Wikipedia talk:Editing the main page

Move

Its a help page after all, does not belong to wiki namespace

• Move --Cool Cat ^Talk 00:56, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

• Oppose Many of the Wikipedia:namespace pages are help pages. Indeed the definition of it is as a namespace that provides information about Wikipedia and how to use it. --Henrygb 11:19, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Then we should atleast make a redirect from Help:Editing the main page to here, to avoid confusion. :) --Phroziac^(talk) 17:25, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
• Move - This was actually my idea, but I guess i forgot to comment. --Phroziac^(talk) 17:25, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. This move cannot be performed. The Help namespace is a mirror of the help namespace on Meta with some auto substitutions for words like "Wikipedia" instead of "Meta". This is meant to provide a common help foundation that can be used on any wiki for getting started. As such the local copies are periodically reset to match changes on Meta and we are not expected to modify it here. Help pages specific to EN Wikipedia stay in the Wikipedia space. Very general help content can be proposed for addition at Meta if you feel that is appropriate. Dragons flight 23:34, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Common sense on MainPage, please.

I was rather disturbed earlier today to find on the MainPage, specifically on selected anniversaries for July 26, an item about somebody being arrested for masturbation in an adult theatre in 1991. ( Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Template:July_26_selected_anniversaries&oldid=4849052 .) I have removed it right away.

I think Wikipedia should adopt some policy to prohibit various taboos on the MainPage. We have many other wonderful pages to choose. Why not use a little more common sense ? While the 'naughty' pages are available to all, and I give credit to those resourceful little brats with no classes to attend during the summer and know enough about computers to find the pages, I have to say that leaving items like masturbation on the MainPage is not that appropriate. It makes us look bad, especially in the eyes of a parent.

-- PFHLai 07:07, 2004 Jul 26 (UTC)

This has actually been discussed before (to death) when Gay bathhouse was nominated as a featured article. I think the ad-hoc policy was pretty much exactly what you just said - we don't censor out content, but (for fear of censorware and alike) we shouldn't "push" it on people by putting it on the main page. The understanding is that if you go to penis, don't be surprised if you find an explicit photo; the main page is not some place you'd expect to find explicit content, so we shouldn't be putting it there. →Raul654 07:13, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)

But that article isn't explicit content. RickK 18:58, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)

And it wasn't "somebody." As I immediately suspected from the description, it was Pee Wee Herman. It made front-page news--well, perhaps it wasn't the front page, let me check. OK, not quite. The Boston Globe put it on page 8, and this is how they carried it:

PEE-WEE HERMAN ARRESTED IN FLA.

Author: Associated Press Date: 07/28/1991 Page: 8 Section: NATIONAL/FOREIGN

SARASOTA, Fla. -- Children's television star Pee-wee Herman was arrested for allegedly exposing himself inside an adult theater, authorities said yesterday. Pee-wee Herman, whose real name is Paul Reubens, was arrested Friday night after undercover detectives raided the South Trail Cinema in a sting operation, a Sarasota County Sheriff's affidavit said. Reubens, 38, was charged with exposure of a sexual organ and released from the county jail after posting a $219 bond.

I think I would say that putting the word "masturbation" on the main page was inappropriate. Indeed, it's inappropriate on the July 26 page unless someone can cite a source that phrases it that way. The Pee Wee Herman article says "allegedly exposing himself" as does the AP article, and I think that's good enough; no need to add a plausible but unsubstaniated interpretation. And I think I would agree that the events that are only page 8 news in the real world probably shouldn't be main-page material for us.

But I don't think "adopting some policy" is helpful. It's not a frequent problem and we have the watchful eyes of editors such as PFHLai to take care of it when it does arise. If we don't have common sense, no policy we write is going to give us common sense. Bye now, I'm off to change "masturbation" to "allegedly exposing himself" on the July 26 page.Dpbsmith 21:20, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Most templates are now protected. -- Kizor 19:41, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Today's featured article

Are everyday's featured articles chosen at random?

• If yes then they should not. Proof: today's article.
• If no then it is even worst. I admit it takes a huge imagination to choose Hero of Ukraine as a featured article but I still think there are more interesting things someone could read.

Trifon Triantafillidis 14:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Featured articles are chosen because they are considered well written and cover their subjects well, as discussed by Wikipedians in a nomination process. They are not chosen for their broad appeal. I suspect that there will be some Ukrainians and people interested in awards who will be very pleased to see this article get such prominance. For others, just don't click through to it. Try clicking on the Random page button instead, if you're bored, or browse through the categories.

The appropriate place to ask this question was Talk:Main Page.-gadfium 20:11, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Pic of the day

The featured image of the day Template:Pic of the day is not mentioned on this page, and it should be. I can't wrap my head around the html/tables on this page right now to add it myself. —Pengo 02:24, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Community Portal protection status

I've noticed that unlike this page says, the Community Portal is only semi-protected. This should be undated on this page. Harryboyles 04:50, 9 July 2006 (UTC)