Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors

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

• 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 08:32 on 2 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.

Administrators: Clear all reports

Errors in In the news

Template:ITN-Update

Guinea-Bissau

I might be being oversensitive but the word "mutinous" to me has connotations other than simply "taking part in a mutiny" that don't really belong in a neutral headline like in ITN. Just my thought. 68.54.4.162 (talk) 19:43, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Its better than "mutineering"

Anyhoo, we dont by precedence wikilink hthe names of the countries per this...also if we want to end with capital then we should add "City"..otherwise the older incarnation was better. (though moving the election before the coup was a good idea)Lihaas (talk) 15:16, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

We've agreed to link the names of countries of direct relevance (as opposed to those in which events, such as natural disasters, happened to occur). A coup d'éta in a nation's capital, related to an ongoing presidential election, certainly qualifies.

How is "capital" unclear or incorrect? —David Levy 18:25, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Seems OK to me as is. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:53, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Grand National

'closest finish ever' -> 'closest ever finish' (for encyclopaedic tone) Modest Genius ^talk 14:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Done. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:36, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Uh, what? Why is that more encyclopedic? I actually switched it from "closest ever finish" to "closest finish ever" because the former seemed obviously worse to me. It was the closest finish, with "ever" just there to clarify and express the time period. -- tariqabjotu 19:00, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

"Ever" is redundant - either it was the closest finish or it wasn't.--ukexpat (talk) 19:03, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• I might have switched too quickly; I agreed with MG that "closest ever finish" sounded slightly more formal than "closest finish ever", and assumed there was some grammatical rule to back that up. Looking at some of the references in the article, and a Google News search, I see that it's split almost 50%-50% on which order used in the sources (indeed, some switch back and forth between headline and text), so it probably didn't matter. It might be redundant logically, but if I just say "in the event's closest finish" period, it sounds weird. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:13, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Errors in the current or next Did you know...

Unless there's something I'm missing here, there is no Queen of England, there hasn't been in 300 years. Elizabeth II is Queen of the United Kingdom, and of the other Commonwealth realms which have her as head of state. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:43, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, and that is a rather insulting mistake for her many other subjects. Over 130 million people have her as head of state, but only 50 million live in England. Just say 'Elizabeth II'. Modest Genius ^talk 13:47, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

(moved from wrong section, below)
Regarding the Queen's unmentionables - Elizabeth is indeed Queen of England but describing her as such is a little like saying Barack Obama is President of New York. She is also Queen of Scots, Northern Ireland, the crown dependencies and numerous Commonwealth countries. Could I suggest changing the linked text to something like "Queen Elizabeth II and I"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.228.222 (talk) 10:58, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

While not as common in Europe, the phrase "the Queen of England" has a rhetorical connotation as someone "above the herd"; it's as much a figurative role as an actual person. You lose that figurative sense of it if you specifically refer to the post and not the concept, so I'm less sure this is a mistake than a missed piece of rhetoric. It is technically correct, inasmuch as David Cameron is first lord of the treasury and Nicolas Sarkozy is coregent of Andorra; it's just a lesser post within the many she holds. GRAPPLE X 12:52, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're wrong, GRAPPLE. She is most definitely not Queen of England, it's not a minor title, it's not anything. There is no monarchy of England, there hasn't been for 300 years I believe since the Act of Union. We shouldn't perpetuate this myth. "Queen of the United Kingdom" would do just fine. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 13:08, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

My mistake; I had assumed that her position as head of state of England was as monarch of that country specifically (in the same manner as the Monarchy of Canada, for example). GRAPPLE X 13:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a common mistake. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 13:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

(end of moved portion)

Not convinced it's that big a deal, but since she's not my queen I don't suppose my judgement is well informed. I've changed it to "Queen Elizabeth II". --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Whether or not it's a big deal, I'm wondering about a wider issue-- why we had two Easter egg links/redirects on the mainpage (unmentionables redirecting to undergarments, and Queen of England pointing at Elizabeth II). Template:Did you know nominations/Rigby & Peller. Is DYK doing this to promote cutesy hooks, ala April Fools? Is it what we should be doing routinely on the main page? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

There's no real problem with putting redirects on the main page. There is a problem (IMHO) putting easter eggs on the main page. I'm not sure how I feel about "unmentionables" being used to link to "undergarments"; it's clear to me what "unmentionables" means, not sure how clear it is to everyone else, nor how clear it needs to be to everyone else when it's linked. The thing is there is a tradition of trying to be a little too cute for my taste on the last blurb of DYK sometimes, and although I don't like it, I'm not going to unilaterally un-cuteify it when I know a large portion of those involved disagree with my taste. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:31, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. I'm not sure I agree with this particular instance, but putting redirects on the main page is acceptable. Back when I used to dabble in DYK, it was hidden in the supplementary guidelines, that although sometimes discouraged, they can be a good thing, and that it's better to link to a redirect than pipe through. Worm^TT · (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

For what it's worth, 'unmentionables' to me implies 'genitals', which is not the meaning intended. Modest Genius ^talk 14:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Yikes. In the States, it just means undergarments, at least it does where I am. Assuming Modest Genius' interpretation is not an extreme outlier of some kind, I'm changing it to "undergarments", and probably wreck the blurb writer's day. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:47, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

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

Linking

Why is Washington DC linked but Massachusetts and Maine aren't Hot Stop 05:14, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't know, but there's probably some MOS-related reason, and even if it is wrong, it's harmless enough that I'll wait for someone more MOS-fluent than I to decide. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:39, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Someone was just a bit too aggressive in their delinking efforts. —howcheng {chat} 16:13, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Misleading

"Polish–Soviet War: The Polish army launched the Vilna offensive to capture Vilnius in modern Lithuania.". The "in modern Lithuania" is misleading, as it suggests that the Vilnius of the Vilna Offensive/PSWar era was in modern Lithuania (it wasn't, at that time it was occupied by the Bolsheviks). I strongly suggest that this is replaced with the direct quote from the lead of the article "from the Red Army". --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 17:08, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Done, leaving "(now in modern Lithuania)" as a parenthetical to establish location. —howcheng {chat} 18:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

If you're doing that then just have "(now in Lithuania)", the modern is redundant if you say now.--23230 ^talk 20:41, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Errors in today's or tomorrow's featured picture

Reporters: please first correct today's or tomorrow's regular version.

Errors in the summary of Monday's featured list

There is a dangling modifier in the first sentence. British film actor, comedian, director, producer, writer, musician and music ''composer Charlie Chaplin's work in motion pictures spanned from 1914 until 1967.

Maybe change to "British film actor, comedian, director, producer, writer, musician and music composer, Charlie Chaplin worked in motion pictures from 1914 until 1967." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.135.112.12 (talk) 18:57, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Any other problems

Please report any other problems on General discussion part of Talk: Main Page.