Misplaced Pages

Talk:Main Page: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:11, 21 June 2009 view sourceJack Merridew (talk | contribs)34,837 edits →Should we add "For technical reasons, # redirects here see number sign": +link offer← Previous edit Latest revision as of 10:47, 21 January 2025 view source TheAstorPastor (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers1,473 edits →Misplaced Pages Birthday: ReplyTag: Reply 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Wikimedia project page for Main Page discussion}}
{{skiptotoctalk}}
{{#ifeq:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|autoconfirmed|{{pp-vandalism|small=yes}}}}<!--

<!--- Please start new discussions at the bottom of this talk page using the NEW SECTION tab, or use the EDIT button beside the section heading to add to it. This "section edit button" and "new section tab" are important, so please use them. --> Please start new discussions at the bottom of this talk page using the "NEW SECTION" tab, or use the "EDIT" link beside the section heading to add to it. The section edit link and "New section" tab are important, so please use them.
] -->{{Talk:Main Page/HelpBox}}
{{#ifeq:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|autoconfirmed|{{pp-vandalism}}}}
{{Talk:Main Page/HelpBox}}
{{Annual readership|title=the Main Page}}
{{Talk:Main Page/Archives}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|counter = 133
|maxarchivesize = 200k
|counter = 208
|minthreadsleft = 1
|algo = old(3d)
|archive = Talk:Main Page/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Talk:Main Page/Archive %(counter)d
|algo = old(3d)
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
}} }}
{{MPH alert}}
{{Talk:Main Page/Archives}}
{{Centralized discussion}}
<div style="right:100px;" class="metadata topicon">'''{{Currentdate}}'''</div>
{{bots|deny=SineBot}} <!-- disable SineBot on this page to make reverts easier per discussion 20/02/2013 ] -->
]
__TOC__
{{clear}}


=Main Page Error Reports= = Main Page error reports =
{{Misplaced Pages:Main Page/Errors}} {{Misplaced Pages:Main Page/Errors}}
<!-- ---------------
Please do not write anything here.
Please go to Misplaced Pages:Main Page/Errors to place an error report.
To discuss the contents of the Main Page, please start a new discussion using the "New section" button above, or use the "" link beside a heading to add to an existing section.
--------------- -->


= General discussion =
<!-- Please leave this stickied at the top of the page, to avoid repeated posts about it
{{Shortcut|T:MP|WT:MP}}
=How to remove the donation notice=

'''Logged-in users''': Go to 'my preferences', select the 'Gadgets' tab, check the box labelled 'Suppress display of the fundraiser site notice', click 'Save', then bypass your browser cache (Ctrl + F5 on Internet Explorer, Ctrl + Shift + R on Firefox) to see changes.

'''Not logged in''': ] (this takes very little time, all you have to do is pick a username and password), then follow the above instructions. It is beyond the control of the English language Misplaced Pages to remove the donation notice for users not logged in. Alternatively disabling javascript may be used to prevent the article from being displayed, although this may affect other script based browsing.

-->

=General discussion=
{{Shortcut|T:MP}}
__TOC__
<!-- --------------- <!-- ---------------
Please start new discussion at the bottom of this talk page, or use the EDIT button beside the section heading to add to it. The edit button is important, so have the courtesy to use it. Please *start* a new discussion at the bottom of this talk page (e.g. using the "New section" button above), or use the "" link beside a heading to add to an existing section.
------------------ --> ---------------- -->
==Usability and discoverability==

I would expect the main page of the encyclopedia to prominently feature both a table of contents and a search feature. This page has a lot of trivia, which is a nice secondary function, but no longer seems to serve its primary functions very well. It does have a search feature, but it's a small icon up at the top in a bar of icons, rather than being front and center and already open with a box to type in words (in the style of a search engine, like ).
== Bulgaria bus accident ==

: ''Moved to ]''

== When the Iranian Elections are over ==

How are we going ot handle that... I know this shoudl be in at ITN... but it'll spill over here so yah... Just wondering because theres going to be so much surrounding when that guy is announced the winner.--] (]) 04:42, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

No massive arguments on here so far.....] (]) 11:04, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps it should say "incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad" rather than just "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad"? -] (]) 12:14, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
:Fixed. --] (]) 12:19, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
::We could always say it is not accepted... since thatas what it is--] (]) 12:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
:::No need to go into opinions and what who thinks what of what on the main page. It's a single title to announce the main update to the article- in this case, the fact that Ahmadinejad won the election. ] (]) 17:07, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
::::So they say.--] (]) 18:33, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::Yes the Iranian election commission says that Ahmadinejad won and that is precisely what our tagline says as well - ] (]) 19:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
::::::Those rioters... a number of news outelts and many others disagree with the,--] (]) 20:02, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Yes they do, but the point that I was trying to make was that we don't simply state that he won but it just says that the election commission says that he won. That way we avoid any possible POV statements, if it later turns out to be electoral fraud then the tagline can be changed (it would be much worse if we insinuated that it was not a legitimate election and it turned out that there was nothing wrong about it) - ] (]) 20:14, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
::::::::We're already being a little suspicious of them. Normally, we would just state who won, not say who said who won. ] (]) 21:13, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

* Given how hotly contested things appear to be, perhaps it would be more NPOV not to have Misplaced Pages annonce that Ahmadinejad won, but rather simply state that the Islamic Republic News Agency has declared that Ahmadinejad won.
::The current blurb mentions protests and allegations. I would say that is NPOV enough. --] (]) 10:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
::: So Misplaced Pages knows that the results announce by Khamenei and the Islamic Republic News Agency are accurate, and the demonstrators are wrong and the allegations of fraud are false? Misplaced Pages has first hand knowledge of this? If not, Misplaced Pages should report that so and so announced such a thing, not that such a thing is the fact. -- ] (]) 00:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
::::We don't declare the winners, the electoral commission does. What they say is as good as right until it is proven wrong. ] (]) 20:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::In that case, Misplaced Pages should say that the electoral commission has announced such and such a result. -- ] (]) 22:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

== Untastefull ==

I find the choice for today's featured article inappropriate. I personally do not want to read about thermometers in rectums. If I would want, I'd look up a page likely to contain these elements. But I disliked having it pushed into my face by putting it on the main page. ] (]) 18:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
:Are you really comparing ] to a rectal thermometer? <span style="font-family:Verdana; ">''']''' <small>{]}</small></span> 18:28, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

See ] ] <small>]</small> 18:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
: What does that have to do with anything? I did not say these words should not be in an article (the subject of ]). I said that this article should perhaps not have been chosen for the main page. ] (]) 18:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Bit harsh on David Morse that isnt it? Comparing him to a rectal thermometer! He's not my favourite man either but still, steady on!] (]) 18:45, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

: O, would you all please be serious! :) ] (]) 18:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
: putting him inside someone's rectum to take temperature... *shrugs* that is one disturbing image ] (]) 19:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
::I do hate to be pedantic (...nah who am I kidding!), but I think the correct word you were looking for, to describe the article in question, was distasteful --] (]) 19:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
::: That's right. That must have been because of those few percents I fell short of the full 100 on my final exams. :) ] (]) 19:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Please God tell me this is a joke... ''']''' 19:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
:No, if it was a joke, it would go, "What's wrong with him, nurse?" "He's got a thermometer up his ass, doctor." "Eh, that's rectum, nurse." "Rectum? Damn near killed him."<ref>http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Rectum%2C%20damn%20near%20killed%20him!</ref> ] (]) 20:08, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
::Hmmm.. I'm going to give that 6/10. I had to deduct marks because is was quite obviously not original work --] (]) 20:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
::: And please keep G-d out of any discussion involving thermometers, recta, ''and'' David Morse. :) ] (]) 20:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

6/10! Thats a bit harsh isnt it? OK its not the best joke in the world but come on! A 7 perphaps? It might not seem very different but there is a definite phsycological effect. If you give him a 7 your encouraging him to try again, if you give him a 6 you're letting him down gently!] (]) 20:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

::::A doctor is shopping. He's at the check-out, and needs to sign the check. He pulls his pen from his pocket, only to find it's a rectal thermometer. "That's just great" he says, "some asshole's got my pen." ] (]) 21:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me Daviessimo, but on Misplaced Pages we must be consistent. No original research, remember? That goes for jokes too, surely? ;) ] (]) 22:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
::Well can you cite a reliable source for that joke? --] (]) 06:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I am seriously considering to remove all jokes from this post. ;) You are clouding the subject. ] (]) 01:38, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

:I like the second one. Bravo 82.33.48.96. --<font face="serif">]]]]</font> 01:51, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes the second one is better. I give that an 8 out of 10. I wasnt roaring with laughter but it was funny nevertheless!. Also who put "citation needed" at the end of Michael of Lucan's joke! I mean come on!] (]) 09:25, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
:He brought the issue to my attention. I'm afraid that per ] it needs to be referenced or I will have to remove it. The key issue here is that he has to prove that this isn't a case of his own first hand experience with rectal thermometers :) --] (]) 10:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

::As the CEO of Rectum PLC I can confirm that this customer satisfaction story is published on our website. Cheers, ]<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 10:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)<small>Warning! Previous sentence may be untrue!</small>

My deepest apologies, Daviessimo. Cite is http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Rectum%2C%20damn%20near%20killed%20him! ] (]) 10:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
:Ah, thats much better --] (]) 11:20, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
::Do I get 7/10 now? ] (]) 11:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
:::Yes you do --] (]) 12:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

::::I'd give him both 8 and 2. 8 for the actual joke but 2 for the theft. --<font face="serif">]]]]</font> 17:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Bit harsh on him that isnt it? Im not a fan of people who steal jokes but still! 2 for crying out loud!] (]) 21:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

:The content of the joke is a serious matter however. Points must be deducted when the subject matter involves the insertion of long, cold, hard items of various misuse into the rectum. It may be the typical chatter of doctors over their elevenses but many talk page browsers might rather not be reminded. We must remember these when we talk among ourselves - look at them all, cowering in the corner, haunted by... oh, one of them has just fainted... --<font face="serif">]]]]</font> 21:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I am never going to see a doctor again!!!] (]) 21:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
:That won't do! If it spreads you'll put them all out of business! I don't want to have to give my precious pennies and cents to homeless street doctors! --<font face="serif">]]]]</font> 22:56, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
When you get to be my age, '''' you will realise that jokes are like sex positions - there are no new ones. Only new people who have not yet experienced them ... and in each case a lot of groaning and some laughter. :0 ] (]) 09:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:Is the implication of that statement that doctors have been placing rectal thermometers in unsuspecting patient's 'nether regions' for thousands of years? --] (]) 10:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:: We of the Illuminati have been doing this for thousands of years. Recently, we have begun to use Illuminati-trained "doctors" and "nurses" to implement our plans. ] (]) 12:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:::I'm sorry, from habit I added the usual fnords to my previous message. Can you see it now? ] (]) 16:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:: It was really tough back when all they had were ]s. ] (]) 18:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
::::OMG I CAN SEE THE FNORDS!! <span style="font-family:Verdana; ">''']''' <small>{]}</small></span> 21:44, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
::: And you remember that? --<font face="serif">]]]]</font> 19:25, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Typical Galileo, stealing everybody's ideas! That was mine! It should be the Willski thermometer! I remember people would complain quite a lot back in the day but i said to them, "If you think this is bad you should just wait until they get them rectal thermometers." At that point they would normally shudder and stop complaining....] (]) 19:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:I was worried reading up to this point that the Willski thermometer '''was''' used for testing rectal temperature, but thankfully, it does not appear so.] (]) 20:55, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

No no, although i was asked to make a rectal thermometer i declined to be a part of such a horrific creation.] (]) 16:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

;References
{{reflist}}

== Battle of Quatre Bras ==

I think the phrase "strategic victory" is wrong in describing the Battle of Quatre Bras. The battle was a tactical victory for the French forces, but had no strategic significance because it was simply a preparation for the Battle of Waterloo, which they lost. Quatre Bras did not succeed in splitting the British and Prussian forces in a way which would have allowed Napoleon to defeat the separately, since Prussian troops arrived at Waterloo in time to decide the outcome.
] (]) 04:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
:This is not an area in which I specialise, but I would question your view. On the face of it, it is correct to call it a strategic victory, not merely a local tactical affair. It had a positive impact on the progress of a wider campaign, as the French had intended. That wider campaign failed to carry through Bonaparte's strategic intent, as ultimately the opposing armies were not separated and destroyed as planned. However, it is reasonable to call Quatre Bras itself a strategic victory, since it achieved its strategic purpose. ] (]) 12:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
::In any case, this is irrelevant for the main page as ] says it's a "French strategic victory". If you dispute this, you should take it to the article since the main page always defers to articles. ] (]) 17:05, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
:::Oops, I meant to make that point first, before commenting. ] (]) 17:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
::::Don't listen to him - <small>(he steals jokes)</small> Hush! --<font face="serif">]]]]</font> 21:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::What you mean because I had the 'strategic victory' in this discussion? ] (]) 06:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

== Anyone can edit ==

There are two pages that I believe should never be protected. ], and ]. Why? To encourage participation. What fun is it to have the two pages everyone looks at first be protected? How about utilizing the form of protection used on ], where the page can be edited but not the content, and use a bot to clear out all edits? ] (]) 06:25, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:As the most visible and highly visited page on Misplaced Pages, the Main Page is permanently protected as a result of excessive repeated ]. The other reason is that it keeps our welcome mat clean so it gives new users a decent looking impression &ndash; free from any shock-value word, phrase or image that would offend almost every person in the English-speaking world. Without protection, it would be safe to say it would be vandalised at a high exponentially rate of speed that it would be realistically impossible for any bot to keep up.

:As for the ] article, it is only ] for reasons you should ask the protecting administrator or ask at ] as outlined at ]. ] (]) 11:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
::There are 86,400 seconds in the day and on the the Misplaced Pages article was viewed 49,600 times, or once every 1.7 seconds. Which means that it is a high profile target for vandals, and although the slogan is "Anyone can edit" that comes with a few caveats, one of which is that if a page is being viewed every 1.7 seconds we would be fools to open that page up to vandals. ] (]) 14:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
:::It seems like more and more pages are being protected. I'm sure we can all agree on the majority of these protections, but it seems like more pages are being protected than should be. Also it seems like some of these pages were discussed to be protected for a shirt period, yet end up protected for a much longer period.] (]) 22:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
:::If it seems like more pages are being protected it is because more people are vandalising pages and reverted vandalism all day stops editors from being able to make good contributions. ] (]) 11:53, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
::::This is not the place for a discussion of Misplaced Pages's protection policy. Try ]. ] 22:09, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

== On This Day ==

How could we have left out ''the arrest of five men for breaking and entering into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Office complex in Washington, D.C. on June 17, 1972'' — the beginning of the ]?

] (]) 17:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
:Probably because the featured picture is somewhat related, and we love to trick users into asking exactly this question. Today though, it is especially silly. A picture of the president who pardoned the president who covered up watergate is obviously not the original break in. (also before anyone points out US bias or something, i'd like to call into question the bridges of london theme the main page has today)] (]) 17:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

::The image was clearly connected to Watergate, was almost definitely specifically chosen to appear yesterday for that reason and had ample links to learn more, including specific mention of the date "June 17, 1972". So, no it's not silly to exclude Watergate from SA/OTD for that reason. And this has absolutely nothing to do with any bias but simply common sense. Besides that, your answer actually highlights how silly this discussion is. There are lots of days which have some connection to Watergate. The most important is probably the resignation of Nixon. There is no need to mention every single one on the main page every year. This discussion is even sillier then the previous one regarding D-day because there's no way Watergate is even close in importance to D-day. I don't know what 'bridges of London theme' your referring to yesterday, while I haven't looked into the history of DYK or ITN I only see evidence for one mention of bridges of London specifically in the TFA. If you are saying one mention is a 'theme', well I have nothing more to say ] (]) 06:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
:::Besides, Nixon's resignation will make its appearance on ]. Watergate gets two major placements on the Main Page this year. <span style="font-family:Verdana; ">''']''' <small>{]}</small></span> 06:57, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
::::Sorry, I didn't mean for the theme thing to be taken seriously (the second mention was that banker who got hung off the blackfriars bridge). I also agree that since Watergate was the bolded link in the featured picture it should not have been included in OTD, I just meant that it took a couple steps to get from a picture of Ford to the actual break in, so I could see people being confused. Sorry again, ] (]) 14:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::I know, it was a bit convoluted, but ]'s POTD (the anniversary of the pardon) was already reserved for another anniversary. <span style="font-family:Verdana; ">''']''' <small>{]}</small></span> 16:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

:On this day items are not chosen strictly based on their importance. Like Today's Featured Articles they are chosen more for variety. ] (]) 18:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

::::Oh. ] (]) 13:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

== Why can't I edit? ==

Why can't I edit the main page?{{unsigned|Nazareee|17:33, June 17, 2009 (UTC)}}

: The main page is edit-protected to prevent ] of such an important page. Only administrators my edit it. If you want to report an error or request a change that can be done on this page. ] (]) 18:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

:: I would think that you would easily be able to revert any vandalism. I'm sure there are thousands of users watchlisting this page (and even more would if the protection was removed). Doesn't it defeat the purpose of a wiki protecting nearly every page? I'm not saying the main page needs to be unprotected necessarily (perhaps semi-protection?), but it seems like a good quarter or so of the pages I view are protected. ] (]) 03:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

:::Editors have better things to do than revert constant vandalism which is exactly what you'd expect on such a page. ]<sub>&nbsp;]·]</sub> 03:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
:::{{ec}} No, absolutely not. ] receives, on average, 70 page-views per ''second''. It is unacceptable if even one of those people sees a ], because that's what would be there. A lot. ]]] 03:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
::::Really, that better? Yeah, I guess that makes sense. But isn't there some kind of thing that could be done to get edits approved perhaps? Some kind of software update could make it possible to make edits but not have them appear until an administrator approves them.] (]) 06:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
:::::See ] which currently has approval for a trial, which is being worked on at the moment. I'm not sure if the main page is likely to be in the trial however. (Actually I'm not that sure what happened to the trial period, the whole situation has been somewhat diverse and looking at the talk pages, it looks ike the issue has been somewhat dead for a while unless there is discussion somewhere else). Bear in mind as well that the main page is compromised of several templates unless you actually have some experience with[REDACTED] it is unlikely you'd know how to edit it. Also other then for obvious errors, the vast majority of changes to the main page require some discussion or evidence of consensus first. In other words, it's not just vandals we have to worry about. ] (]) 06:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
::::::Actually I see it's already been requested and developers will implement it when they get to it ] (]) 07:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Until Vandalismopedia is created, to which all such idiots can be banished to operate on perpetual iterative loops, and the wiki that is described by Adam Smith's 'war of all against all, where life is nasty, brutish and short' (paraphrase) where there are constant edit wars, some pages will have to be protected at various levels. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:I can't think of a good reason why anyone without current access to edit it would, in fact, need to edit it. ] (]) 11:26, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
::Well there are various people with arguably sufficient experience with ITN (probably other areas too but I don't know) to be able to contribute constructively but who are not admins and there are definitely complaints of a lack of admin attention in some instances that I've seen ] (]) 15:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
:::Speaking of ITN - bit of help anyone? It's a bit dead over there for a weekend. --<font face="serif">]]]]</font> 04:15, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

== Euclidean algorithm on todays main page ==

I saw POV in the first line "is an efficient way" that shouldnt be on the main page surely? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 11:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: Why not, it is an efficient way, this is something people have been learning for ages. No POV here. --''']''' 11:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

::The efficiency of an algorithm is demonstrable, not a matter of opinion. —] <small>(] • ])</small> 13:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

== HELP ME ==

AND NONE OF YOU DELETE THIS
I'M SICK OF WAITING
SOMEONE TELL ME WHY WON'T LEAVE ME ALONE
I DEMAND AN EXPLANAITION
PLEASE HELP IN OTHER WORDS
THERE IS A STALKER ON[REDACTED]

] (]) 15:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
:You should probably raise this at ] (deals with incivility) or ] (deals with serious incidents). Wherever you raise it, you should provide examples - I took a quick look at your talk page, and the revision history of some recent articles you've edited, and I couldn't see anything obvious so you should, where possible, explain exactly what's happening and ideally provide ]. Good luck! Cheers, ]<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 15:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

SHOUTING doesn't help, it's just rude. And rudeness is also quite rude. And I'm removing the name from your post. --] (]) 16:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

:Maybe it's the same person who tried to assassinate you in ]? --] <sup>(] . ])</sup> 02:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

== Did You Know... ==

... that there is no mention in the ] article of the current lead regarding "Charlotte of Belgium (pictured) reigned as Empress of Mexico starting in 1864"? ] (]) 15:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
:<strike>That sounds like an issue for ] --] (]) 15:41, 18 June 2009 (UTC)</strike><small>Ah, no it doesn't</small>
:{{ec}} So what? It mentions ]; why should it mention his wife? ] 15:43, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
::The bolded article is ], not ]. --] (]) 15:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
If that had been an error, it would have been an issue for ]. --] (]) 16:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

== Should we add "For technical reasons, # redirects here see ]" ==

Mabey we should add {{dablink|For technical reasons, # redirects here. For the article on # see ]}}

Adding that would let people who search for # get to the correct article. On the other hand we may want to keep the main page "clean". It '''will''' result in vandalism to "number sign" article, and likely ]. But by the same token, '''probably will''' result in major improvements to ], and thus, '''arguably''', more then make up for vandalism/protection.--] (]) 09:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

:We didn't do it for ], we shouldn't do it for ]. ''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 12:34, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


It's a bit weird we visibly link to ], but the only link to ] (which is important enough it's linked to from every page on the site) is hidden behind the pancake menu icon in the upper left. We do have templates like ] that could be used directly on this page as a better gateway to actual articles, for those that are curious but don't have any particular query in mind or are looking for inspiration. ] (]) 20:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
::To be fair though, %s is a lot more obscure then # ] (]) 14:22, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


:Agree about the trivia, but remember opinions here come from the trivia writers. Last time I looked at portal usage statistics, it looks like a few people click to see what they are, and most of them don't click anything further. ] (]) 03:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
::Was there a discussion about %s? If so , please link to it. I did not find one.--] (]) 09:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
::: See here: <span class="plainlinks"></span>, Emmette. ]? Cheers, ] 11:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
But it would be worth dropping the developers a note could they do something about the search box pointing to the Main Page if you enter "#". This is confusing. --] <small>]</small> 13:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


:This appears to be an objection to the ], not the contents of ] itself. The default skins on desktop and mobile both have a large search box or icon right at the top of every page. The desktop skin also has a link to ] in the menu shown on every single page. If you don't like the way that requires opening the menu before that link is visible, I suggest you bring it up on an appropriate talk page for the skin (perhaps ]) or at the ]. ] ] 14:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
== Greenland ==
::Yes, I'm objecting to the fact that the primary functions of the main page are hidden in a menu and in an icon rather than being directly on - if not the most prominent things on - the page.
::Wouldn't changing the skin change ''all'' pages? That seems like the wrong answer, since it wouldn't make sense to put the Contents listing on every page, nor would it make sense to have an open search bar on every page. Unlike the main page, I would expect the primary means of navigation to be clicking on links to related articles, as opposed to browsing through topics. (Search is sort of intermediate on those pages, so an icon seems like a good compromise.) -- ] (]) 21:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
::I see no reason why we can't have in the top box "Welcome to Misplaced Pages" a visually predominant search bar. Doesn't touch the skin. ] (]) 22:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I have whipped up a search box at ]. How does that look? -- ] (]) 01:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::::I like your idea but your design makes the page header (including the recently added editor count) take up 30% of content height on my display, with about 50% of that header wasted grey emptiness. Some smarter (responsive) design will be needed. ] (]) 10:07, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::How about moving the "Other areas of Misplaced Pages" into that box to fill some of that space?--] (]) (]) 14:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::Is that list considered more or less important than the featured content and news sections? -- ] (]) 16:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::What is the size of your display? Desktop or mobile? -- ] (]) 16:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::@Beland: large tablet, laptop and phone; it's the first which was problematic, but that's not the point. Good design will accommodate varying display sizes and orientation so as to maximise usage of space and readability. ] (]) 19:28, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::I'm familiar with responsive design; I just wasn't seeing what you were describing and needed to know how to replicate it. I do see what you are saying when I view the site in landscape orientation; my desktop monitor and phone are both portrait. I will try a flex container layout which will make better use of the space. -- ] (]) 01:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
::::::::I have finished with the flex upgrade; the contents of the welcome banner should now adjust to screen size. The text input box will overflow its container at higher zoom levels, but I ''think'' this is a problem in the skin CSS or the implementation of the extension, which could affect other pages. (If so, it would be worth fixing site-wide rather than just for this page.) How does that look to y'all? -- ] (]) 03:45, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::Much better, thanks. ] (]) 09:37, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
:Can you describe what you would expect in a table of contents for the site? I'm struggling to see how it would work. --] (]) (]) 14:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::Above, I suggested using ]. -- ] (]) 16:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::Probably similar to the that had the list of major portals at the top? That's kind of a table of contents. I think as close as you could get, anyway. ] (]) 20:00, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:::That raises an interesting question: the old layout links to portals like ], but the modern navbar links to contents pages like ]. I'm assuming the contents pages are more appropriate than the portal pages? IIRC there was an attempt to drop portals from the project entirely (partly because they weren't being maintained?), and perhaps they were removed from the main page for some reason related to that? -- ] (]) 01:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
:I'm quite surprised this functionality hasn't already been implemented. Before I started editing, I never used the main page for exactly this reason. Now I check it every day because of the trivia. I feel like a sort of MSN-style layout would be the best of both worlds (and I recognize this is exactly what is proposed, just wanted to say I support it wholeheartedly). ] (]/]) 22:40, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
{{outdent}}
I have added a list of topics and link to ] under the prominent search bar. I decided to go with only a single line, because having two lines word-wrap makes things a bit confusing. I did discover "text-wrap: balance;" can actually make wrapped lines the same length, which looks nicer, so if people are missing the links to outlines, portals, etc. I can put that in, too. How does it look now to everyone? -- ] (]) 03:17, 19 January 2025 (UTC)


*The OP makes a good point. See to compare. What I notice is:
"Greenland (flag pictured) becomes a self-ruling country, taking control of its judicial affairs, policing and natural resources, as approved by the 2008 referendum."
:* Top left is an Explore button which leads to a menu of topics
:Yes, but its foreign affairs, etc are still handled by Denmark. Greenland is not (at this point) an independent country yet. --]] 08:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
:* There's a big search bar top and centre
::So what? A "self-ruling country" doesn't mean that it is an independent country. --] (]) 08:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
:* There's then an ''Ask the Chatbot'' option followed by
:::Okay, but there's nothing wrong with the statement. It doesn't contradict what you say in anyw way. If you think there could be a better wording, try posting at ] ] (]) 08:50, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
:* A series of portal headings: Games & Quizzes; History & Society; Science & Tech; Biographies; Animals & Nature; Geography & Travel; Arts & Culture; ...
::::Whoops. Hadn't realised there was a reply already. ] (]) 08:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
:It then gets into specific sample topics which have a respectable ] tone -- Martin Luther King and past Presidential inaugurations.
:::::If the term is , it is good enough for Misplaced Pages --] (]) 08:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
:]🐉(]) 11:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:@] Looks good, and brings back some useful features which I recall being removed in the past. Don't assume you have only one line: narrowing the window produces two (or more). They align themselves fine, but the initial {{xt|'''Contents:'''}} jars; dump the colon. Also, for accessibility, the list (including '''Contents''') should be a ] (custom-styled if need be), not a set of words separated by interpuncts. ] (]) 13:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::Sorry I wasn't clear; by "two lines" I really meant two ''lists'' - the "Overviews, Outlines..." list and the "Reference, Culture..." list - which are one line each (only) when the screen is wide. I dropped the former because having both of those line-wrapping into multiple lines seemed weird. I made the line-wrapping for "Reference, Culture..." look nice by adding "text-wrap: balance;" to the CSS.
::I initially didn't use {{tl|hlist}} because I wanted the colon in "Contents:", because it's not a member of that list; it's essentially a title for that list. Or at least that's the logic I see in it. But I've dropped the colon and converted to an hlist with custom styling as you suggested anyway. How does that look now? Do you miss the "Overviews, Outlines..." list? -- ] (]) 00:26, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:::@]: This is good stuff. I try (not always successfully) and consider stuff from a naïve reader's point of view. If I know what I want to read about, then I can use the search box(es); if I'm not too sure but know roughly what discipline is involved I can use the headline topics; if I've no real idea or just want to have a browse I can click Contents. ] (]) 10:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
::::@]: I forgot to answer your question: no, I don't miss Outlines etc. Too mechanical for the main page, and is just a click away anyway. ] (]) 10:40, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
:The contents menu looks good. The search bar looks ok by itself but it might look odd in the final display as you'd have two similar search bars quite close to each other at the top of the page -- the one that you've added and the standard one in the header which always appears. ]🐉(]) 09:57, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
*I'm not really sure what problem the proposed changes here are addressing... when I load the main page I see a prominent search bar right at the top, this is what I usually use to find topics and seems adequate for the purpose... unless I've adjusted my skin somewhere and this isn't the default view? As for "Contents", absolutely not. We've spent years painstakingly eliminating the clutter of having "Portals" on the main page, which nobody ever clicks, and now we want to bring back something similar just rebranded as "Contents"? As Art LaPella says above, nobody uses that feature anyway and it's sort of reminiscent of the long-gone days of ] when people navigated the web by looking things up in an index. Those days are long long gone, and the vast majority of navigation to our pages takes places through search (mostly Google and some internal searching) and possibly direct wikilinks these days. &nbsp;&mdash;&nbsp;] (]) 10:41, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
*:Turns out most people don't see the skin's search bar at the top, but you do see it if you are on a desktop device with a wide screen. Having a narrower screen (like my desktop, and any mobile device, which is the majority of readers) causes it to hide behind an icon. You can see this happen if you narrow your browser window.
*:I don't think any of the trivia below the welcome bar actually helps anyone find something they were looking for, either; it's there for people who aren't looking for anything in particular, or distracts them if they were in fact looking for something specific. If the only thing the vast majority of people actually need is a search bar, that leaves plenty of other real estate we might as well fill with things only a small minority use? I don't think of the Contents pages as actually being a comprehensive directory that will get you somewhere, but more as a sampling to show what sort of stuff Misplaced Pages knows about, for people who aren't yet familiar with the site. -- ] (]) 16:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)


== Misplaced Pages Birthday ==
== Can we believe Misplaced Pages ==
Mr. Wen said that Misplaced Pages's articles sometimes are unbelievable. The reason is that everyone can edit or alter an article.


Since it is Misplaced Pages's birthday, shouldn't we add that to the "On this day" page? ] (]) 19:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
So rediculus! I don't think so, how do you think? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 10:29, 21 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:It's a bit late to suggest that, don't you think? It's now the 16th of January in some countries. ] (]) 19:47, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:You could start by telling us who exactly the mysterious Mr. Wen is... --<font face="serif">]]]]</font> 10:36, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
:] lists Misplaced Pages's anniversary as ineligible (in the collapsed staging area) because the ] article is outdated and its inclusion would be ]. ] (]) 23:33, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
:I agree but it's too late for this year. Let's set it up for next year. ]🐉(]) 19:19, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::If we don't celebrate Misplaced Pages's 25th birthday in a different way on the Main Page next year, a mention in OTD would make sense. —] (]) 20:24, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I think we should reserve Jan. 15 every year for either a Misplaced Pages-themed Main Page, or some custom message like stats on what we've accomplished in the last <math>n</math> years. The Main Page is not an article, and we're allowed to be self-referential, and I think once a year we've earned that. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- ]</span><sup class="nowrap">&#91;]]</sup> <small>(])</small> 20:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Put a hat on the globe? ] (]) 23:52, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
:::Maybe a banner listing 25 years of accomplishments—next birthday ? ] (]) 10:47, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 10:47, 21 January 2025

Wikimedia project page for Main Page discussion
↓↓Skip header
Welcome! This page is for discussing the contents of the English Misplaced Pages's Main Page.
For general questions unrelated to the Main Page, please visit the Teahouse or check the links below.
To add content to an article, edit that article's page.
Irrelevant posts on this page may be removed.
Click here to report errors on the Main Page.

If you have a question related to the Main Page, please search the talk page archives first to check if it has previously been addressed:


For questions about using and contributing to the English Misplaced Pages: To suggest content for a Main Page section:
Main Page and featured content
Main Page topics
Today's featured article
Featured articles
Did you know...
In the news
Current events portal
Selected anniversaries
Today's featured list
Featured lists
Picture of the day
Featured pictures
Featured topics
Page semi-protectedEditing of this page by new or unregistered users is currently disabled due to vandalism.
See the protection policy and protection log for more details. If you cannot edit this page and you wish to make a change, you can request unprotection, log in, or create an account.
Archives: Sections of this page older than three days are automatically relocated to the newest archive.

001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019 020 021 022 023 024 025 026 027 028 029 030 031 032 033 034 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 044 045 046 047 048 049 050 051 052 053 054 055 056 057 058 059 060 061 062 063 064 065 066 067 068 069 070 071 072 073 074 075 076 077 078 079 080 081 082 083 084 085 086 087 088 089 090 091 092 093 094 095 096 097 098 099 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208

Centralized discussion
Village pumps
policy
tech
proposals
idea lab
WMF
misc
For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

Main Page error reports

Wikimedia project page for Main Page error reporting Shortcuts
National variations of the English language have been extensively discussed previously: Refer to the relevant style guide on national varieties of English and see a comparison of American and British English.

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

Main Page toolbox
Yesterday
January 21 		Today
January 22, 2025 		Tomorrow
January 23
TFA TFA TFA
SA/OTD SA/OTD SA/OTD
POTD Main Page v. POTD Main Page v. POTD Main Page v.
POTD regular v. POTD regular v. POTD regular v.
Today's featured list: submissions
In the news
candidates
discussion
admin instructions
Did you know
nominations
discussion
queue
BotErrors
Protected pages
Commons media protection
Associated
  • 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 17:56 on 22 January 2025) 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)

Today's FA

Tomorrow's FA

Day-after-tomorrow's FA

Errors with "In the news"

The number killed in Catatumbo is erroneous. The figure of 100 comes from France 24 but that is reporting "across three Colombian departments -- from the remote Amazon jungle in the south to the mountainous northeastern border with Venezuela". The breakdown seems to be 80 in the north and 20 in the south so 80+20=100. But these numbers seem to be rough estimates because these regions are quite wild. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Our article doesn't mention attacks outside of the Catatumbo region. Secretlondon (talk) 13:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
The lead of the article is inaccurate as it misrepresents the sources. It also doesn't explain who was attacked and why. This is not a quality article. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:03, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Current DYK

  • "... that the flag of Mozambique ... is the only national flag to feature a modern firearm". Is the word "modern" necessary? Is there any national flag that features a non-modern firearm? (Swords aren't firearms.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Next DYK

Next-but-one DYK

Errors in "On this day"

Today's OTD

Tomorrow's OTD

Day-after-tomorrow's OTD

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(January 24)

Monday's FL

(January 27)

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.

Today's POTD

Tomorrow's POTD

Amakuru removed View from the Window at Le Gras (File:Untitled (point de vue), Niépce 1827 — HRC 2020 (cropped).jpg) from Template:POTD/2025-01-23, and I replaced it with File:Garlic bulbs and cloves.jpg; however, both of us missed that the protected version had already been manually created for some reason. Can someone replace the protected version with the new garlic POTD? Jay8g 00:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

@Jay8g: ooh, good spot, thank you.  Fixed.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)


General discussion

Shortcuts

Usability and discoverability

I would expect the main page of the encyclopedia to prominently feature both a table of contents and a search feature. This page has a lot of trivia, which is a nice secondary function, but no longer seems to serve its primary functions very well. It does have a search feature, but it's a small icon up at the top in a bar of icons, rather than being front and center and already open with a box to type in words (in the style of a search engine, like ).

It's a bit weird we visibly link to Misplaced Pages:Contents/Portals, but the only link to Misplaced Pages:Contents (which is important enough it's linked to from every page on the site) is hidden behind the pancake menu icon in the upper left. We do have templates like Misplaced Pages:Contents/TOC navbar that could be used directly on this page as a better gateway to actual articles, for those that are curious but don't have any particular query in mind or are looking for inspiration. Beland (talk) 20:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Agree about the trivia, but remember opinions here come from the trivia writers. Last time I looked at portal usage statistics, it looks like a few people click to see what they are, and most of them don't click anything further. Art LaPella (talk) 03:55, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
This appears to be an objection to the WP:SKIN, not the contents of Main Page itself. The default skins on desktop and mobile both have a large search box or icon right at the top of every page. The desktop skin also has a link to Misplaced Pages:Contents in the menu shown on every single page. If you don't like the way that requires opening the menu before that link is visible, I suggest you bring it up on an appropriate talk page for the skin (perhaps Misplaced Pages talk:Vector 2022) or at the village pump. Modest Genius 14:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Yes, I'm objecting to the fact that the primary functions of the main page are hidden in a menu and in an icon rather than being directly on - if not the most prominent things on - the page.
Wouldn't changing the skin change all pages? That seems like the wrong answer, since it wouldn't make sense to put the Contents listing on every page, nor would it make sense to have an open search bar on every page. Unlike the main page, I would expect the primary means of navigation to be clicking on links to related articles, as opposed to browsing through topics. (Search is sort of intermediate on those pages, so an icon seems like a good compromise.) -- Beland (talk) 21:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
I see no reason why we can't have in the top box "Welcome to Misplaced Pages" a visually predominant search bar. Doesn't touch the skin. Masem (t) 22:31, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
I have whipped up a search box at Misplaced Pages:Main Page/sandbox. How does that look? -- Beland (talk) 01:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
I like your idea but your design makes the page header (including the recently added editor count) take up 30% of content height on my display, with about 50% of that header wasted grey emptiness. Some smarter (responsive) design will be needed. Bazza 7 (talk) 10:07, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
How about moving the "Other areas of Misplaced Pages" into that box to fill some of that space?--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:32, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Is that list considered more or less important than the featured content and news sections? -- Beland (talk) 16:19, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
What is the size of your display? Desktop or mobile? -- Beland (talk) 16:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
@Beland: large tablet, laptop and phone; it's the first which was problematic, but that's not the point. Good design will accommodate varying display sizes and orientation so as to maximise usage of space and readability. Bazza 7 (talk) 19:28, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm familiar with responsive design; I just wasn't seeing what you were describing and needed to know how to replicate it. I do see what you are saying when I view the site in landscape orientation; my desktop monitor and phone are both portrait. I will try a flex container layout which will make better use of the space. -- Beland (talk) 01:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
I have finished with the flex upgrade; the contents of the welcome banner should now adjust to screen size. The text input box will overflow its container at higher zoom levels, but I think this is a problem in the skin CSS or the implementation of the extension, which could affect other pages. (If so, it would be worth fixing site-wide rather than just for this page.) How does that look to y'all? -- Beland (talk) 03:45, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Much better, thanks. Bazza 7 (talk) 09:37, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
Can you describe what you would expect in a table of contents for the site? I'm struggling to see how it would work. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 14:34, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Above, I suggested using Misplaced Pages:Contents/TOC navbar. -- Beland (talk) 16:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Probably similar to the old layout that had the list of major portals at the top? That's kind of a table of contents. I think as close as you could get, anyway. ApLundell (talk) 20:00, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
That raises an interesting question: the old layout links to portals like Portal:Mathematics, but the modern navbar links to contents pages like Misplaced Pages:Contents/Mathematics and logic. I'm assuming the contents pages are more appropriate than the portal pages? IIRC there was an attempt to drop portals from the project entirely (partly because they weren't being maintained?), and perhaps they were removed from the main page for some reason related to that? -- Beland (talk) 01:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm quite surprised this functionality hasn't already been implemented. Before I started editing, I never used the main page for exactly this reason. Now I check it every day because of the trivia. I feel like a sort of MSN-style layout would be the best of both worlds (and I recognize this is exactly what is proposed, just wanted to say I support it wholeheartedly). /home/gracen/ (they/them) 22:40, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

I have added a list of topics and link to Misplaced Pages:Contents under the prominent search bar. I decided to go with only a single line, because having two lines word-wrap makes things a bit confusing. I did discover "text-wrap: balance;" can actually make wrapped lines the same length, which looks nicer, so if people are missing the links to outlines, portals, etc. I can put that in, too. How does it look now to everyone? -- Beland (talk) 03:17, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

  • The OP makes a good point. See Britannica to compare. What I notice is:
  • Top left is an Explore button which leads to a menu of topics
  • There's a big search bar top and centre
  • There's then an Ask the Chatbot option followed by
  • A series of portal headings: Games & Quizzes; History & Society; Science & Tech; Biographies; Animals & Nature; Geography & Travel; Arts & Culture; ...
It then gets into specific sample topics which have a respectable OTD tone -- Martin Luther King and past Presidential inaugurations.
Andrew🐉(talk) 11:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
@Beland Looks good, and brings back some useful features which I recall being removed in the past. Don't assume you have only one line: narrowing the window produces two (or more). They align themselves fine, but the initial Contents: jars; dump the colon. Also, for accessibility, the list (including Contents) should be a proper list (custom-styled if need be), not a set of words separated by interpuncts. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Sorry I wasn't clear; by "two lines" I really meant two lists - the "Overviews, Outlines..." list and the "Reference, Culture..." list - which are one line each (only) when the screen is wide. I dropped the former because having both of those line-wrapping into multiple lines seemed weird. I made the line-wrapping for "Reference, Culture..." look nice by adding "text-wrap: balance;" to the CSS.
I initially didn't use {{hlist}} because I wanted the colon in "Contents:", because it's not a member of that list; it's essentially a title for that list. Or at least that's the logic I see in it. But I've dropped the colon and converted to an hlist with custom styling as you suggested anyway. How does that look now? Do you miss the "Overviews, Outlines..." list? -- Beland (talk) 00:26, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Beland: This is good stuff. I try (not always successfully) and consider stuff from a naïve reader's point of view. If I know what I want to read about, then I can use the search box(es); if I'm not too sure but know roughly what discipline is involved I can use the headline topics; if I've no real idea or just want to have a browse I can click Contents. Bazza 7 (talk) 10:36, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Beland: I forgot to answer your question: no, I don't miss Outlines etc. Too mechanical for the main page, and is just a click away anyway. Bazza 7 (talk) 10:40, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
The contents menu looks good. The search bar looks ok by itself but it might look odd in the final display as you'd have two similar search bars quite close to each other at the top of the page -- the one that you've added and the standard one in the header which always appears. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:57, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
  • I'm not really sure what problem the proposed changes here are addressing... when I load the main page I see a prominent search bar right at the top, this is what I usually use to find topics and seems adequate for the purpose... unless I've adjusted my skin somewhere and this isn't the default view? As for "Contents", absolutely not. We've spent years painstakingly eliminating the clutter of having "Portals" on the main page, which nobody ever clicks, and now we want to bring back something similar just rebranded as "Contents"? As Art LaPella says above, nobody uses that feature anyway and it's sort of reminiscent of the long-gone days of Yahoo Directory when people navigated the web by looking things up in an index. Those days are long long gone, and the vast majority of navigation to our pages takes places through search (mostly Google and some internal searching) and possibly direct wikilinks these days.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:41, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
    Turns out most people don't see the skin's search bar at the top, but you do see it if you are on a desktop device with a wide screen. Having a narrower screen (like my desktop, and any mobile device, which is the majority of readers) causes it to hide behind an icon. You can see this happen if you narrow your browser window.
    I don't think any of the trivia below the welcome bar actually helps anyone find something they were looking for, either; it's there for people who aren't looking for anything in particular, or distracts them if they were in fact looking for something specific. If the only thing the vast majority of people actually need is a search bar, that leaves plenty of other real estate we might as well fill with things only a small minority use? I don't think of the Contents pages as actually being a comprehensive directory that will get you somewhere, but more as a sampling to show what sort of stuff Misplaced Pages knows about, for people who aren't yet familiar with the site. -- Beland (talk) 16:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Birthday

Since it is Misplaced Pages's birthday, shouldn't we add that to the "On this day" page? SuperJames888 (talk) 19:45, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

It's a bit late to suggest that, don't you think? It's now the 16th of January in some countries. MadGuy7023 (talk) 19:47, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Selected anniversaries/January 15 lists Misplaced Pages's anniversary as ineligible (in the collapsed staging area) because the Misplaced Pages article is outdated and its inclusion would be navel-gazing. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:33, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
I agree but it's too late for this year. Let's set it up for next year. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:19, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
If we don't celebrate Misplaced Pages's 25th birthday in a different way on the Main Page next year, a mention in OTD would make sense. —Kusma (talk) 20:24, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
I think we should reserve Jan. 15 every year for either a Misplaced Pages-themed Main Page, or some custom message like stats on what we've accomplished in the last n {\displaystyle n} years. The Main Page is not an article, and we're allowed to be self-referential, and I think once a year we've earned that. -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 20:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Put a hat on the globe? CMD (talk) 23:52, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Maybe a banner listing 25 years of accomplishments—next birthday ? The AP (talk) 10:47, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Category:
Talk:Main Page: Difference between revisions Add topic