Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Deborahjay (talk | contribs) at 21:49, 27 January 2017 (→Today: grammar cleanup). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• WP:ERRORS
• WP:MP/E

Please submit error reports only for content that is currently or will imminently appear on the Main Page. For general discussion about the Main Page, kindly use its talk page.

National variations of the English language have been extensively discussed previously: Misplaced Pages does not prefer any national variety of English. While Misplaced Pages strives to use language common to all English varieties, some spelling, grammar, or terminology may differ or be absent in a reader's preferred variety. 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 queue

In the news

candidates

discussion

admin instructions

Did you know

nominations

discussion

queue

BotErrors

Protected pages

Commons media protection

Associated

• Error reports
• General discussion
• FAQ
• Help
• CSS
• Sandbox
  • CSS
• History
• Alternatives
• April Fools'

• It is currently 05:52 UTC.
• Purge the Main Page
• Purge this page

• 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 05:52 on 23 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 because this is not a talk page. (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.

Errors in the summary of today's or tomorrow's featured article

A bit absurd to have a pic of Lemmy illustrating this when the article says Motörhead "divides critics and fans over whether the band belongs to the new wave of British heavy metal. Some believe that the band should be considered an inspiration for the movement, but not part of it, because they had signed recording contracts, toured the country, and had chart success before any NWOBHM band had stepped out of their local club scene." Why not a pic of an uncontroversial member of the movement such as Maiden, Saxon, ToPT or Leppard? Not, of course, that it's my cup of tea at all, you understand.... Ericoides (talk) 14:18, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Pinging David Levy. - Dank (push to talk) 14:42, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

The article also describes Lemmy as "a reference figure for the whole movement", which is why I picked it -- I'm not knowledgeable enough about the topic to know how accurate that is. I'm fine with changing it if a more appropriate picture can be found. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:00, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

The other day, I scoured the Wikimedia Commons and other libre media sources for contextually/aesthetically suitable images from the relevant period, which proved disappointingly scarce. (Unfortunately, such bands tended to perform under lighting conditions less than ideal for photography, especially given the consumer-grade cameras in use at the time.)

The current photograph appeared to be the best option available. I took notice of the article's description of Lemmy Kilmister as "a reference figure for the whole movement" (as Mike noted above) and Motörhead's explicit mention in the TFA summary. —David Levy 15:28, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Lemmy is pretty irrelevant (in fact, completely irrevelant) to the NWOBHM. There are a few decent images of Def Leppard, Iron Maiden, Whitesnake etc. on Commons. Black Kite (talk) 20:49, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Lemmy is pretty irrelevant (in fact, completely irrevelant) to the NWOBHM.

If that's the case, our article is in need of revision.

There are a few decent images of Def Leppard, Iron Maiden, Whitesnake etc. on Commons.

Suggestions are welcome. I limited my search to photographs from the late 1970s and early 1980s, but feel free to select something more recent if you regard it as preferable. —David Levy 20:58, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Errors in In the news

• "Yokozuna" is in italics in the image caption but not in the blurb, suggest some kind of consistency here please. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:10, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Errors in today's or tomorrow's On this day

Today

Observance of International Holocaust Remembrance Day isn't on the Main Page. Do I recall correctly that this was Main Page content in past years? -- Deborahjay (talk) 20:06, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, this year it has been omitted because it is not up to scratch, feel free to improve it! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:08, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: "It is "not up to scratch" - by "it" do you mean the page in the English Misplaced Pages - or the observance isn't "up to scratch"? If the latter, I wouldn't think that's a legitimate reason not to mention an observance. Or does "up to scratch" refer to particular events of observance rather than the designation of this date?-- Deborahjay (talk) 20:13, 27 January 2017 (UTC)'

The article is unsuitable for the Main Page because it contains vast amounts of unsourced text. This is a shame, as it would be useful for the article to be high-profile (I am a teacher, and have spent 30 minutes with my tutor group this morning discussing the IHRD). Hopefully someone can improve it before the anniversary reoccurs next year. Black Kite (talk) 20:31, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I was unaware of this requirement/standard - am I to understand that it's equally applied to all the pages for the many national holidays and religious celebrations noted practically every day as Observed Today on the Main Page in English? The fact of an observance's existence is not predicated on the quality of its Misplaced Pages page... or where is this explicitly stated? -- Deborahjay (talk) 20:35, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Any page linked from the Main Page must be to a reasonable standard. If they are not adequately sourced, we cannot verify the truth of them. If you look back at the archives for this page you will see many examples of articles being removed because they are not; in fact there are a few pretty much every day. Black Kite (talk) 20:43, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

There is a prominent template at the top of that page - only posted "this month" (less than four weeks) on 26 January (less than 24 hours) - that this article needs additional citations for verification which amounts to caveat lector - WHILE the topic's exclusion from Observed today is omitting acknowledgement of its observance, which is tantamount to denying its existence. -- -- Deborahjay (talk) 20:53, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I personally removed the link, for the reason cited above. My father, whose parents were Holocaust survivors (unlike most of their relatives), will be surprised to learn that I'm a Holocaust denier. —David Levy 21:08, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks David, and thanks for your calm tone here. To reiterate, we don't usually have bold target links to articles which are sub-standard. I'm a little bit shocked that Deborahjay would suggest that I'm claiming that the "observance" isn't "up to scratch". Claiming me or others to be "Holocaust deniers" is incredibly offensive. I suggest you redact your outlandish statement and apologise to all concerned. If you don't understand how articles are selected for the main page, that's one thing, but to start hurling such unfeasibly offensive bullshit around is beyond anything I've ever experienced at Misplaced Pages. None of us are denying The Holocaust. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I contend that the prominent and correct use of the very recently applied "add citations" template is sufficient to uphold the editing practice and standards of the English Misplaced Pages, such that noting the 27 January observance of International Holocaust Remembrance Day linking to that marked-as-deficient page provides a solution to note its observance. I don't see any indication above that my suggestion has been given any consideration. I don't see any acknowledgement that this is significant to informing the English-speaking readership. I don't see any concern that the omission of the observance of International Holocaust Remembrance Day, reflects on the character of the English Misplaced Pages and its maintainers. Rather, the respondents above are evidently entrenched in their assessments. To find out if I'm entirely mistaken, I'll bring this matter to the attention of other Misplaced Pages contributors and administrators beyond the few involved who have weighed in above. Until I see evidence of such, I'm sorry to believe as I must - based on your words and deeds herein. -- Deborahjay (talk) 21:46, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Tomorrow

It's "The Lego Group", not just "Lego Group". The Rambling Man (talk) 20:07, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Fixed. —David Levy 20:32, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Errors in the current Did you know...

Errors in today's or tomorrow's featured picture

Errors in the summary of the last or next featured list

Please report any such problems or suggestions for improvement at the General discussion section of Talk:Main Page.

• Main Page discussions