CREEP) 331dot (talk) 12:22, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

The lock should indicate that the page is protected. Also, if casual readers want to know what it means, they can go to the Wikipedia protection policy page and figure out what it means. RaschenTechner (talk) 13:28, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

That's what you want to do, but you don't indicate why this is a needed change. 331dot (talk) 14:31, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I already said this: Usually all protected pages have the protection icon RaschenTechner (talk) 16:49, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

This one has never had it, again, why is this a needed change? What's the benefit? 331dot (talk) 16:54, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

People would know that this page is protected. They would also know what kind of protection is in place without needing to access the protection log, which is not accessible for unregistered users RaschenTechner (talk) 18:20, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

But what's the benefit to that? I'm honestly not clear on what the problem is that you are attempting to remedy. 331dot (talk) 18:25, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

People who are unregistered can not see that the page is cascade-protected. It's only a problem for those who are interested in Wikipedia protection but aren't registered yet. RaschenTechner (talk) 18:49, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Is that a large number of people? It seems more hypothetical; I've been here for 12 years and you're the first I've seen that claim this is a problem. 331dot (talk) 19:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

It is not a large number of people. This is not the main problem, it's just that every non-special page has a protection icon when protected. Except the main page. RaschenTechner (talk) 20:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I too think a padlock is not necessary for the Main Page, which is uniquely exempted from MOS, standard layout rules for articles etc. It's pretty clear that the page is protected, obvious why, and adding a padlock wouldn't help anybody. It would just mess with the design for no useful purpose. Modest Genius ^talk 18:19, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Actually, the lock shows when you click the edit button, together with a huge warning that you have be careful. If you are an admin, that is, otherwise you probably cannot even do that. So, no need to add it extra. Tone 21:08, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I do sympathise with the OP somewhat. The Main page is special. On mobile, if you are logged in there is no edit button at the top (if it was there, clicking it could give you a popup telling you the page is protected) and the Talk page button is hidden down the bottom.

Logged out on mobile (don't test this is you don't like ads, I am still recovering) there is still no edit button and I couldn't find the Talk page button anywhere (might be a browser issue).

The presence of an edit button would help introduce the concept of protection to new editors.

This may all be by design, we don't want too many suggestions on this talk page, it is more convenient to have a barrier to entry for people who want to "improve" the Main page.

Having said all that, the status quo is not too bad. The experience on desktop is more like a regular article page, but most of our readers (and perhaps one day editors) are on mobile. Commander Keane (talk) 21:42, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

What problem are you trying to solve?

Hypotheticals aside, was any actual breathing human confused about the main page's protection status specifically because it was missing its lock icon? ApLundell (talk) 05:32, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

This is not the main problem, it's just that all non-special protected pages usually have protection locks. RaschenTechner (talk) 17:16, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

I'll repeat: what problem are you trying to solve? Remsense ‥ 论 18:47, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

All non-special pages that are protected normally have protection locks and the main page doesn't follow that norm. RaschenTechner (talk) 19:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

I remember when the locks were introduced (I think it was shortly after semi-protection was implemented in 2005). I do not remember anyone ever asking for a lock displayed on the Main Page. There is no need to put visual clues on the Main Page to show that it is protected, just like there is no need to put visual clues to show it cannot be deleted. And "consistency" is not a reason to do it: the Main Page is a sui generis entity following its own rules. —Kusma (talk) 19:02, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

You are unlikely to get any traction with this request. The main page is special even for special pages, it pretty much has a completely unique ruleset and isn't going to be helped by having a lock on it. I get that other pages might have something, but that doesn't mean the main page has to as well. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Trying to understand RaschenTechner's point, the only problem I can think of that adding the lock helps is directing new users on how to fix errors on the Main page. Clicking "View source" is perhaps not clear enough for some. A clickable visual lock may help. I don't know how effective it would be, if at all. Not saying I want a lock though, the distraction is too great. On mobile there is nearly zero indication on how to fix errors. Commander Keane (talk) 19:22, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Would a new user necessarily even know what cascade protected even means? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:51, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

A new user would just see a lock and click on it, or hover over it. The colour (I presume that's how cascade is differentiated) is not important to a new user. Commander Keane (talk) 20:02, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

If the purpose is to help new users figure out how to report errors on the Main Page, a better way is to add a link to where they can report them, such as "Noticed an error on this page? Learn how to report it.". A padlock does not provide any indication that it's the way to report problems. Padlocks are the symbol for security, not bug reports. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 01:11, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

If a new user clicks on View source, there is already a clear explanation of the protection, a link for reporting errors, and other help. In addition, Talk:Main Page has ample guidance in the header banners. Adding any protection lock icon would lead to more confusion for newcomers, not less, and it would clutter the page which is already very busy. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 20:51, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes it is a great point that a lock could add more confusion, as mentioned they are not the universal symbol for editing. I don't know how intuitive View source is though. Perhaps instead an Edit button that gives instructions when clicked would be better. Hopefully new users are clicking Talk and seeing the "Report errors" link. However, there is misunderstanding with what "Talk" means in this setting for new users. A "Noticed an error..." link would the most obvious, but we don't even do that on articles. I would favour a little information symbol in the top right corner. It can explain what's what. Would also be nice on mobile, where there is no View source button at all. Commander Keane (talk) 02:01, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Main page history

Could I urge regular editors/watchers of this page to add {{MPH alert}} to their user pages, or somewhere they are likely to see regularly. In short, it provides an alert if the wp:main page history has not been created by noon UTC on any given day. If the page has been created, it displays nothing. Normally there is a bot that does that creates the history page just before midday, but it's not been editing for the last week or so. I've been creating the pages manually, but yesterday I missed it and as a result no page was created. The process to create the history is very simple, and instructions are given in the alert. The template is transcluded at the top of this page, but it's easy to overlook. Thanks. — Voice of Clam (talk) 16:35, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Added. I will regularly create these snaps. – DreamRimmer (talk) 18:03, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

We thankfully have archives for all the sections of the Main Page that change from day-to-day (the exception being "In the news", but I don't think anything new was added there today), so you could probably recreate how the page would've looked on November 2 using those archives. ApexParagon (talk) 22:13, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

They can be recreated that way, but it takes a lot of effort and I don't have the time to do it at present. Doing a snapshot at the time is much simpler as it just requires substituting all templates using Special:ExpandTemplates. — Voice of Clam (talk) 08:39, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

ProcBot's main page snapshots task has been down since 21 October. Pinging @ProcrastinatingReader to draw their attention to this issue and to see if they can restart the bot. – DreamRimmer (talk) 08:48, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

This should be resolved now. Apologies for the downtime. I don't know what the underlying cause is, but the infrastructure the bot lives on keeps running out of disk space every few months. (I think it's due to random temporary logs accumulating.) A restart tends to clear it up, but needs to be done manually. I'll try to carve out some time to properly investigate before this next happens. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:04, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

The "USS Nevada" article

For some reason, the "USS Nevada (BB-36)" article was transcluded onto the Main Page, instead of simply being listed on the "Did you know?" section, making it now cascade-protected. In other words, the article is now unable to be edited by anyone other than administrators.

(If you check the source code of the Main Page, and scroll down to the list of transcluded pages, you'll see it listed.)

I don't think this was intentional, since no other mainspace articles featured on the Main Page are protected in this manner. Can an administrator please fix this? ApexParagon (talk) 01:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

This happens whenever {{USS}} (or another ship name template) is used to link ship names -- something about the template makes Mediawiki think the page is getting transcluded when it isn't. The fix is to use standard links on the main page instead of link templates. :Jay8g [V•T•E] 02:03, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I've removed the ship name template. ApexParagon, please post main page problems at WP:ERRORS as you'll get a quicker response. Schwede66 08:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

US elections & main page

Hello, I think the DYK section attempts not to feature blatantly political items in the immediate aftermath of immediately before an election, not even one for each side. Currently the main page has a picture of a US election map and a picture of a US politician who is actively campaigning for one side. The election is tomorrow. Are there/should there be similar guidelines for other sections of the main page—or is the stance that as long as the bias is for the right side and the greater good, that's hunky-dory? Thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 09:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Where do you see a picture of a US politician seeking election? I don't. It's not an "election map", it's a depiction of the party affiliation of US governors. 331dot (talk) 10:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

The page has been changed. (I guess we'll have to live with the guy in a blue hat reading "De..." (?paired with a reworking of the Statue of Liberty?; previously, the three together...), Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 10:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

So this means the historic nature of Obama's 2008 election can never be in the Selected Anniversaries part of the main page, because he chooses to express his views about current elections? (And it's not like those views are surprising) 331dot (talk) 10:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

No, it can be featured in any year that isn't an election year. It can also be featured in an election year if the date of the election is earlier than November 4 (on average that would be 2 out of every 7 election years). It's a longstanding convention that we avoid political hooks pertaining to a particular country in the days and weeks before that country holds an election. We ran Obama and McCain jointly as TFA on November 4, 2008, which at least achieves a balance... but even that I'm not sure it would be approved if it were suggested today.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I would get this if Obama was seeking office, but he's not. His views should surprise no one and it's not an endorsement of Kamala Harris to post about Obama. I could see leaving his image off, but the blurb could stay. 331dot (talk) 10:59, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

That's quite a radical interpretation of any US politician. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:35, 4 November 2024 (UTC) Did you know..... that in 2024 Dominion Voting Systems in Puerto Rico produced hundreds of "garbage votes"??

Very good, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 10:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) There was a picture and blurb about Barack Obama, which I've swapped out per the above issue. There is a long-standing convention that we don't feature blurbs about prominent stories or politicians, particularly when it's only from one side of the coin. Obama's election can always run next year. The FL I think is borderline. It clearly is an election map, showing red and blue states won by the two main parties in gubernatorial elections. Probably if I were the sole arbiter I'd err on the side of caution and remove it, but equally it's not totally obvious to me that it could be construed as unduly interfering with the election, given the even distribution of red and blue, and I imagine it would be controversial to swap this out so will leave for now.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:45, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Next year Kentucky Virginia elects a governor, and Obama will likely endorse the Democratic candidate, so it can't run next year either under this convention. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

2026 is fresh congressional elections. 2027 Kentucky and Mississippi elect governors. 331dot (talk) 11:02, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm just surprised that Alaska is a left-wing state; and California's on the right. (Unless I click the map to be able to read the fuzzy blob on the right. Please add a key to the caption (as was asked for by @Jmchutchinson previously).) Bazza 7 (talk) 12:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)