Talk:Main Page

Main Page error reports

To report an error in content currently or imminently to appear on Main Page, use the appropriate section below. Reports should contain:

• Where is the error? An exact quotation using {{!xt}} of the text in question helps.
• Offer a correction if possible using {{xt}}.
• References are helpful, especially when reporting an obscure factual or grammatical error.
• Time zones. The Main Page runs on Coordinated Universal Time (UTC, currently 15:00 on 11 August 2026) and cannot be 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. (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.
• Actual errors only. Failures of subjective criteria such as taste or interestingness, or failure to divert enough DYK readers to articles that aren't new or recently improved, are not errors.
• 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 the summary of the featured article

Please do not remove this invisible timestamp. See WT:ERRORS and WP:SUBSCRIBE. - Dank (push to talk) 01:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Current DYK

The "... that the call sign of a New York state TV station honors a professional wrestling executive?" DYK

I clicked the link to the article, WKOF, but the article does not discuss the content of the DYK. Professional wrestling is not mentioned in the article. The word wrestling does not appear anywhere in the article. This is clearly an error, because an article is supposed to contain at least some information about the DYK. Right now, the only available information that can be found regarding the DYK is in the DYK itself and not in the article.--JasonMacker (talk) 13:50, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

JasonMacker, I added the word "wrestling" to the article, does that answer your concern? TSventon (talk) 14:05, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Next DYK

• ".. that, during the siege of Amida in 502–503, the available food and drink were given to men while women ate leather shoes and the flesh of the dead?" Source has "most" of the available food: the women in general got a too meagre ration as well, and the rich had grain storages. Fram (talk) 14:12, 11 August 2026 (UTC)
  • Rephrased to "... that, during the siege of Amida in 502–503, most of the available food and drink were given to men, leather shoes and the flesh of the dead went to the women?" — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:36, 11 August 2026 (UTC)
• "... that Mitchell Burns demonstrated how to extract natural shampoo from a "very phallic" plant on Christmas Day?" The article doesn't mention "extract natural shampoo", it says "demonstrating shampoo ginger" with a link to Zingiber zerumbet. The source given doesn't seem to indicate which plant it was though (searching for "zingiber" or "ginger" gave no results on that page). Hook-article-source should all three match of course. Fram (talk) 14:19, 11 August 2026 (UTC)
  • The species is identified specifically in the video, though Instagram being Instagram I'm having a heck of a time finding it to cite. Jishara, can you provide a reference that specifically identifies the plant? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Next-but-one DYK

• "... that Justin Hinds expected to become an accountant before becoming a Super Bowl–winning coach?" This may be correct, but the way it is presented in the article is far from it. "For the 2022 season, the Chicago Bears hired Hinds as an assistant defensive line coach, where he spent the next two seasons.[7][9] Without this opportunity, Hinds originally expected to become an accountant before discovering coaching." No, he had been a coach for 13 years already before the Chicago Bears opportunity came along. There is no indication that it was a choice between the Bears or being an accountant, the choice seems to have been after his playing career, to be either an accountant or a coach. Fram (talk) 14:27, 11 August 2026 (UTC)
  • This comment was removed as not an error, per the statement "this may be correct", then reverted with the rationale "The hook leads directly to a wrong statement. This shouldn't be on the main page if his isn't solved". I will not comment further, aside from reiterating from the header "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." — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:56, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

  This was removed, but the hook implicitly and the article explicitly makes it seem as if he would have become an accountant had he not received the Chicago Bears offer, which is weird as he was a professional coach by then for 13 years (and a pro player before this), and this Bears offer was simply a better offer, but not a new path or anything. The hook source to me reads as if he would have become an accountant if he hadn't become a coach; and after more than a decade of coaching, this path led him to the Super Bowl. Fram (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

• '".. that Amasa E. Killam cleared 100 acres (40 ha) of New Brunswick woodland to build a barn and farmhouse from age 14 to 22?" Er, no: he cleared 100 acres and he built a barn and farmhouse. There is no indication that he needed to clear 100 acres to be able to build those... Fram (talk) 14:31, 11 August 2026 (UTC)
  • Rephrased to "... that Amasa E. Killam cleared 100 acres (40 ha) of New Brunswick woodland for his homestead from age 14 to 22?". — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:53, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Errors in "On this day"

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Monday's FL

(August 17)

Wednesday's FL

(August 12, tomorrow)

Friday's FL

(August 14)

Errors in the summary of the featured picture

Notice to administrators: When fixing POTD errors, please update the corresponding regular version (i.e. without "protected" in the page title) in addition to the Main Page version linked below.

Today's POTD

The posted picture's description on its Wikimedia page mentions Shiva’s vehicle (the bull) - as "Nandi" - there is no mention of the term "Vrishabha" anywhere even once on that page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:8th_century_Standing_Shiva_Mahadeva,_Kashmir,_India,_Clevelandart_1989.369.jpg

The article "Shiva" also mentions the bull as "Nandi" - there is no mention of the term "Vrishabha" anywhere even once in the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva

The reference source for this image also mentions the bull as "Nandi" - there is no mention of the term "Vrishabha" anywhere on that page too https://www.clevelandart.org/art/1989.369

I think this might be an error which has inadvertently continued from the image's label (edited by someone in the past) - so please see and correct the term "Vrishabha" to "Nandi" - because even the article on Wikipedia about Shiva’s vehicle (the bull) is named "Nandi (Hinduism)" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nandi_(Hinduism)

Thanks, Jn.mdel (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:15, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

General discussion

Add number of edits to the top banner

I’m using the template above to get the attention of administrators because my previous discussion got archived, although it got some supports. Anyways, I am suggesting this edit because:

• it adds more argumentum ad populum, even further encouraging people to become editors,
• it is another interesting fact about the immense scale of the English Wikipedia,
• it further demonstrates that "anyone can edit," and
• it also aligns with the statistics shown on Special:CreateAccount.

I suggest formatting it like this, considering the number of edits (1,364,104,091, ) changes much faster than the number of articles:

• 250,642 active editors
• 7,222,832 articles in English
• 1,364 million edits

Keeping the edit count more detailed (using the millions), whilst making sure it’s not too outdated. I’ve tested these edits at WP:Main Page alternatives/(editable). 2600 etc (talk) 19:03, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Link to the archived discussion for reference: /Archive 211 § Add number of edits to the top banner. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 20:20, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

That discussion had no consensus. I still don't think this change is either necessary or desirable. Modest Genius ^talk 10:30, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Support, good idea to increase editor base HerrHeulsuse (talk) 13:53, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Support the idea, but it should be formatted "1.361 billion" not "1,361 million". Buttons0603 (talk) 21:34, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Good idea (1.364 billion). 2600 etc (talk) 11:43, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Oppose, I always like to look at numbers but there's a point where adding more makes the page confusing to look at. Also I don't think the edit count really tells us anything, as an edit can be as tiny as a punctuation change or as big as the creation of a new and long article (see Wikipedia:Edit count). So I look at this 1.3 billion and ask "what does this even mean?" and I honestly don't know the answer. An active editor count though is very easy to interpret: there is a community of 250,000 humans who make edits every once and a while. So I think we're fine with what we've got. Panamitsu (talk) 12:15, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Seems like a nice idea, I suppose, but I'd switch the order (articles - editors - edits) and write out the billion to keep the number formatting consistent. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:23, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes I think that the current ordering should be articles then editors (which is opposite what it currently is) as it seems to me that a reader would care more about the article count than the editor count. ―Panamitsu (talk) 23:28, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Oppose. As per User:Panamitsu. Keep page simple and meaningful. JMCHutchinson (talk) 08:59, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

•  Not done as to the immediate edit request. Please complete a discussion that can conclude with a strong consensus, then reactivate the edit request if supported. — xaosflux ^Talk 12:52, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Australia_Show

Politically meaningful point raised could be the promotion of stories of kidnapping and coercion (negative) w/ a politically relevant (positive) feature on this day, the day of Indigenous Peoples'. Nathanieldjenkins (talk) 18:18, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

For example, American Indian Movement Nathanieldjenkins (talk) 18:21, 9 August 2026 (UTC)