Jump to content

Talk:Main Page

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 64.229.228.195 (talk) at 12:11, 8 August 2006 (→Worst flag ever). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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

Today's featured picture

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

Main Page and beyond

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

Main page discussion

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

Typo

There's a typo in today's featured article, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. "Remedies" has only one 'i'. Could someone fix this? --dm (talk) 03:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Try WP:ERRORS. --64.229.205.228 15:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Sizes

The images currently seem very osman small (except for the featured picture). Can they perhaps be made a bit bigger? Thanks in advance. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 05:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

how do I add pictures in the left or right corner in mini formats ?(like on this page) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usa

Wikipedia as advertisement

Practically all of your contemporary biographies read like advertisements. How can I trust you? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.155.207.167 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Please add {{Advert}} on articles that read like advertisements. Someone will clean them up shortly. Actually, you can start cleaning them up right away. -- 64.229.223.126 19:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Read like adverts in what language? But seriously, I think it's a result of articles being created (usually) by people who like that individual and think they should have an article, or have their article expanded. It you want to see a mess, watch some of the "company" edits of for-profit colleges that turn them into brochures. As the person above stated, feel free to take a knife (edit) to it immediately if you wish --Bobak 19:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Or the people trying to quietly slip a URI for their business into an article claiming it as further reading. We're watching (most of the time). --Monotonehell 20:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The IP editor 81.155.207.167 has been adding nonsense to Alan Hart (writer), and has received four warnings in little over 24 hours. --Dhartung | Talk 08:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finnish Sauna

This is my first attempt to initiate a discussion: in the Northern Michigan area saunas used by American-Finns, bundles of cedar branches (instead of birch leaves) are provided to beat the skin to a rosy red and, as grandfather said, "to open the pores."

Also, I see no mention of "Tar Candles" as a folk medicine. In Finland, there is a saying: "If tar and the Sauna don't work, you're going to die." Commodore678 03:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

okay... you may want to find the appropriate article for that... like Sauna. --219.89.236.186 07:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tisha B'Av

Today is Tisha B'Av in the Hebrew Calendar, commemorating the day that both Temples were destroyed and several other tragedies befell the Jews throughout history.

Is this important holiday of one of the World's major religions not qualified for inclusion on the main page? Elipongo 09:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but no. Lots of love, - Mel Gibson 09:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)—The preceding comment purported to be made by Mel Gibson was added by 219.89.236.186 (talk • contribs) 09:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]
rude ;)
You may like to read the guidelines for suggesting entries to on this day and then suggest it if it fits --Monotonehell 10:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good joke <g> Thanks for the link. However, although that page does state what the *criteria* for inclusion are, it does not state what *procedure* to use to request for events to be included! I just got done surfing around for fifteen minutes and could not find a page to *make* a suggestion. Maybe I'm just being dumb, but its rather user unfriendly, in my not so humble opinion! Elipongo 15:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Over a million guidelines and counting. Once you've been here a few months, you'll sometimes be lucky enough to find the procedure you're looking for. Often the best thing to do is post something here and hope someone notices and gives you a link or points you to the right person (the Wikimaster of Selected Anniversaries). Piet 17:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was a hearty laugh this morning --thanks, I needed it! --Bobak 15:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please scroll up to the top of this talkpage to see what to do when there is an omission on the Main Page. --64.229.205.128 20:40, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elipongo, it is not that the holiday failed to meet criteria, but that it simply wasn't one of the 4 or 5 anniversaries chosen. There are many more anniversaries eveyr day than may feasibly be featured on the front page. --Dhartung | Talk 08:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

News items

Huh? Isn't the North Korean flood more important than anything Floyd Landis will ever do? Call me crazy... -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In The News is not Wikinews. In the News covers how articles have been updated to reflect new events. Create a good article on the North Korean flood, and it can be added to the ITN template. Dark Shikari talk/contribs 18:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You can start with posting a headline about the flood along with a few newslinks on Portal:Current events. Thanks. --64.229.205.128 20:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article

Lindsay Lohan, "Music of the US" the featured article had gone down. Are we really short of anything substantial? Defining? Obscure? Needing exploration? May an article on "Everyday Life" next or "Pubic Hairs?" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ArthurianLegend (talk • contribs) .

Music of the United States is an article you might find in any encyclopedia. And you missed the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Nevertheless, if the article on pubic hair is improved to featured standards, I see no reason (other than taste) why it should not be, well, featured. Better we encourage even quotidian articles on popular culture to be of high quality than concentrate only on the quality of the "proper" articles, true? --Dhartung | Talk 08:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Israel-Lebanon Conflict

Is it correct to call it a strife? Can someone explain the difference between a conflict and a strife?--Patchouli 18:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strife is basically headlinese because it's short. It isn't much used in formal writing, though, and it's become a bit of a cliché with regard to the Middle East. Where do we use it, or is your issue with the word "conflict" that we do use? --Dhartung | Talk 20:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have no issue with conflict. I think conflict should be used here unless Lebanon declares war; then, there is a war between two nations. Now it is a military engagement involving guerrillas. I just wanted to learn about strife.--Patchouli 20:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Am I suppose to use quotation marks or italicize here for the two words I used?--Patchouli 20:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You can do it either way you choose, this is only a Talk page and there isn't any requirement of style, only of being understood. I still do not understand your question. Strife is an English word very similar to conflict, but it is not used nearly as much in formal writing. Conflict is used in this case more often because the conflict is not always violent, whereas strife usually implies active violence. --Dhartung | Talk 22:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Patchouli, you may want to check out Wikipedia:Manual of Style. But on talkpages, anything goes. --199.71.174.100 22:31, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"[C]onflict is not always violent, whereas strife usually implies active violence," is the explanation I was seeking.--Patchouli 08:26, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "duties" of "President" Fidel Castro

surely you meant to say "Cuban Italic textdictator, Fidel Castro, handed over Italic textpower to his brother...yada yada yada... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madmax5 (talk • contribs) 01:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Officially, Castro is the President. That is the proper way to address him. -- Psy guy Talk 01:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, we didnt. The still-President of Cuba handed over his duties. Is this in any way inaccurate? Preston 02:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't "Debian" be hyperlinked in the Ubuntu article?

Shouldn't "Debian" be hyperlinked in the Ubuntu article? --Irrevenant 03:06, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, they're probably writing a script to do it as we speak. --Tess Tickle 03:13, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's there now. If it was there already and I missed it: sorry. If it wasn't: thanks. --Irrevenant 04:25, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

link To Kidspedia On Main Page Recest

Kidspediais at the moment a mini wiki wich is going to be a kids vershon of wikipedia. The link is part of an atempt to stop it having 1000's of unfinesht pages. Plase reply on the kidspedia discoshen page. I cant get a link but just go to the scrchcard bit on wikia and you will find it on all mini wikis. JosephK19 17:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice: Kids' spellings, too!

Kids spelling - I thought you were dyslexic :-) --Radioactive turnip 11:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What discussion page? Can we get a link? And sign your posts, please. — ceejayoz talk 14:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now that there's a link, it won't be happening. It's a non-Wikipedia Foundation site with only 9 articles, and none of those have any content. — ceejayoz talk 20:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probally shouldnt be using the wikipedia logo on it, even if you have changed the colours. Its copyrighted and your use of it could cause confusion as the site's affiliation with wikipedia. Rafy 01:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dosen't the simple english 'pedia fill that purpose? Pacific Coast Highway (blah • I'm a hot toe picker) 02:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article - Ubuntu

I'm generally a massive fan of the featured article, but I thought this one was far below the usual high standards. It reads very much like an advert or some sought of promotional blurb. Regards, Smiffy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oismiffy (talk • contribs) .

You want "some soft of", not "some sought of". YRTE. Also, if you don't like the writing, participate to make it better. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In a similar manner to the way in which you want "some sort of", not "some soft of". 81.132.80.88 19:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Eek - I thought that about the correction but didn't like to say it. Just proves anyone can make a mistake in the excitement of the moment!! Anyway, thanks for the pointers - I don't really have a problem with how its written, just the content. I take your point about getting involved - I know the featured articles are strongly scrutinised and discussed, hence my dissapointment that this made it through. Maybe I will put my money where my mouth is. Regards. Oismiffy 20:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's comprehensive, concise, and clear, even if it doesn't "sizzle". Is that enough for featured? I dunno. --Dhartung | Talk 23:26, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First people complain that it sounds like a marketing blurb, then they complain it doesn't "sizzle". Yeah, like, let's have it both ways or something. The cool thing about Wikipedia is, you just tell people what you want and they make it for you. Must feel like paradise. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 17:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the news pictures

I have noted this plenty in the past, but this one is just too easy to have a light-hearted go at. Is it not possible for the pictures to be formatted to be inline with the news bullet that it is exemplifying? We currently have the top headline of:

"Spanish cyclist Oscar Pereiro Sio claims he is the true 2006 Tour de France winner"

Across from that we have a picture of an ageing man with a beard, who, on closer inspection, is a notorious president/dictator (delete as appropriate). I am not sure if Castro could win the tour de France - but I doubt it!

Is it difficult to align the picture with the bullet? I know the (pictured) text is used, but to the casual viewer it just looks wrong (and in some cases, such as this one) makes WP look a bit embarrassing/daft. Apologies if this was covered before during the redraft discussions at the start of the year, but I can't see any technical reason why the pic could not move up and down as appropriate (thus I am guessing this is a stylistic choice). SFC9394 00:27, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This has come up several times. There was an attempt at a solution a few months back that gained support but was never implemented and more recently there was an a period where an attempt was made to at least have a flag or some logo related to the top item. But people kept complaining that a flag was boring... Perhaps we should just keep the pictured item on top? --Monotonehell 02:05, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It has never bothered me. Newspapers often have strange juxtapositions of photographs and news stories, too. --Dhartung | Talk 21:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't newspapers normally have a caption under each picture though? Also, you should never hold a newspaper up as an example of good page layout. ;) --Monotonehell 01:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mel Gibson

I realise this is too late—but why didn’t Mel Gibson make it onto the Main Page?! Its dominated the news far more than some of the other things listed. But ah, well… it’s in the past... the incident that is and not the ramifications.--Greasysteve13 03:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It maybe newsworthy but this is an encyclopedia. Try Wikinews. --Monotonehell 03:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know, I was just surprised Mel Gibson didn't make it in the in the news section of Wikipedia's main page. Who does he have to kill?--Greasysteve13 05:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
lol how'd you find out about that? I thought Mel's people had that all hushed up? ;) I was a bit terse above, sorry, what I mean is items featured in ITN need to be of encyclopedic value, have an article that has been substantially updated with the new information and (finally) be nominated for inclusion. --Monotonehell 08:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay.--Greasysteve13 11:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the in the news section isn't just for US news, but worldwide. Entertainment gossip isn't exactly high profile news world wide. --lightdarkness (talk) 04:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't suggesting that the in the news section was just for US news but this Mel news in general has been heavy in a lot of Western news, thats not to say Eastern news insn't just as Important. And it may surprise you all but I am not American.--Greasysteve13 05:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Say, isn't Britney pregnant again? --Dhartung | Talk 21:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

go go Azeri peeps!

Big ups on today's selection which put the FA in phat! w00t?! --70.209.187.182 07:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

40th birthday of Jimbo Wales

Should the 40th birthday of Jimbo Wales be mentioned in the Main Page tomorrow? Hardee67 18:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. Shanes 18:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto. Maybe when he is 100 we will :-) --HappyCamper 18:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I guess this means that his birthday should not be mentioned on the main page. Hardee67 18:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the birthday needs to be intrinsically notable for it on the main page. For example, if we go by our article on Preident Bush, last July 6th would have been his 60th birthday, but this was not announced on the main page as we can see here. --HappyCamper 19:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
President Bush is not the founder of Wikipedia however. The birthday of Jimbo Wales is different, in that he's the found of the Wikipedia project which is this encyclopedia. Hardee67 01:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
He's made it clear in the past that he should recieve no more or less attention than any other subject with regards to items about him. --Monotonehell 01:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Oooohhh!!! Wikipedians - look at this! Well, you gotta admit, spontaneous birthday wishes are pretty sweet. --HappyCamper 19:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

stereotypical progressive bias in Israeli-Hezbollah news

Every time I see the main page in the last month, I've learned about a new airstrike by the Isreali military and how many "people" it killed, with no distinction between civilians, soldiers, terrorists (ok, sorry, militants). I've never seen one bit about any attacks by Hezbollah, which many people can assure you are on-going and more often targetted at civilians. Why is it we only need to hear about the casualties caused by the democracy? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by B. Phillips (talk • contribs) 22:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]

To help us, please identify (or write up) a decent article on a recent attack by Hezbollah and post a suggested headline on Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Thanks. -- 199.71.174.100 00:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Complaint

You should give a contact link. I recently edited my entry - SHANE BRIANT - recently. You took me out of the main encyclopaedia for doing so. BUT EVERYTHING WAS VERIFIABLE - all you had to do was check with the IMDb (Internet Movie Data Base). I did it only because your entries showed my worst work (hooro films) and omitted my best work (the other 30 films). I thought it would be of interest - if you are an encyclopaedia - to have on record that I am a prolific novelist too. Also easily verifiable.

I did it only because my friends in America pressed me to do it - not because I have a big egos. My Google links are currently over 74,000. But I do not appear right now in your Encyclopaedia.

Kind regards

Shane Briant

sbriant@bigpond.net.au

I think you should write this at the talk page or the one who moved the page (User_talk:RHaworth). While it might be bad practice to edit an article about oneslef you didn't create the article, so I think that your complaint is valid. But the best course of action is to contact RHworth before doing anything else. 83.227.141.19 23:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC) – Sorry I was not logged in whil writing this Jeltz talk 23:31, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I would suggest asking RHaworth to move the article back. Moving an article to userspace in this way is effectively speedy deletion, and as the biography asserted notability, it doesn't seem to have been eligible. If you don't get any joy from him, try deletion review to get the decision reviewed. --Sam Blanning(talk) 23:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(Actually looking at Shane's talk page he may be ahead of me.) --Sam Blanning(talk) 23:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved back to Shane Briant. There was no call for 1 user to invoke his 1 opinion like that, especially when he was claiming unverifiability despite the prominence on IMDB and Google. — BRIAN0918 • 2006-08-07 00:37

Category?

The main pages doesn't seem to have a category. Maybe it should have one?-70.92.246.98 02:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about CatAgory:Main Page or CatAgory:Pages people complain about ;) *snigger* If you're serious I think a category on the main page would be a bit redundent and clutter it somewhat. --Monotonehell 06:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling

Israeli is misspelled Isareli. Please correct, TewfikTalk 03:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copied to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. If you notice errors or ommisions in the future please post them there. Thanks :) --Monotonehell 06:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kfar Giladi

I've written an atticle on Kfar Giladi. Could someone please link it? --PiMaster3 talk 14:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry could you be more clear with regards to what you want? "link it"? --Monotonehell 15:17, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I assume he's talking about the second news item, which refers to Kfar Giladi. I've turned it into a wikilink. --Sam Blanning(talk) 17:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'm not an admin so I couldn't change it myself. --PiMaster3 talk 22:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Worst flag ever

Most users will just think there's a problem with the image for the Libya FA. Are there no free images of the countryside or Tripoli or something? --Nelson Ricardo 00:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the simplicity of Libya's flag should prevent it from appearing on the Main Page. Perhaps those readers unfamiliar with the Libyan flag will click on it or open the article and learn something they didn't know before. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 00:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't mock other cultures, but: "The top right corner of the flag represents peace, the top left represents life, the bottom right represents faithfulness to the country and the bottom left represents unity" (Flag of Libya). Say what you want about that there green rectangle, but it sure is pulling its weight. --Sam Blanning(talk) 00:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If they think there's a problem with the image for the flag, I guess they'll be pleasantly surprised when they learn something --taking another step away from ignorance and into the insatiable beast that is knowledge (or some other gobbledygook) --Bobak 00:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We could use a map of Libya though; that represents Libya just as wlel as its flag. —Cuiviénen 00:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm actually skeptical about the 4 corners thing. It sounds like a joke. Not that the flag doesn't look like a joke, of course... --Kinst 01:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
IIRC, the green on the flag is mainly for the Green revolution, but I will check out my flag books later and get back to yall. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer to use national flags when (and only when) an article about a country is run. Maps make TERRIBLE main page images (at 100px wide it's basically an incomprehensible blob of color) and should never, ever be used under any circumstances. Raul654 01:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I sent an email to the Libya Embassy in the US, should expect an answer by the end of the week. My flag books debunk the four corners theory for now, and even my boys (FOTW) are scratching our heads, since not much flag info comes from Libya. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about using the coat of arms? Ziggur 02:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just swapped out the PNG image for the arms, but as Raul said before, let's stick with the flag. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Honestly, I've always thought it was kind of a dumb idea for a flag, but you have to admit, it sure is attention-grabbing in its simplicity. People are used to seeing photos and diagrams on the main page, and seeing a big green box is sure to make the Libya page a popular destination for casual readers and hardcore editors alike. Lovelac7 03:34, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leave it there of course. I never knew there was a country flag with just one color. Brilliant idea. Way better than all those boring red-white-blue flags. Piet 07:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leave it, though I don't think we should be nominating it as a featured image any time soon. In other news I think the four corners thing is a joke (no mention here and they seem to have most details about other flags and I can't find it anywhere else.) Jellypuzzle | Talk 10:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please mention the all-green flag in the TFA text. --64.229.228.195 12:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Odd Phrasing

"Libya is slightly larger in area than Alaska, the fourth largest nation in Africa, and the 17th largest in the world" makes it sound like Alaska is in Africa. Can it be changed? --194.217.191.10 09:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)Adam[reply]

See the next section. Graham talk 09:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of Lybia's area with Alaska

I'd put this up on WP:ERRORS, but it might deserve some discussion, so here goes. I have a problem with the following sentence:

"With an area of 1.8 million square kilometres, 90% of which is desert, Libya is slightly larger in area than Alaska, the fourth largest nation in Africa, and the 17th largest in the world."


Firstly, it's badly worded and it could be interpreted to say that Alaska is the fourth-largest nation in Africa. Secondly, as an Australian, I don't find comparisons with the area of Alaska helpful, and they probably wouldn't be helpful for people outside North America. The sentence should be changed the way it was in the actual article to:

With an area of 1.8 million square kilometres, 90% of which is desert, Libya is the fourth largest nation-state in Africa by area, and the 17th largest in the world.

Hmmm, I see someone was also confused at WP:ERRORS, so I'm not the only one. I'll redirect any discussion here, because this is a more suitable place for discussion. Graham talk 09:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to match the article. You may need to purge your cache in order to see the update on the Main page. Raven4x4x 10:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks; that clears things up a bit. Graham talk 11:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Placements of images on the main page ...

Hi guys, in the past I noticed several times that images are misplaced on the main page. Today, however, it’s the worst misplacement I’ve seen for quite some time. The picture of the "Warsaw radio mast" is placed on the very top of the "On this day" section, but the corresponding text is the last bullet point at the very end of that section. – Can't the layout of the main page (!) be checked that the images are always beside the corresponding text items? – Thanks. MikeZ 12:03, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The image is not misplaced. It's always in that same spot no matter which of the bulleted item contains the corresponding text. --64.229.228.195 12:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&oldid=68387610"