Legality of Cannabis by U.S. Jurisdiction

Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
49TL (talk | contribs)
Administrators
34,006 edits
m Reverted edits by 202.7.166.166 to last version by FireFox
69.136.198.10 (talk)
No edit summary
Line 6: Line 6:


== Featured Article ==
== Featured Article ==


...In ''In the news'' section on [[Main Page]], it is mentioned that [[K. Natwar Singh ]] was sacked. He has only been stripped of his portfolio; he still remains a minister, albeit without porfolio, waiting for the verdict of a judicial enquiry. --[[User:Gurubrahma|Gurubrahma]] 07:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
...In ''In the news'' section on [[Main Page]], it is mentioned that [[K. Natwar Singh ]] was sacked. He has only been stripped of his portfolio; he still remains a minister, albeit without porfolio, waiting for the verdict of a judicial enquiry. --[[User:Gurubrahma|Gurubrahma]] 07:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
:Fixed. Thanks, [[User:BanyanTree|<nowiki></nowiki>]][[User:BanyanTree|Banyan]][[User talk:BanyanTree|Tree]] 18:53, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
:Fixed. Thanks, [[User:BanyanTree|<nowiki></nowiki>]][[User:BanyanTree|Banyan]][[User talk:BanyanTree|Tree]] 18:53, 10 November 2005 (UTC)


I wonder why, in the Main Page summary of "Today's featured article" on the [[S-mine]] the original article's "best-known version" has been changed into the less-than-literate "most well-known version". Is that the most well we can do? -- [[User:Picapica|Picapica]] 22:17, 13 November 2005
I wonder why, in the Main Page summary of "Today's featured article" on the [[S-mine]] the original article's "best-known version" has been changed into the less-than-literate "most well-known version". Is that the most well we can do? -- [[User:Picapica|Picapica]] 22:17, 13 November 2005





== Turkish Wikipedia ==
== Turkish Wikipedia ==
Line 121: Line 126:


==In the News==
==In the News==

It is believed that AL ZARQAWI has been killed in Iraq today. This should be mentioned.


Why have we had the same news for about 4 days now? [[User:Zoe]]|[[User talk:Zoe|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 21:26, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Why have we had the same news for about 4 days now? [[User:Zoe]]|[[User talk:Zoe|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 21:26, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:15, 20 November 2005

This is the talk page for discussing changes to the Wikipedia Main Page: please read the information below to find the best place for your comment or question. For error reports, go here. Thank you.

Today's featured picture

  • Today's featured picture is taken from the list of successful featured pictures, If you would like to nominate a picture to be featured see Picture of the Day.
  • To report an error with "Today's featured picture...", add a note at the Error Report.

Main Page and beyond

Otherwise; please read through this page to see if your comment has already been made by someone else before adding a new section by clicking the little + sign at the top of the page.

Main page discussion

  • This page is for the discussion of technical issues with the main page's operations. See the help boxes above for possible better places for your post.
  • Please add new topics to the bottom of this page. If you press the plus sign to the right of the edit this page button it will automatically add a new section for your post.
  • Please sign your post with --~~~~. It will add the time and your name automatically.



Featured Article

...In In the news section on Main Page, it is mentioned that K. Natwar Singh was sacked. He has only been stripped of his portfolio; he still remains a minister, albeit without porfolio, waiting for the verdict of a judicial enquiry. --Gurubrahma 07:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thanks, BanyanTree 18:53, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why, in the Main Page summary of "Today's featured article" on the S-mine the original article's "best-known version" has been changed into the less-than-literate "most well-known version". Is that the most well we can do? -- Picapica 22:17, 13 November 2005



Turkish Wikipedia

Turkish Wikipedia [1] now has more than 10.000 articles. Please take it to the list of the Wikipedia languages that has more than 10.000 articles.

Done. Congratulations, BanyanTree 22:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

dogpatch artical

Why has that dogpatch artical been there for two days? yeah

It hasn't been, Wikipedia operates on UTC, which means a new day (on wikipedia) starts at roughly 7 P.M. EST. So, the dogpatch article hasn't been on the main page for 24 hours yet, it will update to a new article at 7PM eastern tonight. -Greg Asche (talk) 22:02, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Did You Know?" picture

why is there a picture of a poppy on the did you know section?

Because red poppies are worn on Remembrance Day which is mentioned in the first item.--nixie 00:21, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, so is today's DYK section meant to be some kind of intelligence test? <KF> 05:29, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If you find mousing over an image testing- then I suppose so.--nixie 05:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Images for DYK are supposed to be relevant, not easy. Clicking the image will give info about the image and shows what items it's linked to which should ample evidence what the image relates to. - Mgm|(talk) 20:03, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You know all that (and more). I know all that (and more). People working on the Main Page and the DYK section know all that (and more). My point was that newcomers to Wikipedia, many schoolchildren among them, will not know all that. <KF> 22:39, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In my experience, the first thing schoolchildren do when they see something they don't understand is click it (or push it, or hit it, or shoot at it, etc.) So I think they'll work it out soon enough. sjorford #£@%&$?! 12:04, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

November 14

The caption for the DYK picture has a misspelling. It's "flag of Burkins Faso." Should say Burkina. Dave 03:53, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've fixed it.-gadfium 05:09, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Archives!

Please be more careful archiving. Archive number 47 contains messages posted as late as 10 November 2005 . How is that possibly ready to be archived? Do you archive message just to clear the whole page? Why would you do that? (And yes, I am pissed that you archived a post I only replied to 9 hours ago.) --JohnO 03:27, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You mean the post about the DYK item that had disappeared off the front page by the time I had archived it? - BanyanTree 18:12, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, smart arse. In addition to a comment on the CNET review which was still relevant. --JohnO 03:47, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Does asking for confirmation makes a colleague a smart arse ? --64.229.222.3 14:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No, but being a facetious prick does. (And 'colleague' is far too grandiose a word, don't you think?) --JohnO You found the secret writing! 00:19, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
"Too grandiose a word"? Now that's facetious. --64.229.227.162 16:59, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
From your last comment, I'm guessing you don't know what facetious means. --JohnO You found the secret writing! 18:56, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Try looking it up on Wikipedia... ? --Pepito 22:19, 17 November 2005 (EST)
Facetious doesn't exist. --JohnO You found the secret writing! 03:35, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
From your last comment, I'm guessing you don't know Wiktionary. Please see http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/facetious . -- 64.229.222.10 06:01, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect. I am fully aware of Wiktionary. As am I aware of your continued numbskulledness (a word not to be found in the dictionary). You continue to miss the point.
  • Facetious means inappropriately jocular.
  • When Banyantree replied with what he supposed was a rhetorical question, he was being facetious. (For which I used the more colloquial term, smart arse.)
  • When you asked "Does asking for confirmation makes a colleague a smart arse?" you either missed the point or you were being facetious, too. Whereupon I cleverly implied that you were both facetious pricks without stating which of you I meant.
  • I now take this back. Banyantree was indeed being facetious, you missed the point. It went over your head. It was too much for you. (This time I am spelling things out so you understand me.)
  • Next you did something to amuse both me and the readers of this page. You attempted to employ the word facetious in your reply to my last comment, but you fell on your arse when you misused it. Obviously it doesn't mean what you think it does. Oops. Your bad.
  • Calling me a colleague of another person simply because we both commented on a webpage demonstrates that you are a little shaky on the meaning of the word colleague, too.
  • Pepito then suggested "looking it up on WikIPEDIA." That was a suggestion for YOU.
  • I helped out by showing that it wasn't available on wikIPEDIA. (I get the impression that you are the sort of person who needs a lot of help.) I didn't say that it wasn't to be found at wiktionary. Nor did I say it wasn't to be found at any other dictionary site online. Nor did I say it wasn't to be found in a real paper dictionary.
  • But you divulged your intelligence once again. You're guessing I don't know what? Wiktionary? Why? Because I didn't mention it? Does it make any sense to say "I'm guessing you don't what cheese is" simply because you haven't mentioned cheese yet? No. No it does not. But some people need a little more help than others.
  • I'm sorry to have flogged you so publicly, but you are a menace to the collective IQ of the users of this site. Also, I suggest you get a handle. --JohnO You found the secret writing! 09:36, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Being facetious again, JohnO? Just want to conclude this conversation with a friendly reminder to you, JohnO, that we are all colleagues here building an online encyclopedia together, and we should be nicer to each other, especially to helpful, hardworking administrators like BanyanTree. Have a nice day. --64.229.220.108 19:09, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's right son, take the higher moral ground. You really showed me there. --JohnO You found the secret writing! 20:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

St. Martin's Day (Nov 11) in Poznan

St. Martin's Day is celebrated not only in the Netherlands but also in Poznan, Poland. There's a tradition of baking croissants stuffed with white poppy ('rogale marcinskie'). There are also parades and concerts, especially on Ulica Swiety Marcin (St. Martin Street), near the Imperial Castle. Recently it has acquired also some patriotic elements so as not to be seen as a counterweight for Indenpendence Day's celebrations which are held virtually quite adjacently.
I would be glad if someone added 'Poznan' to the text on the main page ('St. Martin's Day in the Netherlands'). Zbihniew 13:41, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Partrick Lichfield

As Patrick Lichfield has just died, could he be put on the list of events? 212.85.6.26

Deaths are normally put on Deaths in 2005, unless their death itself affects current events. Someone has already put Patrick Ansone there. - BanyanTree 16:25, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Local names of other wikipedias

(discussion moved to Template talk:Wikipedialang)

Today's featured article

Katamari Damacy says "The game fall..." It should be "The game falls", the singular form of the verb fall. Art LaPella 00:50, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be already fixed. Thanks! Flcelloguy ( A note? ) 14:46, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should mention the game's system.--Fito 18:04, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Selected anniversaries

To any nearby admins: The link to the disambig Northern Alliance should point to Afghan Northern Alliance. Deltabeignet 04:21, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done Redwolf24 (talk) 04:41, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Page

Oi, can you help me on the page that I created? (list_of_swear_words) --ASCA, ISCS 10:45, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Czech wiki

I have already asked for this, but no-one listened to me, so I'll ask again - can someone change the "Česká" on the mainpage link to the Czech wiki to "Česky"? "Česká" means something Czech (in the feminine gender), whereas "Česky" means in the Czech language. Have a look at the alternate language links in the Czech language article, it uses Česky too, and so do all the other articles on wikipedia (European Union, Germany, Japan etc). -- Hexagon1 14:44, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

This pains me also. There should be some sort of continuity in the names. Jellypuzzle 14:56, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Sorry for the delay. [[Sam Korn]] 15:41, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It calls itself "Česká Wikipedie" on its main page. I don't know if that's been put into another case due to the context ('the Czech Wikipedia currently 19000 articles') or not. I agree, however, that it should say "in the Czech language" if there is a difference in meaning. Otherwise it implies that it is only for people in the Czech Republic (admittedly that's where 90% of the world's Czech speakers are) rather than anyone who wants in. Or maybe it doesn't, I don't speak Czech! --Cherry blossom tree 17:49, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
"Česká Wikipedie" is an inflected form, as I said in my first post, "Česká" means something Czech (ie. the Czech Wikipedia) (in the feminine gender. Thanks for fixing it, Sam Korn. -- Hexagon1 01:53, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Right, I see where you're coming from now. Sorry I was a bit slow there. --Cherry blossom tree 23:35, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Awkward intro wordings, FA link

Our guideline that the title of an article appear near the beginning of its introduction makes sense in most cases, but if slavishly adhered to can produce awkward constructions like "The History of Loompaland starts in 1954..." and "The Geography of Loompaland reflects its status as an island..." This isn't a hard problem to solve for article introductions (it's just a convention, after all), but one place where it is a near-requirement is in the introduction for featured articles appearing on the Main Page--because the reader needs something to link to. However, I don't think the occasional awkward construction that results reflects well on what we "consider the best writing in Wikipedia." Also, I don't think it's immediately obvious that that link in the Main Page blurb leads to the article itself--most people coming to the page anew would, I think, expect to be able to click on a "Read More" link at the end of the blurb, or on the blurb title "Today's Featured Article" to navigate to it. Therefore I think we should follow the convention of making "Today's Featured Article" a link to the featured article, and in cases where an intro is better-written without restating the title, write it that way. Demi T/C 17:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like a very sensible proposal. I've had difficulties myself in figuring out which link to click on in a featured article. Go for it! --Gantlord 10:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the News

It is believed that AL ZARQAWI has been killed in Iraq today. This should be mentioned.

Why have we had the same news for about 4 days now? User:Zoe|(talk) 21:26, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Because a large portion of wikipedians that participate at ITN set the bar of importance too high for inclusion at ITN. Just a couple weeks ago someone was arguing that Samuel Alito SCOTUS nom wasn't worthy there... -Greg Asche (talk) 01:29, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it's because we've been running a bit dry on quality suggestions at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates over the last few days. I encourage you to update an article and add something about it to the page.--Pharos 02:04, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've done so, and other admins removed my additions as not notable enough for ITN. I'm not trying to go on a personal crusade here, but I agree with Zoe, the news in ITN does get stagnant, and I'd like to change that. -Greg Asche (talk) 04:48, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
ITN was protected to prevent vandalism, not to instigate admins as a quality screen. If the suggestion is at all acceptable (ie, it fits the objective criteria of sourced plus article updated), add it. People will improve on it still. dab (ᛏ) 15:32, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The candidates' page is a good place to discuss what gets posted or not. Items not ready to be featured on the Main Page should go to Current events first, then go on ITN when sufficient updates have been made. Avoiding edit wars on the Main Page might be considered a good side effect besides preventing vandalism. --64.229.5.51 22:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if we're going to have news that are not fresh from the day _which I'm ok with_ we might as well put in dates and maybe hours. "Chirac announced curfew" looks like it happened today... this is unreasonable. Jules LT 15:40, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That line needs to be updated, probably to mention the requested extension of govt emergency powers to 3 months. --64.229.5.51 22:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That line about Chirac announcing the curfew is so old and stale, it needs to be either rewritten with a quick update or removed from the Main Page. ITN is supposed to feature updatedness of Wikipedia articles, not tardiness ! Can someone with sysop powers fix that, please ? --64.229.221.156 09:33, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've always thought that the "In the News" section is really badly laid out. Perhaps there is some reason for this, but in order to read more information on the stories in the section, more often than not the links within the little snippit DO NOT link to that story in Wikinews, rather the resulting Wikipedia entry for the word. So if I, for example, read "Jacques Chirac declares a state of emergency, announcing curfews in an attempt to quell the civil unrest across France." and then want to find out more about that story, i have to go click the link at the bottom of the box to go to wikinews and then go find the article (which usually does not have the same snippit as a title, as it will be a general article about the riots in france that I want). Could somebody PLEASE link the news articles directly into the page?! goodsmonth 11:26, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If an article is not sufficiently updated, it should not be on ITN. ITN is set up to feature updated articles in Wikipedia, not a portal for Wikinews, which is not part of the encyclopedia, Wikipedia. --64.229.222.3 14:23, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yet ITN is supposed to be latest news, Wikipedia (in comparision to Wikinews) often has only limited stories on something that is just happening, it makes Wikipedia look pretty disorganised to not have clear links to further information on the stories featured. Rather than only allow ITN points that have well updated articles (which means it will most probably not be news that is that new), why not serve the dual function of being a portal for Wikinews by having a link at the end of the snippit like 'Read more in the Wikinews article' (only something a little more concise, and only when wikipedia doesn't have a good article on it) and still link the keywords in the snippit to Wikipedia? This would also be a good way to somewhat solve the problem of ITN getting very stale that is being discussed above. But hey I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, and perhaps Wikipedia and things in other affiliated Wiki's are as a rule imcompatible...? —preceding unsigned comment by Goodsmonth (talk • contribs) 01:48, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to bring up your ideas at Template talk:In the news. But I have to say that Wikipedia and Wikinews articles are very different. Wikinews articles are about what happened that day. Wikipedia articles are encyclopedic entries, and emphasize on background and history, or information on how things build up to the events that happen in the news. ITN features those encyclopedic entries updated with news-related materials. For newsarticles, click on the link to Wikinews at the bottom of ITN (just above DYK). .... IMHO, ITN is not disorganized, but badly needs more contributers (who have probably moved on to Wikinews?), and more attention of those who has the right to edit there (i.e. admins). .... May I introduce you to Current events ? A link to this page is on the left side of every page in Wikipedia (the 3rd one under the logo). That's where the newest and most updated snippits are, with links to actual news articles in the 'Net. Hope this helps. --64.229.179.75 07:18, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks goodsmonth 08:55, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome. --64.229.221.156 09:33, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia in Galego

Wikipedia in Galego [2] now has more than 10.000 articles. Please take it to the list of the Wikipedia languages that has more than 10.000 articles. Stoni (talk) 21:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Firefox 17:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Errant closing div tag

There's one on the main page. Does someone want to sort this out? - Ta bu shi da yu 22:31, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • OK, it's fixed.--Pharos 22:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Feet

I have a fungus on my feet, i just wanted to how i get rid of this devestating disease.

Wikipedia does not give medical advice, nor is this the appropriate page to ask such questions. →Raul654 23:44, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Wedding in Japan

I am surprised this news haven't show up yet. You don't get a royal wedding everyday and this surely worth the headline. --59.121.201.103 05:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not even a mention on Current events? Yikes! The Sayako, Princess Nori page needs an expansion, too. --64.229.179.241 07:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Now posted on Current events and on the candidates' page. --64.229.179.241 07:20, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sayako Kuroda

The very strong implication in the article is that since she left the royal family, she's no longer a princess of Japan. Thus, she shouldn't be called Princess Sayako Kuroda on the main page. I propose "Princess Sayako," "the former Princess Sayako," or "the former princess Sayako Kuroda." Dave20:09, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Colin Campbell on DYK

The note about Colin Campbell handing out the two longest suspensions is incorrect. Coutu and Maloney had longer suspensions. See the Violence in ice hockey article's list of longest suspensions. --Westendgirl 07:57, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. I was reading that bit and thought something was off. --Madchester 18:09, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. You could also link the longest suspensions to the link I provided above, if you want.--Westendgirl 18:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, DYK has been updated for the day, so the only ppl who will see it are those browsing thru the archives. Too bad noboy noticed the error earlier. --Madchester 18:28, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Vandalism on November 15 Featured Article

The Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 link is directed to some sort of vandalized page. Would you please check this out? —preceding unsigned comment by Dominican (talk • contribs) 20:41, 15 November 2005

Looks like it's been reverted already. Next time, you can revert the vandalism yourself (if you want). See Wikipedia:Revert. -Greg Asche (talk) 21:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

main page crowdedness

Is it me, or do main pages, as bandwith skyrockets, become plethoran thickets of visual information? —preceding unsigned comment by 209.6.218.228 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 15 November 2005

Perhaps so, but the Wikipedia Main Page has not changed substantially for more than a year. — Dan | Talk 21:43, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Did You Know?"

I think the did you know section should have INTERESTING facts on it. Is that so hard to do?

Such as - Did you know lemurs only drink soda?

Stuff like that. I mean, real stuff. OK? Thank you. Cyprus 01:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • The idea behind the Did you know is to show off Wikipedia's well done new articles. Follow the link to Archive and it will explain. Falphin 02:23, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Terrible standard! 1/4 items are interesting -- the rest are pushed in by vain article parents looking for front page exposure. Lotsofissues 05:56, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please create articles on topics that YOU find interesting (everybody has something different in mind), and submit them to DYK. This way, DYK will feature articles that interest YOU. --64.229.179.75 06:41, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please! This is not a matter of subjective taste, there are plenty of articles that I and 66% of visitors would find interesting. Lotsofissues 17:24, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, then create articles on those topics and submit to DYK. When all conceivable articles on your topic of interest have already been created (unlikely), then help expand and revise those articles and improve them to featured status so that they will show up on the top left on the Main Page instead of the lower right. This way there will be something that interests you on the Main Page. Brand new articles to the lower right, old(er) articles refined by collaborative editing efforts to the top left. (Articles with information on new/recent happenings to the top right, and those on old significant news to the lower left.) If you want to change the raison d'être of DYK and make it a section for quirky facts and general trivia, please bring this up at Wikipedia talk:Did you know. --64.229.5.175 18:09, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thats subjective Lotsofissues. I find articles on Astronomy, Chemistry, Physics very boring but articles on Literature, History, and Medicine very interesting. Very few people's interest match and I bet there are very few if any articles that 66% of people will find interesting that don't have an article yet. Newbie222 22:42, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Malyasia

Where the hell is that? I mean, I've heard of Malaysia but not Malyasia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.231.213.255 (talk • contribs)

It's an obvious typo. Can someone with sysop power please fix this error on DYK ? Thanks. --199.71.174.100 01:29, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
already fixed Broken S
Thank you. -- 199.71.174.100 01:32, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Should Main Page be renamed?

How come does the Main Page not conform to the capitalization standards of the other pages? Shouldn't the title be "Main page"?

Theshibboleth 04:10, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Main Page/Archive 34#Title of 'Main page'. Hope this helps. -- 199.71.174.100 04:23, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mouse (computing)

Yeah, the link should be pointing to Mouse (computing), but the current one goes to Computer mouse, and is redirected. Not a big problem, but I don't like the idea of redirects in the Main Page. Haha, yeah... -- pmam21talkarticles 05:18, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 05:36, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Typo

In today's featured article, "presidental" should be "presidential". Graham/pianoman87 talk 10:22, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • OK, it's fixed.--Pharos 10:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever been yelled at for asking a question?

A few minutes ago my friend decided to ask a question was, What was Shakespear's first play performed in the US. As soon as she entered it someone under the name Paris Hilton had yelled at her, telling her to stop adding things to Wikipedia. That it is considered vandelism.

Sorry for the mix-up. We certainly encourage asking questions, and adding to articles. What happened was someone with the same IP address as you was adding nonsense to the Paris Hilton article. Please register an account and this confusion won't happen again in the future.--Pharos 14:06, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for responding, we are very grateful, my friend was very upset.

Clara Maass Article (DYK: Nov 17)

I think it should read "was bitten by misquitos carrying yellow fever" rather than "was bitten by yellow fever carrying misquitos". I don't know how to fix that, but I just thought I'd bring that to someone's attention. —preceding unsigned comment by M30 (talk • contribs) 14:23, 17 November 2005

I agree. Can someone with admin access fix this line on DYK, please ? Thanks. --64.229.227.162 17:17, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyright violation on main page!

The image of the rioters is tagged as a copyvio. Please replace with another pic pronto! Borisblue 23:34, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Compliments from Marleen

Hey i think this is a great place to get info, but i hate it when people talk about stuff not relating to the topic... well just thought i would complement you guys and your page :)

-Marleen

In the news today

What does it mean by: "return to normalcy throughout France."?

Pece Kocovski 02:29, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Police declared a return to normalcy. Which part do you not understand?
however, "three weeks of civil unrest subsides" doesn't parse for me. "civil unrest subsides after three weeks", fine, but weeks cannot subside, and the number is wrong too. 80.219.176.50 07:09, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ack. Grammar offense! On the main page. It should be "as three weeks of civil unrest subside". the subject of the subordinate clause is weeks, modified by "three" and "of civil unrest". please please someone correct this. it hurts me. 129.67.120.12 07:08, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. Simply "After almost three weeks of civil unrest, ..." would be fine. Can someone with sysop powers fix that line on ITN, please ? Thanks. -- 64.229.222.10 07:21, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Out-of-order anniversary

Anyone notice that the 1905 anniversary date today is out of order?Tommstein 04:05, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Evil Monkey - Hello 04:38, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a time/date stamp to the main page

There's been a few suggestions on helpdesk-l that the main page include the time and date that the main page was loaded, because not everyone operates on UTC and it's almost impossible to tell when "today" is except by looking at the "selected anniversaries". Any thoughts? Alphax τεχ 06:19, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just like the one at the top right of this talk page ? I like it, but where on Main Page shall we place it ? I would stay away from ITN, as we don't seem to be updating ITN enough these days. Putting a clock next to outdated news headlines may make us look silly. -- 64.229.222.10 06:29, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it is just my browser, but I am on a public computer and in spite of the time/date stamp at the top of this talk page saying november 18th, the featured article is November 15th. Any ideas why? —preceding unsigned comment by 212.85.15.87 (talk • contribs) 09:47, 18 November 2005
May want to purge your cache. Try Ctrl-F5 or click here. Hope this helps. --64.229.220.108 19:18, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Normalcy" on ITN

Please could we have the non-existent word 'normalcy' changed to the correct term 'normality'? —preceding unsigned comment by 82.39.87.139 (talk • contribs) 12:16, 18 November 2005

  • Keep. The word "normalcy" seems fine. Just did a quick search for "return normalcy France" in Google News. The word was indeed used in quite a few newspapers. Apparently, the word "normalcy" is not a non-existent word. -- 64.229.220.108 19:29, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is an Americanism. Brits usually use "normality". See List of American English words not used in British English#N. So it's correct.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 19:45, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • It appears to be my fault, as I used the turn of phrase at Current Events; I cannot say why I picked it over normality, but the word certainly is in the dicitonaries [3] [4]. The literal translation of the statement by the French police is "normal situation", maybe we should use that. dab (ᛏ) 19:58, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure why you apologize. This is an existing word, it's spelled correctly, and it's in the dictionary. Just because it's an Americanism doesn't mean you are automatically at fault for using it.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 20:31, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    no, no, it's fine; I just noted the repeated complaints, and wanted to say that it's not a literal translation anyway. But I suppose this way people can learn about current events and extend their vocabulary at the same time, go wikipedia! :) dab (ᛏ) 21:13, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite sure that "normality" is used worldwide, whislt "normalcy" looks odd to non-Americans. On the principle that we are writing for our readers, who are a worldwide audience, "normality" should be preferred, jguk 21:28, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

if you change it, change it to "normal situation" which is what the police actually said, retour à une situation normale partout en France. dab (ᛏ) 21:32, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
normality is a chemical term in US English, as in normality of this chemical solution, so it sounds funny to US ears. --Ancheta Wis 00:58, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I seriously doubt this. Maybe to US chemists' ears. How many USians, if you asked them in the street, would spontaneously identify "normality" as a chemical term? You may as well say it is a mathematical term, and probably it has specific meanings in lots of other contexts. dab (ᛏ) 15:08, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to rain on your parade, but there's a Wikipedia policy against changing forms of English in non-England/US related articles. It's described in Template:Lang2 and Wikipedia:Manual of Style. - Kookykman|(t)e

POV in "Did You Know?"

I am very surprised by the item "did you know...that the campaign for a "Malaysian Malaysia" has had its proponents denounced as traitors or irrational firebrands?".

While it sounds like reporting some objective fact, and maybe is (though the links provided hardly offer substance), the point in question is by its very nature POV.

Or, to put it differently: The only thing that can make interesting (as in "did you know") the fact that said proponents were denounced as traitors or irrational firebrands would be that for some reason they are obviously not and that one should know so. Which is POV, QED. —preceding unsigned comment by 129.194.8.73 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 18 November 2005

I thought that "Did You Know?" means "Have you read this brand new article?" That whole section on the Main Page features recent additions to Wikipedia. -- 64.229.220.108 19:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

suomi, not Suomi

moved to Template talk:Wikipedialang. 18:02, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

iraq

please put somethign in the main page about how right now, the house is voting on if they should take the iraqi troops out of iraq--Jakewater 03:23, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that In the news on MainPage is not a news service, but a section on MainPage to feature articles in Wikipedia that have been updated with recent news-related content. To add headlines (to alert fellow Wikipedians that pages need to be updated, etc.), please post at Current events. To suggest featuring well updated articles, please post at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Thanks. -- PFHLai 18:10, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

'founding fathers' link in Federalist no. 10

I think the words 'founding fathers' in today's featured article should link to Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States rather than Founding Fathers, which is a less specific sort of disambiguation article --81.154.236.221 15:17, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Revised as suggested. Thank you, Afterword, for pointing this out. -- PFHLai 17:50, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rhetorical question

What happens if, say, someone publishes a pulitzer-prize winning novel titled "Main Page" and we have to make an article about it? would there have to be a permanent disambig tagline on top of this page saying something like This is Wikipedia's main page. For the novel, please see "main page (novel) Borisblue 20:26, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

good question. The Main Page should properly be at Wikipedia:Main Page, anyway :p The question then becomes, of course, what happens if somebody writes a novel called "Wikipedia:Main Page" (or, if somebody designs a programming language called "WP:V" or something)? dab (ᛏ) 22:13, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing has how Wikipedia is a trademarked name, it'd be rather difficult to publish such a book ;) Raul654 22:20, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wiki and all its complex legal and copyright text such as "NO guarantee" and "anyone can edit". I am sure that NO one could get through all that complex infinite red tape ;-).Voice of AllT|@|ESP 22:23, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you never know. Maybe Jimbo decides to go into the Hollywood business and then launches a "Wikipedia" movie trilogy, one of whose segments being "Main Page". Doesn't sound too far-fetched people!Borisblue 02:36, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sweet! I'll audition for the part of user:Larry Sanger Raul654 02:40, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If I ever start a project that achieves widespread fame, I'll be sure to name it "Main Page" just so this annoyance can be fixed. Thanks for the idea. Fredrik | tc 03:00, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=28846999&oldid=28833620