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 01:09 on 6 July 2024) and is not adjusted to your local time zone.
- Can you resolve the problem yourself? If the error lies primarily in the content of an article linked from the Main Page, fix the problem there before reporting it here. Text on the Main Page generally defers to the articles with bolded links. Upcoming content on the Main Page is usually only protected from editing beginning 24 hours before its scheduled appearance. Before that period, you can be bold and fix any issues yourself.
- Do not use {{edit fully-protected}} on this page, which will not get a faster response. It is unnecessary, because this page is not protected, and causes display problems because this is not a talk page. (See the bottom of this revision for an example.)
- No chit-chat. Lengthy discussions should be moved to a suitable location elsewhere, such as the talk page of the relevant article or project.
- Respect other editors. Another user wrote the text you want changed, or reported an issue they see in something you wrote. Everyone's goal should be producing the best Main Page possible. The compressed time frame of the Main Page means sometimes action must be taken before there has been time for everyone to comment. Be civil to fellow users.
- Reports are removed when resolved. Once an error has been addressed or determined not to be an error, or the item has been rotated off the Main Page, the report will be removed from this page. Check the revision history for a record of any discussion or action taken; no archives are kept.
Errors in the summary of the featured article
Today's FA
- It would be best to add "black-breasted buttonquail" to the caption – a one-word caption looks rather jarring and unusual, and not great for accessibility. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 00:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Also fixed a redirect. Schwede66 17:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Jan 30 - forages is meant to be a verb in this blurb?
- "... found in rainforest and in forages with large areas of thick leaf litter."
- The second "in" needs to be removed or swapped to 'it'. And, swap "with" to 'in'.
- (Second para of article lede has "The black-breasted buttonquail is usually found in rainforest, and forages on the ground for invertebrates in large areas of thick leaf litter.") JennyOz (talk) 04:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- "Forage" can be a noun, meaning the stuff one forages. Cows forage on forages of grass. But unless this bird actually does gather thick leaf litter, for some reason, the verbed version would make far more sense. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
1
Tomorrow's FA
Day-after-tomorrow's FA
Errors with "In the news"
"Shooting" is more informative than "armed attack". "Guard" is more precise and concise than "person". I'd also like to see a more active voice, "kills" instead of "leaves dead", but that's the least of this. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:03, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Here's a mainstream reliable source using what we both believe to be the correct words, if that's required. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Errors in "Did you know ..."
Current DYK
- "that, upon completion in 1998, The Guinness Book of Records named the Mercedes-Benz CLK GTR the most expensive production car in the world?" Initially hard to parse whether the completion is of the book or the car. And the article clearly states that one car was completed in 1997, not 1998 (1998 is when production started). I suggest: "that The Guinness Book of Records named the Mercedes-Benz CLK GTR the most expensive production car in the world over the period 1998–2015?" JMCHutchinson (talk) 20:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done. BorgQueen (talk) 20:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- I've tweaked again, per the nominator's request. BorgQueen (talk) 00:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done. BorgQueen (talk) 20:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Next DYK
Next-but-one DYK
Errors in "On this day"
Today's OTD
The SA guidelines state "the event should have occurred on the day in question in the calendar in use at the time (per MOS:JG)". England did not switch to the Gregorian calendar until 1750 so this should feature on 20 January - Dumelow (talk) 06:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
"1835 – Richard Lawrence became the first person to attempt to assassinate a sitting US president when he failed to kill Andrew Jackson at the US Capitol (assassination attempt pictured) and was subdued by the crowd."
- That it was the first attempt on a sitting US president is stated only in the lead and uncited - Dumelow (talk) 06:45, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
- Now mentioned in the body with citation. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 07:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Firefangledfeathers - Dumelow (talk) 07:28, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- The word "sitting" is ambiguous here. Did the attempted assassination occur while he was in office, or while he was on a chair? Maybe there's a better word we could use? -- RoySmith (talk) 00:56, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Firefangledfeathers - Dumelow (talk) 07:28, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Tomorrow's OTD
"1578 – Eighty Years' War: Spain won a crushing victory at the Battle of Gembloux, which led to a breakup of the Seventeen Provinces into the Catholic Union of Arras and the Protestant Union of Utrecht."
- Seventeen Provinces is linked in the blurb but not mentioned or linked in the article - Dumelow (talk) 08:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- I spent an unsuccessful twenty minutes trying to secure a source for this. I added some supported content on a result of the battle to the article, and tweaked the OTD blurb to say:
This is the most bold I've been in editing at OTD, so I'd appreciate review/correction. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:13, 29 January 2023 (UTC)1578 – Eighty Years' War: Spain won a crushing victory at the Battle of Gembloux, threatening the States General of the Netherlands and contributing to its move from Brussels to Antwerp.
- I spent an unsuccessful twenty minutes trying to secure a source for this. I added some supported content on a result of the battle to the article, and tweaked the OTD blurb to say:
Day-after-tomorrow's OTD
Errors in the summary of the featured list
Monday's FL
Friday's FL
A few things i picked up - Dumelow (talk) 07:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- The second to fourth sentences are not verifiable by the source cited
- Why "as of May 2022", can it be updated to 2023? It's not the date of completion of her training as she flew to the ISS in November 2021
- "forty-two were part of the Space Shuttle program" doesn't seem to be verifiable in the article. Counting all the entries mentioning "STS" gives 40 astronauts. Presumably Stephen Thorne (astronaut) and Sunita Williams were also part of the programme but this is not stated.
- Not sure why we don't mention the programmes of the last two astronauts (presumably SpaceX?)
Errors in the summary of the featured picture
Today's POTD
- I'm pretty sure there shouldn't be a comma between "protists" and "belonging" in the first sentence. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 05:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Why's that? It seems to scan better with the comma to me, making clear the belonging refers to the species as a whole, not to the word protists... — Amakuru (talk) 08:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- I've spent so much time reading a bunch of grammar/syntax stuff to try and figure out which one of us is right. At this point, I have no idea anymore lol. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 09:29, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah I think partly it's just a stylistic debate, for which there's no definitive consensus amongst writers and grammarians. Some people try to minimise the commas everywhere to aid flow, while others think they help with parsing. I tend to favour the latter personally, but mileage may vary. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 10:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- The comma seems misplaced to me. Consider a parallel sentence: "Homo is a genus of multicellular animals belonging to the order Primates." I think the longer list of adjectives modifying "protist" is confusing the issue. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:07, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- The question is, disregarding the adjectives for a second, whether it should be parsed as (genus) of (protists belonging to the order Peniculida) or as a (genus of protists) (belonging to the order Peniculida). If, as I suspect, the intended syntax is the latter, then it ideally does need a comma for clarity. — Amakuru (talk) 17:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- The comma seems misplaced to me. Consider a parallel sentence: "Homo is a genus of multicellular animals belonging to the order Primates." I think the longer list of adjectives modifying "protist" is confusing the issue. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:07, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah I think partly it's just a stylistic debate, for which there's no definitive consensus amongst writers and grammarians. Some people try to minimise the commas everywhere to aid flow, while others think they help with parsing. I tend to favour the latter personally, but mileage may vary. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 10:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- I've spent so much time reading a bunch of grammar/syntax stuff to try and figure out which one of us is right. At this point, I have no idea anymore lol. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 09:29, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
- Why's that? It seems to scan better with the comma to me, making clear the belonging refers to the species as a whole, not to the word protists... — Amakuru (talk) 08:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Tomorrow's POTD
Any other Main Page errors
Please report any such problems or suggestions for improvement at the General discussion section of Talk:Main Page.