Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors

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 22:35 on 15 May 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, determined not to be an error, or the item has 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 with "In the news"

"China" should be changed to "Chinese government" to match the report (and our article). The report doesn't accuse a nation of wrongdoing, it accuses a government, and the report specifies "Government" throughout (links/quotes at ITNC). "China" is the victim of the human rights abuses, the "Chinese government" is the perpetrator. Levivich 15:57, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Reliable outlets refer to "China", with a minority population as the victim. The article itself uses "China" (e.g. China's policies, China describes, China's "counter terrorism laws") as well as "government of China". The use of a country's name to as shorthand for its government or other controlling entity is not unusual (two random current examples using "UK", "EU", "Sweden" and "Finland" as shorthand for their respective governments or similar. [1], [2]). Bazza (talk) 16:10, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

We can do better. It's a dozen extra characters well-spent on precision and clarity. Levivich 16:33, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

It is common usage to refer to a government's actions as being done by the state. Russia attacked Ukraine. The United States invaded Iraq. The government acts in the name of the state, and that is the common usage in English. And China is certainly not the victim, a minority Chinese population is. nableezy - 16:25, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Drawing a distinction between "China" and a minority Chinese population reinforces the idea that this population is not part of China. That's the reason we shouldn't do it. (And the US is a democracy, and Putin invaded Ukraine.) Levivich 16:35, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Thats not a meaningful distinction. Putin certainly directed the invasion, but no Russia invaded. Eg Russia invaded Ukraine, Russia invades Ukraine, Russia invades Ukraine. But no, that isnt the idea that is reinforced. The idea that is reinforced is that the state is accused of crimes against humanity against a minority population of that state. Like Myanmar and the Rohingya. Theres a reason why China is who disputes the report, eg In a 131-page response, China justified some of its actions on security grounds and said the report was “based on disinformation and lies”. It is common usage to refer to a governments actions as being done by the state. Thats the whole reason governments are recognized, they are treated as the representative of the state, and their actions are that of the state. That has nothing to do with democracy either. nableezy - 16:55, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

@Levivich: I requested the same change a couple of days ago but to no avail. The article mentions “Chinese government” with respect to its actions in Xinjiang twelve times, but Bazza decided to cherry-pick “China’s policies”, which is mentioned only twice, to illustrate a point. The UN report does also make use of specific terms such as “Chinese authorities” and “Chinese government” (see the full report). I don’t think it’s difficult to get that there’s an anti-Chinese element here, and people will try to fool you and waste your time as much as they can just to make you give up on your wish to make Wikipedia better. That’s how it is, unfortunately.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:22, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

A. whats anti-Chinese in feeling that "Chinese government" is redundant to "China" in this context, B. how would that anti-Chinese element be ameliorated in any way by changing China for Chinese government? The two sentences mean the same thing, one is just marginally shorter than the other. nableezy - 00:07, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I explained it in more detail in that previous discussion. Using “China” implies that the general public in the country is fine with the actions by its government, but that’s highly inappropriate for the most populous country in the world (even if only 10% of the people are opposed to the policies pursued by the government, that would make a majority or significant minority in any other country). The UN report condemns the Chinese authorities, not the Chinese people for wrongdoings against the Uyghur people, so using a collective nouns such as “China” falls under WP:POINT.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I think this boils down to WP:ENGVAR: I (and I suspect many other native English speakers) do not take "China" to be a collective noun in this context: I read it as a shorthand for the national administration in China. It's a bit like "the US invades", or "the US withdraws from" not meaning the entire population of the USA upping sticks and moving elsewhere. @Kiril Simeonovski: WP:AGF and do not accuse me of cherry-picking, please: I wrote the article itself uses "China" (e.g. China's policies, China describes, China's "counter terrorism laws") as well as "government of China" to illustrate how the former is used as an equivalence of the latter in the WP article, as well as elsewhere. Bazza (talk) 08:15, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Bazza 7: Please read the previous discussion and my initial comment on the exact same thing there. We can use the name of the country in the context of international relations (e.g. diplomatic missions, participation of national sport teams, signing of international protocols etc.), but we ought to use a more precise term when it comes to internal affairs. So, we can say "Russia invaded Ukraine", but we cannot say "Russia invaded Chechnya" or "Russia occupied Moscow". In addition, the UN report nowhere mentions instances of human rights abuses against the Uyghur people committed by Chinese individuals or groups (e.g. bullying by Chinese pupils in schools, mobbing at workplace in private companies etc.). Instead, it sticks to actions conducted by the "Chinese authorities" or "Chinese government-affiliated media".--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:46, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

I think this is about right – in the context of international relations, "China" is sometimes a shorthand for the Chinese government (or its representatives) but in the context of domestic policies as discussed in the blurb, we need to be clear about what entity in China we mean. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 08:53, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Kiril Simeonovski: I have already read the previous discussion. You made your point, as you have here, about wanting the wording changed several times; and others made theirs saying that the wording is fine and understandable in context. I have made the same view here. You seem to want to prohibit statements such as "Russia invaded Chechnya", but that will fail: English is not a prescribed language, and its vocabulary and grammar are derived from common usage rather than dictat by authority; hence me stating "Russia invaded Chechnya" is valid and, with context, understandable. Both here and in the previous discussion, you seem to be having difficulty acknowledging that some editors have views different from yours. Repeatedly making the same point will not alter my mind here, and I am still of the view that the current wording is good, brief and accurate, for the reasons I (and others) have already stated. Bazza (talk) 11:59, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

But the entity is the entire state apparatus. Its not as if the Central Committee is itself rounding up people, it is the entire state structure that is accused of these acts. And just China is shorthand for that, not for all Chinese people (obviously, as the targets are Chinese), or even all ethnic Han Chinese people (likewise obviously, otherwise it would have to say Chinese people or the people of China). nableezy - 16:31, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh, and as far as but we cannot say "Russia invaded Chechnya", that is incredibly common usage. See for example here or here or here or here or here. No we cant say Russia occupied Moscow, but only because that makes no sense as a state doesnt occupy its own territory. nableezy - 16:36, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Errors in "Did you know ..."

Current DYK

In the third hook, the compound modifier "14.5-hour long" should have another hyphen: "14.5-hour-long".  MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM  23:35, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Done, thanks. Stephen 00:03, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, but unfortunately, it was done at an inopportune time, and caused an edit conflict for the bot, which stopped it. So the hyphen (which was added to Queue 2) will have to be added to the current version on the Main Page. I was in the middle of giving detailed instructions on how to complete the bot's tasks when I noticed that Shubinator had already taken care of most of it, and I did the image tagging.  MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM  00:24, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Errors in the summary of the featured list

Friday's FL

(May 17)

Monday's FL

(May 20)

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.

Any other Main Page errors

Please report any such problems or suggestions for improvement at the General discussion section of Talk:Main Page.