Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bagumba (talk | contribs) at 06:10, 2 January 2025 (→Errors with "In the news": Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Errors in the summary of the featured article

Today's FA

Tomorrow's FA

Day-after-tomorrow's FA

Errors with "In the news"

Amending the number killed to 10 to coincide with news sources and a longstanding policy of not including the perpetrator among those killed. 75.140.13.103 (talk) 20:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. Suggest, "An attacker kills 10 people, with dozens injured, in a truck-ramming and shooting in the US city of New Orleans (street pictured)." Wehwalt (talk) 21:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Frankly, I'd prefer something more like "An attacker rams his truck into a crowd and opens fire, killing at least 10 people and injuring dozens, in the US city of New Orleans".--Wehwalt (talk) 21:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Do we need to say "in the US city of"...? New Orleans i'd think is one of those cities that the average reader is going to know where it is. If anything this could be reduced to say "New Orleans, Louisiana". --Masem (t) 22:02, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I've made the change along the line I suggested in my latter post above, and at Masem's suggestion, have deleted "in the US city of".--Wehwalt (talk) 22:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I've also updated the number of killed, respecting the OP's comments. Wehwalt (talk) 23:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

US: But we often have blurbs with like "Paris, France". New Orleans is not an obvious world capital. Maybe it is well known outside of US, but could start a slippery slope on debating "well-known" cities (like we use to have with whether or not to link a country in a blurb)—Bagumba (talk) 01:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

What does policy dictate? Wehwalt (talk) 01:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't believe there is anything formally written, it's more de facto. —Bagumba (talk) 01:56, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

What do you think, "In the U.S. city of New Orleans," to start unless we are running up against length limits, or do you have a better way? Wehwalt (talk) 02:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I never liked <city>, <country>, but it seems to have been the de facto practice (brevity?), and some might take exception with a new practice on a US topic. But as long as we're consistent going forward. —Bagumba (talk) 02:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

MOS:OL says that we don't need to link to municipalities as long as its obvious from context. For Paris, there does need to be a secondary name since there's places like Paris, Texas. That's why at least identifying the state helps to provide context. Masem (t) 02:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm not saying France was necessarily needed there. But I don't think it was consciously included because of ambiguity with Paris, Texas, either. —Bagumba (talk) 02:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm good with any short addition, as long as no length limits are violated. Further expanding the place name doesn't seem to me to be worth sacrificing what's already there. Wehwalt (talk) 02:25, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

We've also had "Minneapolis, United States",, even though there is Minneapolis, Kansas and Minneapolis, North Carolina, both in the US. —Bagumba (talk) 02:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Should say "rams a truck" not "rams his truck"; the Ford involved was rented from a Houston man. WikiContributor0830 (talk) 23:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Fair enough. Done. Wehwalt (talk) 23:08, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Should we add that the truck had an Islamic State flag, now that media coverage is heavily implying that as the motive? Aaron Liu (talk) 02:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

• The image captioned "Location of truck-ramming attack" does not show the location of the truck-ramming attack and should be removed. Abductive (reasoning) 02:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

  It does, though. Canal Street at the intersection with Bourbon Street, where the ramming began, pictured in 2022 Aaron Liu (talk) 03:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

  No, the terrorist went down Bourbon by turning off of Canal; no ramming occurred on Canal. The photo is a disgrace. Abductive (reasoning) 03:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

  Removed image The image seems to be at intersection with Royal, not Bourbon. See Talk:2025_New_Orleans_truck_attack#Infobox_image.—Bagumba (talk) 06:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Current DYK

Next DYK

Next-but-one DYK

Errors in "On this day"

Today's OTD

Tomorrow's OTD

Day-after-tomorrow's OTD

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

Monday's FL

Errors in the summary of the featured picture

Today's POTD

I would strongly urge that the bit "Often mischaracterized as propaganda ..." be revised to "Often characterized as propaganda ..." (i.e. without the "mis") ASAP. The current wording is a clear violation of WP:NPOV. References in the article Duck and Cover (film) do indeed establish that the film has been characterized as propaganda. Nothing that I see in the article or its references establish that this characterization is erroneous, and we should not be calling the characterization erroneous in wikivoice on the main page. At best, whether or not the film should be considered as propaganda is disputed, and it isn't clear that either position would be dismissed out of hand as WP:FRINGE. Arguments that the film's advice would indeed be efficacious don't mean that the film wasn't propaganda, as it was clearly an attempt to influence public behavior (even if the influence was positive and intent benevolent) and thus definitionally propaganda. CAVincent (talk) 01:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I concur, it is the word "propaganda" that has been mischaracterized as always meaning negative or misleading. Abductive (reasoning) 03:45, 2 January 2025 (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.

• Main Page discussions