Talk:Main Page/Archive 15

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

"Some Bullshit Happens in Soccer"[edit]

"Nobody gives a fuck about your shitty wogball. Three out of five articles for March 7, two out of nine on March 6, one out of nine on March 4. That's six out of 29. I didn't realize soccer was worth 20 percent of the entire news coverage of one site. Why not rename it WikiSoccer. Or Soccanews."

Quit trolling. People cover what they like. If you want to change the stats write more non-soccer stories instead of trying to discourage good contributors. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Iran Test First Small Atomic Bomb" hoax article on mainpage[edit]

"Iran Test First Small Atomic Bomb", this hoax article is on the mainpage since the creation of the article, 30th November. That´s typical Wikinews, its just another blog. Delete this article!! --Wikineuser 08:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews is not a blog. Since Wikinews is a news website that anyone can edit many anons create hoax articles. Admins like myself delete them quickly so no one can see them. —FellowWikiNews (W) 16:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was not a speedy delete. Wiki"news" is a blog. For 4 days this hoax article was on the mainpage. --Wikineuser 09:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand what you mean. Wikinews is not a blog. Actually, you are wrong. It did not have the {{publish}} tag on it, therefore it is not on the main page. Not sure if Wikinews admins are even stupid enough to not see a hoax article on the main page. (I'm an admin.) —FellowWikiNews (W) 02:18, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong. Without the tag, it was for 4 days on the main page. This is the proof that Wikinews can´t work and is a blog. --Wikineuser 04:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, only the {{publish}} tag puts it on the main page. This article was in the Stories in development section on the bottom of the main page. FellowWikiNews (W) I am Canadien! 18:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong again, it was published and placed in the publish section on the main page. Wikinews is a blog and can´t achieve anything. --Wikineuser 12:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uhhh, sorry but you are wrong I checked the article again and there was no publish tag. See: P.S. Sorry but only admins can see this page after it was deleted. FellowWikiNews (W) 21:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, you are wrong again, it was published and placed in the publish section on the main page for days. Wikiwrong is a sandbox which copies wrongly from news sources and is a blog. End of the discussion. --Wikineuser 11:47, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • You cannot just claim something to be a blog. Since you don't seem particuarly intellegent, I'll help you along with this. A blog is short for "Web log", and is a defined by being "user-generated...Journal style...reverse chronological order". While Wikinews is user-generated, it is not in the style of a journal, rather it is in the style of a news site. Since there is nothing to say a news site cannot be user-generated, Wikinews would seem more fitting for this catagory. 21:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with Wikineuser. Look that Israeli president scandal was on there for weeks when it is an affair hardly worth mentioning for more than a day or two. And look here Roger Federer won the Australian Open but that was a week ago last Sunday! I think Wikipedia should either (1) partner with some other organization that really knows the business of news or (2) hire people whose only function is selecting and writing news articles instead of allowing any monkey to write news. News is different from a normal Wiki article: news is knowledge (1) known only within the past day or even past hour, must be presented (2) as accurately as possible and (3) within a short timeframe; it is not knowledge that has the luxury of being reviewed by tons of people over a long period of time. 03:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First we are not wikipedia. Second if we hire people to make news and don't let just anyone it defeats the purpose. Third we arn't perfect, but complaining about it isn't going to fix that. (There is a button labeled edit that will however). Bawolff 04:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quote

No, you are wrong again, it was published and placed in the publish section on the main page for days.

Only admins can edit the main page. Therefore, the only way an article gets on the main page is by putting the publish tag on it. You should really do your research before causing a dispute and later finding out that you were wrong. FellowWikiNews (W) (sign here!) 00:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


It is surprising that Wikinews does not feature the most important ongoing situation right now in Africa on its main page. And not even on the Africa region page! -- 16:14, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Highest edits page?[edit]

I hope this is the right place to ask; is there an article that lists the users with the highest edit counts? Or a page that list the non-admin users with the highest edit counts? If not, who could create a list? I think it would be quite interesting. Icelandic Hurricane 21:22, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'd have to check on an editor-by-editor basis on the edit counter. This is usually available at but the toolserver seems to be down just now. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think wikimedia stats used to have it, but they don't anymore. Bawolff 08:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Someone should import Interiot's tool2 to Wikinews so that this can be done. Ccool2ax 13:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
you can if you want. However the toolserver is up now, so we can editcpount away. I think someone like Amgine might have the greatest nyumber of edits (Amgine has 11 917 edits [1] ). Bawolff 21:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think this would create and urge to make unnecessary edits in order to raise one's edit count; in the same way people make excessive posts in a forum in order to raise their stats. ( 23:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]
  • I think I win now... I'm at 13,072. This is edit that +1 --Brian McNeil / talk 16:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page in article space?[edit]

Should main page not be in main page space like Wikipedia? Shyam (T/C) 21:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The wikipedia Main page is in the main namespace. Some projects (I think wikiverssity) have it in the project namespace, but I don't really see how that matters. Bawolff 08:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The reason some people don't prefer the Main Page in the Main namespace is because if it's there, then it's counted as an article, shows up when one hits random page, etc. Ccool2ax 13:24, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Should we also move it to main page, just a thought? Shyam (T/C) 18:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about. Wikinews main page is in the same namespace as the wikipedia main page. If you really want to put it in portal: or Wikinews: namespace, we could, but it seems kinda pointless. (Also I think some people don't like the prefix. Actually I think there was a big argument as to move it into the portal ns a while back. Bawolff 05:17, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the very top left of both the pages for the clarification. Shyam (T/C) 11:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Still don't know what you mean. Wikipedia uses a tad bit of js to hide its name,(and apearently we do too). but if you turn off javascript, the pages look identical title wise. Bawolff 00:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand[edit]

Is it just me, or are there way to many articles on New Zealand listed here. I'm sure New Zealand's an interesting place, but it's not exactly a world hotspot. Are there just an unusually large number of editors from there, or what? --WikiMarshall 6:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

^I totally agree with that, the editors should do something about it. There could be relevant world news in place of the 5 or 6 small issues from New Zealand that are always taking up space on the front page.. No offense to New Zealand, but come on, its not that relevant to world issues and no one country should get more coverage than another on here.

Welcome to Wikinews, WikiMarshall. There are many contibutors listed who contribute for New Zealand listed here. For any discussions regarding New Zealand, follow up this page. For any further queries, please let me know. Shyam (T/C) 07:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are also many India and Canadian contibutors on Wikinews :) —FellowWikiNews (W) 17:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And, of course, English :) Thunderhead(talk) 06:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Big Mommas of Wikinews are the United States, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and recently India. If you want to add to that, there's only one way: write articles! MESSEDROCKER 21:21, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I like writing and you don't have to read the articles, no one is making you. --Nzgabriel | Talk 07:55, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately the issue isn't how many articles about New Zealand, but how few compared to other countries. I think the Australian and New Zealand writers have done an exemplary job. Now whom from the other continents will follow suit? An effort should be made; however, to balance the main page, because seriously if I want news I go to wikipedia.
Wiki is an anagram of Kiwi. There's the answer to why there are so many no news stories from the Shakey Isles. Someone claims that the UK is one of the "big mommas" on here, yet the top news story in the UK - the Ipswich murders - has been totally ignored. --Whnook 14:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exwikinewsie, Amgine once said: "Wikinews strongly supports local reporting. When our daily coverage is high enough to warrant it, local news will be relegated to local portals only. Until then, we wish to encourage local reporters with a venue where their articles may be viewed on the main page."

There have been 6 front-page articles on domestic affairs in New Zealand in the last 8 days. This is extremely disproportionate to any other national coverage. The trend has existed for some time. How can New Zealand coverage be balanced with other national news, and shouldn't international news take precident? --Jtfine 21:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Getting more people involved with Wikinews who aren't from New Zealand would seem to be the appropriate solution. This isn't an impossible task. GreenReaper 21:40, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • New Zealand contributions are an example of what a small number of dedicated people can do for the distribution of news on a particular part of the world. GreenReaper may have been a little curt with his answer, but from the wiki perspective the solution is more stories from other parts of the world.
One day the NZ stuff will be spun off into its own region-specific main page, and we'll have very interesting arguments about what goes on the front page. That first requires that we have a good few more countries with as many stories per day as New Zealand. --Brian McNeil / talk 22:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if my response appeared curt - that wasn't my intention, the solution just seemed obvious. :-) Here are some constructive suggestions I prepared earlier on the topic of wiki promotion and community building (slides, audio). They are targeted for community-specific wikis, but many could apply to any community endeavor. GreenReaper 22:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would totally approve of the New Zealand articles being placed only on the New Zealand Portal, mainly to avoid these arguments but still keep my loyal readers happy. --Nzgabriel | Talk 03:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why does it matter if there are a lot of New Zealand news articles??!!?? 04:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some news clips[edit]

Following in the footsteps of Dell and Apple, Japanese electronics maker Toshiba has been forced to recall defective laptop batteries made by Sony. Unlike the Dell and Apple products, however, the Toshiba batteries do not run the risk of overheating and hence are not a safety threat. The batteries instead can potentially fail to charge and discharge properly, according to Toshiba.

Toshiba and Lenovo have become the latest computer brands to recall Sony-made laptop batteries.

Lenovo said it took the decision after one of its laptops caught fire at Los Angeles Airport. Meanwhile Toshiba said it did so on the advice of Sony.


This brings the recall to a worldwide total of over seven million batteries following Dell's earlier recall of 4.1 million Sony batteries and Apple's 1.8 million.


A Handful of International Airlines Now Require Owners of Certain Dell and Apple Laptops to Remove the Batteries While Onboard

Sony laptop batteries came under further fire today after Lenovo confirmed that the laptop, which caught fire at the Los Angeles International Airport over the last weekend was a ThinkPad equipped with Sony batteries.

The laptop incident was described on the web site Something Awful. A man ran up the wrong way and pushed aside boarding passengers and once he confirmed that no one was in the vicinity, he dropped his laptop. Once he did that the machine burst into flames.

Japanese electronics giant Matsushita, the maker of Panasonic products, has begun recalling some 6,000 laptop batteries due to fears that they may overheat.

Matsushita Electric Industrial is recalling lithium-ion batteries installed in Panasonic-brand notebook computers assembled in April and May last year and sold in the domestic market.

Hiding the Main Page title[edit]

All, check out the Wikipedia Main Page. Note how the title of the page isn't there. It'd be great if someone could get in touch with a developer (or even a knowledgeable admin on WP) and figure out how that was done. -- IlyaHaykinson 17:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

like so[2]. w:Mediawiki:Monobook.js uses something very similar.  — Doldrums(talk) 17:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sweet. Nice investigative work. Any objections if I put this in place on WN? I think it looks less geeky. -- IlyaHaykinson 09:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I implemented some changes: removed the page name (Ctrl-R or Ctrl-F5 to see) and made the Template:MainPageHeader a bit closer to Wikipedia's. I would suggest actually stretching it all the way across, again much like Wikipedia, if someone wants to take on this project. If people dislike these changes, please feel free to revert (or, if lacking administrative privileges, leave a nasty message on my talk page). -- IlyaHaykinson 06:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You could also do it in CSS h1.firstHeading {display:none;}

Bawolff 18:48, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I hope this is the right place to ask. Does anyone think that we could have a signpost and esparanza? Icelandic Hurricane 22:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

template:wn news. Bawolff 00:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Major world events omitted![edit]

Britney Spears is divorcing and it is not on the frontpage? No wonder teenage girls seldom visit wikinews... 10:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is an article. Britney Spears to divorce husband Kevin Federline. —FellowWikiNews (W) 20:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Main page changes[edit]

The page looks shocking now. Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 22:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

personally I liked the previous version a little bit better. It seems unbalanced without a title. but don't let me stop you, we definitly need a change - experiment on. nevermind, I just needed to get used to it. Bawolff 00:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone object to classing the RSS link with the class rss. (Like this). Bawolff
Actually maybe the RSS link should remain unclassed, as it links to a page listing RSS links, but does anyone mind if I include an RSS link in the footer? Bawolff 01:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can't figure out how to edit the line with disclaimer provacy policy and about on it. But I still think we should have a stylized RSS somewhere on the main page. having Wikinews RSS sticks out at you a lot more. any sugestions? Bawolff 01:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OR vs. interviews[edit]

I suggest either filtering interviews from template:original stories (notcategory=interviews), or merging the two lists. Right now interviews appear redundantly in both lists.--Eloquence 11:12, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done.  — Doldrums(talk) 07:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revamp Main Page[edit]

I propose that the front page be revamped to display more articles at any one time and should displya categories like any news site. In order to sustain people's interest in the project, we need plenty of updates all the time and that featured main page stories be categorily arranged. Please check normal news sites such as googlenews for an idea on what I am saying. The revamp would include the following changed.

  • More stories on the homepage.
  • Bigger Picture for main story.
  • News Categories
  • Change title fonts back to Arial.
  • Change logo to resemble Wikipedia's main logo.

Please discuss this matter. TownCrier 01:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't want more news stories or bigger pictures on the front page. That only makes for more scrolling. The title fonts are fine with me, I don't see any reason not too look more professional, with less-"webby". typefaces.
News categories, though, has possibilities. I've often batted the idea in my mind that the front page could be organized by categories, with the 5 newest XXX stories, regardless of age, 5 newest YYY stories, etc. If there's more than 5 ZZZ stories in one given day, they'd all appear, but every category would have at least the five most recent. This would force us to write more articles in areas like Health or Economy and Business, which we sometimes are slow to do elsewise.
As for the logo, NO. While Wikipedia and Wikinews do collaborate on many occasions, they are completely seperate projects of the Wikimedia Foundation. As such, they should be branded seperately. Additionally, it's much easier to defend the copyright of completely unique logos in court. -- Zanimum 14:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

American Anthropological Association?[edit]

Is this really front-page worthy? Several prominent organizations have condemned both the war and the use of torture- what exactly is it about these anthropologists that makes this news item that significant? 07:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, we've only ever had five stories with the world "Anthropological", and none of them have taken place in North or South America, let alone the US. Are you sure you were looking at us? -- Zanimum 14:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Oaxaca State governor and teacher protests[edit]

I'm looking for more information about the teacher protests in Oaxaca State. There have been endless personal stories of murder, torture, and assault (physical and sexual) carried out by the government forces against men, women, and youth who are standing up and protesting the violent and repressive government regime. Even the president of Mexico and many others have asked the Governor to step down so order can be restored, but the Governor refuses.

Have there been any additional reports or news coverage devoted to this subject? Sonofapreacherman 14:10, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd recommend Google News for this... n:Oaxaca protest. Our coverage of many news stories is limited, due to a relatively small user-base. As such, we haven't had any coverage since "In a Show of Force Mexican Federal Forces Remove Oaxacan Protestors from Oaxaca City Center", back on the 31st of October. -- Zanimum 14:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Australian report shows emissions increase "more than doubled since the 1990s"[edit]

Can we please change "Aussie" to" Australian" - this informal word implies and affectionate regard for a nation and perhaps reeks to some of smug jingoistic nationalism and possibly extremely distasteful. "Australian" is a more politically neutral word. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 23:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I changed Aussie to Tasmanian to avoid repetition and be more informative. Is that OK? --InfantGorilla 00:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Aussie sounded okay to me. —FellowWikiNews (W) 16:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extensive documentary[edit]

Is there an area to write down information that has been investigated under a longer period of time rather than "news of the day" kind of news? Lordmetroid Dec 3, 21:16

Look to Wikinews:Story preparation. Edbrown05 07:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is also Wikinews:Request an interview. —FellowWikiNews (W) 15:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


What are the odds of categories for news such as say, news about Sony or their products, being deleted? Does anyone agree that a category for such news would be a good idea? - 05:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we already do this on Wikinews. There is a Category:Sony. —FellowWikiNews (W) 14:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Important Article[edit]

Muslims required to wear armbands

now called: Americans want Muslims to wear armbands [above comment claiming this is an important item isn't mine, but I agree] Towsonu2003 04:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mars story[edit]

I've just corrected the text of the Mars story to note that it's evidence for water that;s been found, not actual photographs of liquid water! Can someone correct the lead on the front page?

Sorry, Can't find it. What's its full name? Bawolff 21:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Ford[edit]

CNN says Gerald Ford has died - where's the obit to move to the mainspace?


Edbrown05 was making a couple for a little bit. This is one of his. See also commons:category:Political cartoons and commons:category:Editorial cartoons

I suggest include free comics in everyday Wikinews´ edition. You can see Wikinews:Free webcomic, for free comic sources.-- 11:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually of those the only one we could include is Everybody Loves Eric Raymond. The others are all restricted to non-commercial use. the wub "?!" 22:17, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We had Political cartoons at one point, but it interfered with WN:NPOV And hard to figure out how to include them. There was also an offer from a cartoonist who watned to make non-political cartoons, but that never materialized (see Water cooler archives). Bawolff 00:00, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry! I just allocated that free time! terinjokes | Talk | Come visit the WikiBistro 15:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

who decides what news get featured on main page?[edit]

who decides them? 12:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who writes a comprehensive article may submit it on the first lead, the second lead, or the third lead. See: Main second Featured story. FellowWikiNews (W) 00:27, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clone articles[edit]

I notice quite a few clone articles on the same subject seem to pop up. Is there any standard procedure to minimise this, or purge articles on the same topic? Pauric 14:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We usually do follow-up articles on Wikinews. FellowWikiNews (W) 20:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If it is an exact duplicate article (not a follow up) you can tag with {{dupe|<name of the otehr article here>}}. Bawolff 00:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Football fields as a mesure of surface[edit]

Is it really necessary to use "x football fields" to represent surfaces like the breakaway ice-shelf? And I'm certain it refers to American Football fields. Please take note that most of the planet considers "football" another sport which has a different playing field size. Besides when somebody talks about "11 000 football fiels" it starts to get hard to imagine what they ment at all. Using speficif countries or even states would make much more sense if one doesn't want to include scientific mesures (like square kilometers). But please don't use something as culture specific, confusing and just plain impossible to imagine like "football fields". I'm certaine even a pro football player can't figure out what 10 000 football fields represent except "pretty big".

Admin please fix Main Page spelling errors?[edit]

In the article summary "Iraqi govenment to investigate Saddam video" (sic) on the Main Page, the word 'government' (in the title) lacks an 'r' and the word 'responsible' is misspelled (with a 'c'). Will someone with privileges to alter the Main Page please fix these ASAP?

Also, the word 'to' is extraneous, and the whole summary in general is in desperate need of a rewrite. My suggestion: The Iraqi government has vowed to investigate the leaked video of Saddam's execution which revealed taunting of the former dictator during his final moments and angered members of the nation's Sunni minority.

EDIT: Spelling errors have been fixed (thanks!), rewrite still necessary.

Feel free to comment on Talk:Iraq investigates leaked video, taunting of Saddam if you have any suggestions :-) FellowWikiNews (W) 01:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Typo on main page[edit]

There's a typo in the preview for the Saddam Hussein article - it should say "unleashed", not "unleased". -- 01:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. FellowWikiNews (W) 01:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Nothing on this? Surprising. This could be a start -



I am doing a school project and I remember seeing a wikinews artical with a bbc news source about a woman who in 2006 was demonstrating that she didn't like a truck carrying some form of weapon in her city so she lay down in front of it in protest. I have searched for ages trying to find it but I have no luck, Can anybody help out please? 00:03, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, is this it? Hope i could help! Thunderhead - (talk) Congrajulations to Kat! 00:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It might be something to do with this [3]. If it is, you could use the details form there to google it Nil Einne 14:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Commons images have a tab to show what links to it. If it has to do with submarines, maybe this story Britain to replace Trident nuclear missile system. But neither this nor its Related news mentions the criteria you are talking about. - 15:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any other details about it? Or even maybe what month it was in? You could also try searching google for it, and prefixing (that will search only wikinews). Bawolff :-)(-:


I am wondering y any time us news gets posted on here it gets yanked but when its any international news it becomes the big story. like some of these international news stories arent really that big of a deal im sorry. something like the state of the union address is rather big considering how many lives it effects (especially in iraq). some of these stories in britain like that racist big brother thing and that serial hooker killer arent really anything when put up against some other stories. and another thing i dont get is y sometimes theres new news on here constantly than for like a week its the same stories and nothing changes, i mean more on the front page than anything else, its just something i thought was wierd.

The answer lies in the fact that we have a relatively limited number of contributors to write stories, and that they can write whatever they want, ignoring the big stories if they feel like it. Any established member can change the stories on the main page, so join in and help out to improve these shortcomings!--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, make sure that you click "Refresh to see the latest news!" every day. Often, your cache will not update the front page. -- Zanimum 19:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MSNBC_Poll ????[edit]

whats up with rss fead about MSNBC_Poll.Or it's just me?Plus firefox can't display it(i don't have internet explorer) and if i try to vew the source it's just a header.-- 05:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thats not good. Bawolff 05:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

“Philippine commission tags military in slays”[edit]

Slay is not a noun. The article has been moved to “Philippine commission tags military in slayings.” The link should be updated to reflect this change in both name and target.—Kbolino 19:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noting this. It appears the article was changed to your suggestion, then later to "Philippine commission holds retired general responsible for killings". -- Zanimum 19:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2nd versus 3rd lead[edit]

Why is there a distinction here? I always thought once we have a new story for the "secondlead" template, we bump whatever was there down to third lead, and delete whatever was third lead. Now I read that there's a formal distinction between the two? Why? -- Zanimum 16:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the text on the templates explained that the 2nd lead is more a second, important international story, where the 3rd has a more human-interest side to it. Once again I really think the label "Featured Story" makes it all very confusing.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Third lead should, ideally, be a human interest story that is well written. First and second lead are for more international events/stories. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:23, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prodi's resignation dismissed??[edit]

I am not sure the article gets it clear. Prodi resigned, and his resignation was accepted. Then, as usual when it is necessary to find a new government, the President of the Republic asket to political parties whom they wanted as "new" President of the Council of Ministres, and the majority proposed Prodi again. This is why he needs a confidence vote (otherwise not requested), and this is why he will eventually lead a different govenment ("Prodi III").-- 22:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Columbine High School[edit]

The sub-heading of the Columbine bomb scare on the main page is pretty sensationalist, isn't it? "...just two months before the eighth anniversary..." In other words, it is one sixth of a year from a non-significant anniversary of an event which is only connected because it happened in the same place. Given a random event at Columbine high school, there is a one-in-three chance that it will be nearer to an anniversary of the shooting than this. It's a bit like saying that John F Kennedy was assassinated "only" five months after the ninety-seventh anniversary of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln - spooky co-incidence, huh? 02:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. -- Zanimum 20:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Could you please add an interlang to Japanese Wikinews? ja: can work. Also Turkish (tr) was dropped. Thanks. --Aphaia 12:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Turkish does not exist, but I've added Japanese and Thai (th).--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BBC poll[edit]


The wikiversity link is showing red as it's an internal (wikinews) link. Could someone please change this as i don't know the correct link. Cheers --MarkieTalk 16:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where exactly is this link? FellowWikiNews (W) (sign here!) 17:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Right at the bottom in the sister projects area.--MarkieTalk 17:30, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
oops sorry it seems to have been a glitch - dont know what quite went on as its blue now!?!?!?--MarkieTalk 17:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
May just be me going mad though!--MarkieTalk 17:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Ungdomshuset" still relevant?[edit]

In the main page of wikipedia, the following news item is listed: Riots break out in Nørrebro, Copenhagen following the eviction of squatters from Ungdomshuset by Danish police.

This is rather old news, the riots have completely stopped, and the story has (almost, but not completely) been dropped from the local media (I am from Denmark). Perhaps someone could find some more current news to place there instead?

We have nothing to do with the news section on the front of Wikipedia, although you're not the first to think that we do. --Brian McNeil / talk 12:27, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, do you have any suggestions for where I could post this instead, then?
Good idea, thanks

editintro's in create an article box seem to be screwed[edit]

Big line breaks by is this a minor edit box. I wrote a thing on bugzilla about it, hopefully someone will fix it soon. Bawolff 08:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shorts as first lead?[edit]

Does everyone agree to have a brief as lead article? I personally think it should at least be a separate article, with an {{expand}}-tag.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

not quite sure i understand you, but if you mean that the link to the day's shorts on the main page shld be more prominent than its what it is now (a link in Start an article), then yes. –Doldrums(talk) 10:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, I mean that the story about Eastern stock markets fall sharply was the main lead, and that page redirects to Wikinews Shorts: March 14, 2007.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
in that case, i don't like the idea of making a shorts item a lead article. looks odd that we haven't developed the article we consider most important to the state where it can stand as a full article. –Doldrums(talk) 17:56, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamic content broke[edit]

I'm seeing all the dynamic boxes expanded on the front page with Firefox Has someone been playing with the CSS and/or Javascript? --Brian McNeil / talk 09:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup now you mention it im seeing that too in IE (boo hiss!) as well.--MarkieTalk 09:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The templates for each major region also appear fully expanded, check the bottom of Portal:Turkey which has three. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
i think (can't quite remeber) that these have been showing like this for a long time but not sure about the main page.--MarkieTalk 10:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The correct behaviour is such that where there is only one dynamic box on a page it appears expanded. When >1 they all appear collapsed. So, for many of the country portals the region box will appear expanded. Turkey has three so they should appear collapsed. Main page was working within the last week, but tracking down where the error is isn't something I can do. --Brian McNeil / talk 10:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Right. Ok, didnt know that. Thanks--MarkieTalk 10:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Confirming Main Page breakage viewed with Opera 9.10 too. Dan100 (Talk) 15:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mmmh, I use Firefox too, and everything seems fine...--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 16:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have hide/show boxes on the oldest days of news? --Brian McNeil / talk 16:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I have.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
IE is not showing the [show] and [hide] tags next to the older days of news.  Thunderhead  ►  17:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that was me, reverted my changes, see if that's it, sorry everyone Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 18:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope sorry still cant see any hide/show tabs even when cache cleared--MarkieTalk 18:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, can't have been my changes, that's interesting. Bawolff should be able to track it down, as he's our js expert Brian | (Talk) | New Zealand Portal 18:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Might just be me - better wait for someone else to check if it changes for them--MarkieTalk 18:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly to this on the single source template the exceptions are bit now doesnt expand.--MarkieTalk 20:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]