Talk:Main Page/Archive 7

Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10


In 2001, Larry Sanger predicted the wiki would have 84,000 articles by mid-2008. At the current rate, we would have perhaps 320,000 articles by 2008. But since we reached Sanger's prediction in about 30% of the time allotted, then it stands to reason that by late 2004 we will have 320,000+ articles. I wonder when we will run out of topics. Juan Hernandez

You also have to figure in the fact that 30,000 of our articles were created by a bot with US census data for nearly every US city and town. --mav
Can someone add the data for Augusta, Georgia, the bot seemed to skip over the the second largest city in Georgia for some reason. Considering nothing exciting has ever happened there it's not suprising that no one has yet created an article for this city. ;) - smp
Add it to the list at User:Rambot. -- John Owens 16:52 3 Jun 2003 (UTC)

So then we could probably expect another couple million articles generated in that manner for other countries.hmmm.....big site Juan Hernandez

Yet another question...Might the person who enabled the By Alphabetical Order page so that it includes at least an archived record, consider doing it, if he/she is so empowered, for http://wiktionary.org as well?

Wiktionary is behind on updates, as it has some customized code in there (mostly for saying "Wiktionary" instead of "Wikipedia" ;). At some point it does need updating, and that'll be in with the rest. --Brion 17:23 Apr 21, 2003 (UTC)

I am trying to update the http://sa.wikipedia.org pages but it keeps linking to http://www.wikipedia.org , is there a way to fix this that a user can do. Thanks!

That's because we don't have a Wikipedia set-up in that language yet. Post a message to Intlwiki-L and nicely ask a developer to set one up for you. It may take some time though becasue of technical reasons. --mav

On April 29, it is noted that this is the anniversary of the Bounty. Clicked on teh bounty, and found out it's the 28th. I am in Timezone GMT+10 (Western Pacific). Just wondering.

The historical anniversaries are a running list... some will refer to dates other than today.

http://pd.wikipedia.com and pd.wikipedia.org are redirected to wikipedia.org. But meanwhile there is a Low Saxon Wikipedia at http://za.wikipedia.com. Is it possible to redirect pd.wikipedia.com to za wikipedia.org or - better - transfer the content of za.wikipedia.com to use pd.wikipedia.org?

pd.wikipedia.org is the domain given in wikipedia available for the Low Saxon language (Plattdüütsch) 213.39.207.24 19:39 Apr 30, 2003 (UTC)~

Vieques needs to be on Main page current events, and maybe, Im not sure but maybe, Mexicana de Aviacion too.

We should talk to bantam books or a big publisher so our encyclopedia gets published into the largest and most informative encyclopedia book ever.

and where are those counters? LOL

Antonio Orgy Martin

Ask and ye shall receive. The update, that is, not the orgy. -- John Owens

Someone needs to set the width of the "Selected Articles" table to 600 pixels. Admins keep adding stuff to the historical aniversaries and the formatting gets all messed up. -- 165.247.201.82 08:11 May 1, 2003 (UTC)

Fixed. Some Admins are new and have their screens at 800 px wide so it looks fine to them (not to me though). --mav

What's Battle of the Nile doing? It happened the first of August, not first of May, so unless I'm not understanding something it shouldn't be there. Geoffrey 11:05 May 1, 2003 (UTC)

Removed. I have no idea why that was listed - it's not even on the May 1 page.... --mav

Edwin Rosario should be on historical anniversary on the main page on May 1

Thank you and God bless

Sincerely yours, Antonio El Demonio Martin

I would but then that would mean Chernobyl and another listing would drop off. We can't list everything - that is what the day pages are for. --mav
    • Agreed

Antonio Cheerful One Martin

Why did Beltane disappear from the main page? - Logotu 18:37 May 1, 2003 (UTC)

Because we can't list everything - and there is a lot to list for May 1. --mav
Right-o, then. Out of curiousity Is there some set number of entries, or what? - Logotu
No. But the resulting size has to work on both standard res (800 x 600) and high res (1024 x 768+) screens. Also, a typical day will have 3 entries listed while a day like May 1 will have two to three times as many entries listed. --mav


Since the Iraq War category is off the main page, perhaps we should bring back the "Ongoing Events" category? -- Infrogmation 11:11 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

I would vote against it. The links on current events seem to be enough for me and nobody ever updated Background articles for ongoing events. --mav

Antonio To The Batcave!!! Martin

I need help with the Tim Duncan page: I need someone to format me a table on the Career stats areas, cause it doesnt look that good the way it is now, and I dont know how to do tables and stuff.

I'd appreciate it.

Thank you and God bless you!!

AntonioMartin

I wasn't sure that a table was necessary, so I tried just changing the lists around a bit. I think it looks all right now, but tell me if you disagree. I don't think this is the right page to ask about such things, though. It should be for discussing the Main Page! You can ask general queries on the village pump, such as, "Help! How do I do tables?" The answer is to just copy and paste a table from a page that already has one, and just change the contents. :) -- Oliver P. 19:26 May 5, 2003 (UTC)

Please add Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky's b-day to the main page. MB 19:09 May 7, 2003 (UTC)

Only events go in the historical anniversaries section. --mav
I do have to say , through, that I think maybe a list of Happy Birthdays or Happy Birthday to should go in the main page

"This is a read-only backup missing several features such as logged-in users and image uploads. "

Is it my imagination or did I just edit? --mav

Yep--Jason and I apparently crossed paths. The main server went down, so he switched the IP to point to the new server, where Brion and I had a read-only backup running. When I went to edit the front page, the old server was already back up and I edited that instead. LDC

You're having one of those dreams again, Mav. ;) -- John Owens

So there isn't any good reason for there to be a dash after every hyphen? I never did like those extra spaces at the ends of lines. -- John Owens 20:24 May 9, 2003 (UTC)

http://www.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=Facebook&lang=en&q=Special:Lonelypages is one month old, and many links are useless, as they've since been linked. Anyone able to update this? - user:zanimum


Why is George Galloway on the main page as "Galloway"?

It was shortened like that for space concerns. Otherwise, the "in the news" section would have pushed past the end of the line and wrapped to next line on 800x600 screens. It probably wasn't the best shortening, but the only alternative is the removal of the link. -- Minesweeper

There seems to be a severe problem with the main page with my browser - it is refusing to load and crashing altogether. I'm running IE6.0 on Windows 98. The problem is caused by the Korean characters in the languages section - take those out, and the problem goes away.

Now of course, this is Microsoft's fault, not ours. But if this is affecting a significant number of users, including new users, it could be quite a problem. Perhaps we could consider taking out the offending characters for the time being, although of course this wouldn't be ideal.

Has anyone else been having the same problem? Enchanter

Can someone please consider adding the Welsh and Low Saxon languages? thanks, Aldie 07:51 May 14, 2003 (UTC)

If not yet there, you can add them also to m:The provisional portal of Wikipedia Giskart 12:51 May 14, 2003 (UTC)

OK, I did Welsh, but what's the URL for the Low Saxon one? (I can't find a language code for that). -- Toby 12:59 May 14, 2003 (UTC)

OK, I found it (za). Done. -- Toby 13:50 May 14, 2003 (UTC)

Please add Dave DeBusschere to Recent Deaths MB 22:46 14 May 2003 (UTC)

Done, but you might consider making a more substantial article for him. Fred Bauder 13:14 May 15, 2003 (UTC)

I just want to say thank you for letting me enjoy such a wonderful experience as Wikipedia. I had never been to a place where I could talk about the things that I think are important in life, in a neutral way, of course.

I never plan to retire from here so you'll guys will be dealing with me for a LOOOONNNG time! LOL

Thanks and God bless you all! Antonio Glamour Baby! Martin

Please add the 2001 anthrax attack to In the news. See Current events May 11. MB 20:28 15 May 2003 (UTC)

You have to update 2001 anthrax attack with the latest news so that people will know why it's listed on the front page. -- Minesweeper 20:37 May 15, 2003 (UTC)
Done, please add to main now. MB 21:40 15 May 2003 (UTC)
Added. -- Minesweeper

San Antonio Spurs should be In the news, and George Francis in recent deaths on the main page

Antonio Here I am! Rocking like a Hurricane!! Martin

Our article on the Spurs is embarrassing and doesn't have any context in it telling the reader why it warrents listing (they weren't the only ones to win last night either; also, this is a minor win as far of the entire team history is concerned - we will only record something when and if they win the championships). But bio meets the specs. --mav

Could Rik Van Steenbergen be added to recent deaths? I just wrote a short biography, hoping some Belgians can add to it. Jeronimo

Done. --mav 06:53 16 May 2003 (UTC)

Is it just me or has the article counter got stuck at 120,701 articles? -fonz

Same here... --mav 19:02 16 May 2003 (UTC)

June Carter Cash, singer and wife of Johnny Cash, died May 15, aged 73. Uyanga 20:50 16 May 2003 (UTC)

Done. --mav

Please add FA Cup to "in the news", it is the FA Cup final today Mintguy 11:47 17 May 2003 (UTC)

I may have missed it but I don't see any entry in current events mentioning that fact nor do I see that the article has been updated to reflect this piece of information. This is also not the type of thing we would be adding to that article anyway. However, as soon as there is a clear winner we will list the updated article on the winner after the fact of their win is made clear on current events (per our guidelines on this; see Wikipedia:Selected Articles on the Main Page). Context is needed otherwise a person clicking on FA Cup will not know why in the world we have that article listed on the Main Page. --mav 01:03 18 May 2003 (UTC)
The article is fixed now per the guidelines so I put it on the Main Page. --mav


I was just about to say I'd fixed it (to be honest, I wasn't sure if the date in the FA Cup article was mentioned too far down, but I guess it's OK) - thanks mav :) --Camembert


And could someone include Wendy Hiller in the "Recent Deaths", please? She was a very great actress. Deb 22:52 17 May 2003 (UTC)

Done. ---mav

I'm confused. I just want some clarification. I thought that when adding new Historical anniversaries, they are to be put at the beginning of the list. Anne Boleyn and Mary I were placed in the middle of the list. Just want some clarification. Kingturtle 02:02 21 May 2003 (UTC)

I believe the thinking here is that Historical anniversaries should be listed in chronological order. Thus, new ones like you added should be placed at the front of the list. Mav's are from a few days ago (May 19), so he's slipping them in where they fit chronologically. -- Minesweeper 02:11 21 May 2003 (UTC)
Yes, that is exactly it. I should have been more clear King of the Turtles (I just love that nick, BTW :). --mav

How do articles get placed into catgories (maybe I just missed that somewhere)? Is there a category of "Military Science" or some other place where one can place ship histories, etc.?

Yes there is: Military science. If you're looking for ship articles, take a look at List of ships of the Royal Navy, List of ships of Japanese navy, List of ships of the United States Navy, List of ships of the line of the United States Navy, and List of museum ships. -- Minesweeper 21:37 21 May 2003 (UTC)

I don't like the "new articles" section. How are the articles chosen for that anyway? I would rather have an "article of the day" section. LittleDan 01:37 22 May 2003 (UTC)


? New articles are added daily to the Selected Articles box. They are grouped into several different categories based on timely relevance to the current date. If you want to be presented with any old random article then use the Random Article feature of the software. --mav
but if we had an "article[s] of the day" section, we'd put developed articles there about relatively obscure topics that don't happen on that day. If you want new articles, just look on the "new articles" feature of wikipedia. I don't see the merit of putting randomly seletcted new stubs on the homepage. I'd rather see randomly selected *good* articles for people to come by and say "wow, wikipedia has great articles on such-and-such relatively obscure topic." and learn about it, instead of being presented with the stub-of-the-day. LittleDan 00:34 23 May 2003 (UTC)
Dan, do you mean going to "recent changes" and looking for articles with an N next to them? I think the "new articles" feature on the main page is more convenient and more appealing to people who may come upon wikipedia for the first time (i.e. through the main page). I don't see a problem with it; there are all sorts of ways people may want to get into wikipedia and this offers one. Also, the somewhat random or disjointed character of the list on the mainpage I think give people just one more vivid indication of the breadth of wikipedia, and the diversity of our interests. I'm sorry you do not like it, but I just don't see any compelling reason to get rid of it. Slrubenstein
Just so you know, a much easier approach than looking for the N's is Special:Newpages, accessible from the dropdown menu at the top of the page as "Newly created articles". -- John Owens 04:22 23 May 2003 (UTC)
The articles are currently chosen mostly be me, as I created that section a few days ago and other sysops have yet to join me in editing it. It is mostly an experiment and will be removed if it does not work. You may not have noticed it, but the idea behind that section is actually very similar to what you are proposing, namely, to give exposure to our fleshed out new articles. I deliberately only add those articles that are reasonably well written and preferably non-stubbish. In selecting these articles, I also have to go through Newpages, deleting nonsense pages and fixing stubs along the way. So I think the section is worth keeping not only because of the exposure it gives to our most recent works (regardless of whether there is currently any timely interest regarding the topic or not), but also because it encourages those who edit it to go through Special:Newpages, which are somewhat neglected in comparison to Recent Changes. I think agreeing on which these new pages are going to be is going to be much easier than choosing a single "Article of the day". --Eloquence 04:42 23 May 2003 (UTC)
"...because it encourages those who edit it to go through Special:Newpages, which are somewhat neglected in comparison to Recent Changes." Ah. So that is your ulterior motive in all this! :-) In that case I now think that section is pretty darn cool and should stay - however the Historical anniversaries section already sucks up much of my Wikipedia time as it is so I don't have much time to contribute much to the other sections. BTW, one of main reasons why I created the Historical anniversaries section was to direct more attention to the day pages and the linked history/bio articles so that they can be updated and expanded. Hang in there Eloquence, I'm sure other people will start to contribute to the section in a month or two ; esp. if you suddenly go on vacation like I did. --mav
I love the New Articles bit. Keeps me uptodate on the latest great work done here :) Kingturtle 07:54 23 May 2003 (UTC)

There's a small typo in East Timor in the list of anniversaries - it reads E. TImor. As I'm no sysop I cannot fix it myself. andy 08:03 22 May 2003 (UTC)

Fixed. :) -- Minesweeper 08:06 22 May 2003 (UTC)

Can Eurovision be put up on the main page? 1)It's its anniversary and 2) its on today. -fonzy

? Why? I don't see anything about Eurovision in current events or in reference to any Historical anniversary. Nor do I see any link to a day page even close to the current day of the year at Eurovision. --mav
Well, it is true that you have to follow some of the links, like to ESC 1956 and ESC 2003 to see the relevant dates. But then, I'm not sure you didn't already know that, and were just hinting to Fonzy that the dates mentioned should be on the Eurovision page itself, and perhaps they should be on the May 24 and 1956 in music and 2003 in music pages. -- John Owens 10:25 24 May 2003 (UTC)
Hmm, the links are already there on those date/year pages. So I guess it's just the Eurovision page itself and the current events that you're waiting on? -- John Owens 10:28 24 May 2003 (UTC)

I think it would be nice to do like the French Wikipedia and state "Site graciously hosted by Bomis (www.bomis.com)". Should we add this? --Geoffrey 19:52 25 May 2003 (UTC)

Interesting point. You should take it up on the WikiEN-L. --mav

Anna Santisteban should be on Main Page, Recent Deaths.

Antonio In love with Love Martin

Done. --mav 23:19 25 May 2003 (UTC)

I suggest "already working" -> "working" or "currently working". "already" probably isn't appropriate for a two year old site... :)

Hi, here's a minor suggestion: how about linkifying January 15 and 2001 in "We started on January 15, 2001"? --schnee

For that part of the text we are trying to only link that which is most relevant so that new users are directed to where we want them to go (note that every current link except Wikipedia is to a Wikipedia meta page). --mav 09:40 27 May 2003 (UTC)

The Stanley Cup finals start tonight - you might want to add that to the current events section. The NBA finals start next week as well. Kirjtc2 20:05 27 May 2003 (UTC)

They will only be listed if the current event is important enough to warrent updating the article (with the appropriate day and year links) and is listed on current events. Otherwise there is no way for a reader to know why the article is being listed. See Wikipedia:Selected Articles on the Main Page. --mav

Suggest noting the death of Luciano Berio on the main page. He was a major 20th century composer, and his Sinfonia is a particular favourite of mine. IHCOYC 00:09 28 May 2003 (UTC)

I've added him. He was indeed a major figure. Sad news. Hopefully I'll be able to expand the article on him over the next few days. --Camembert


I posted this to the WikiEN-l list but realise this is the correct place to post such requests. Apologies for the mis-posting!

On Monday, Peter Hollingworth resigned as Governor-General of Australia. I have added an item to Current events and updated the Hollingworth and G-G pages. Does this warrant an "In the news" listing on the main page?

Claudine 01:51 28 May 2003 (UTC)

Yep. That's all we ask. --mav 02:07 28 May 2003 (UTC)

Thanks Mav! I'm slowly getting back into the swing of things. Claudine 02:56 28 May 2003 (UTC)

Can we make an exception to the "no birthdays" in historic anniversaries for centenials? Perhaps Bob Hope could go in the In the news section, but of course he hasn't done anything noteworthy recently, other than not die before the 100th anniversary of his birth. -- Infrogmation 00:38 29 May 2003 (UTC)

I for one am willing to make such an exception - but only for 100 year increments. --mav
That's all I asked for. I just wish I'd gotten that exception prior to Bix's centenial. -- Infrogmation 04:00 29 May 2003 (UTC)
There's always next time. :) --mav 04:04 29 May 2003 (UTC)
Do we really want to ever do this for centennial birthdays of people who aren't still alive? Or should it be limited to people who've survived to their century mark? -- John Owens 04:06 29 May 2003 (UTC)
Only for those living, IMHO. Kingturtle 04:19 29 May 2003 (UTC)
Which inevitably leads to the paradox, that very few living centenarians will have done anything lately. ;) But I'm willing to overlook that, for those with noteworthy past accomplishments, like Leslie. -- John Owens 04:28 29 May 2003 (UTC)

Suggesting mellophone as a "new article" -- I think it's a pretty good article, myself ;-) -- bdesham 00:42 29 May 2003 (UTC)

Of course you do - you wrote it. :-) Nice article, BTW. --mav 01:12 29 May 2003 (UTC)

Mav, I replaced Eurovision with Champions League because the champion's league final was approximately 12 hours ago, and it's the biggest club football (soccer) event in the world. The result was added, but looking now I see that there's nothing to indicate that the final was held very recently. --Robert Merkel

I agree. I also think it's about time we take down the FA Cup. Erzengel 08:23 29 May 2003 (UTC)
A day link to the correct day is needed so that somebody reading the article knows why it is listed. --mav
Isnt the World Cup the biggest soccer event in the world?

Antonio Kicker-Goalie Martin

Could somebody please add "Beagle 2" to the list of New Articles. I think there will probably be a lot of interest in this shortly, (it is due to be launched in 4 days time), but what I have written is currently little more than a stub. Maybe inclusion in "New Articles" would encourage somebody to flesh it out a bit. Thanks. GrahamN 17:31 29 May 2003 (UTC)

Mav, why would you removed The Rite of Spring so quickly? Its premiere is one of the most famous premieres in western music history. Why not remove an item that is a few days out of date instead of this one, which was only a day old? Kingturtle 04:43 30 May 2003 (UTC)

Sorry. I didn't know it was that important compared to the other events that happened on May 29 (such as the fall of the Byzantine Empire or the confirmation of General relativity). --mav
It isn't often when an opening causes a literal riot. thanks for putting it back :) Kingturtle 07:23 30 May 2003 (UTC)

Maybe Iraqi Airways should be on main page, current events

Antonio Fight! Fight! Fight! Martin

Done. --mav

Can we have a "," in the number of pages? Harry Potter

While it's a good sign that we need one, this won't be possible without a software change, because that number is autogenerated. If it's important to you, drop Brion a message, he loves to hack that kind of thing. <eg> --Eloquence 11:32 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Why would we want a comma? All that does is cause confusion between American and European standards.


Could a sysop add the death of Ilya Prigogine to the Main Page? Thanks. James F. 20:53 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Done. MB 20:59 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Please consider adding British American Racing (BAR) to the new articles section, Aldie 12:55 5 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Will do. Just let me find a couple other articles, and then I'll add them. MB 13:33 5 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Something for historical annivesaries for the 6th: Aram Khachaturian was born 100 years ago on the 6th. MB 14:01 5 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I don't think it makes sense to have "other category schemes" listed on the front page of wikipedia. Most people don't understand that the first group of links is for a specific category scheme. LittleDan 02:03 8 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Could we please add Pentecost to the main page? I'm not sure about the policy where to put it. "In the news" or "historical anniversaries", both don't fit exactly ... -- JeLuF 08:06 8 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Added to the anniversaries. --Infrogmation 17:30 8 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Diary of a Nobody is just a little over stub-size. The article is not impressive enough yet to be offerred up as Wikipedia's finest new articles. I suggest it be removed and replaced with something more substantial. Kingturtle 18:11 8 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Go for it, Kingturtle. --Commoner Frog-mation

Maybe International Boxing Hall of Fame should be in Main Page Current Events (or In the news)...maybe --Antonio Homewrecker Martin

Only if the current event is historic enough for us to update the article. --mav

Actually, I had to update the article. I put the names of the newly inducted people in the article.

Antonio Wild Sider Martin

User:Fred Bauder wrote social structure of the United States and added it as an article at 13.10. At 13.14 he then put it on the Main Page as a new article. Now I don't wish to complain about specifics of that article BUT is it right that a sysop can make the unilateral decision that their work is worthy of the main page... surely another sysop should add such an article to the main page as they see fit - i.e. it undergoes the same procedure as a non-sysop. This would be consistent with the submissions policy on Wikipedia:Brilliant Prose. Pcb21 12:32 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I don't think it's an abuse of privileges, but it would probably be good form to update the rest of the list if you add a page that you wrote yourself. In addition, Fred broke the page layout by adding a very long link. --Eloquence 15:15 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)
If you have a problem with this, please mention it on Fred's user talk page so that he is sure to know about it. MB 15:23 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Perhaps abuse would be a little strong a term for it. But it does engender (in me, at least) a feeling of a two-tier hierachy in wikipedia that we want to avoid. I thought sysop-ness was supposed to be a burden not a priviliege :-) Pcb21 16:25 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)
AFAIK there's been no statement of policy that a sysop can't put a page they created on New Pages section of the Main page, but I wouldn't object to such a policy in the future. Perhaps new pages could be mentioned or nominated here on the talk page, and some other sysop could add or ignore them as they think best. Pondering, -- Infrogmation 22:34 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Trevor Goddard died. Pizza Puzzle

MB 14:47 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)

The Ball point pen article doesn't seem to have any indication of why it is now an historic anniversary; could someone who knows why please add that info to the article? -- Infrogmation 22:34 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)

"Biro first patented the pen in 1938 and applied for a fresh patent in Argentina on June 10, 1943"

Under "new articles", could we/should we have a section on "rewritten articles" or "fixed stubs" or "improved articles" where we can point to articles that have just been changed from stubs into brilliant prose, or otherwise massively improved? Martin

It seems like it would be difficult to wade through recent changes to find rewritten articles (wouldn't you have to check the history?). Is there a better method? -- Notheruser 16:31 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)