Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors

Please post error reports regarding only what is currently or imminently on the Main Page. For general discussion about the Main Page, please use its talk page.

Most issues relating to national variations of the English language have already been discussed here at length: Wikipedia does not prefer any national variety of English. Although Wikipedia strives for writing common to all varieties of English, some spelling, grammar or terminology it uses may be different or otherwise absent in yours. See the relevant style guide and a comparison of American and British English.

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 20:56 on 11 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.

Today's FA

• There's a stray ref at the bottom of the Main Page. Where is it coming from? Abductive (reasoning) 03:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It seems to be something with POTD (the errant ref appears on Wikipedia:Picture of the day/On the main pages), although I don't see what would invoke it and it's not on {{POTD protected/2024-04-30}}. Queen of ♡ | speak 03:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I think it was a problem with tomorrow's POTD. I think I fixed it here. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Yup, I was in the middle of typing that out. Thanks. Queen of ♡ | speak 04:00, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tomorrow's FA

Day-after-tomorrow's FA

Current DYK

• "... that G299.2-2.9 (pictured) is one of the oldest known supernova remnants in the Milky Way?"

Really? @MemeGod27, Maury Markowitz, Storye book, AirshipJungleman29, and Ganesha811: It is some 4500 years old. Most of the entries in List of supernova remnants are in the Milky Way and are much older. For example, Simeis 147 is 40,000 years old, the oldest one is about 1 million years old. In total, that page lists 15 supernova remnants older than the DYK article. Fram (talk) 13:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There may have been a typing error on the main article, which in turn caused that. The hook was also changed last second by somebody MemeGod ._. (talk) 13:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: There was confusion about the distance and age on mine and others part. It happened 4,500 years ago FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE (I think), which should make it 20,500 ly old (may be wrong). Either way, I still don't know why the hook was published as "oldest supernova remnants in the Milky Way." MemeGod ._. (talk) 13:24, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Convention in astronomy is to refer to transient events as occurring at the time they are seen on Earth; light travel time is not included. So for example SN 1987A happened in 1987 (when it was observed), not ~168,000 years ago (the time taken for light to travel that distance). Modest Genius ^talk 15:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fram I did find the issue. It is older than most "Type Ia" supernova remnants in the Milky Way. That was not specified in the hook. The source is still the same, the Type Ia part was not clarified though. MemeGod ._. (talk) 13:30, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the hook text and link to "Type Ia supernova". Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't feel great about this hook, but it's at least closer to being accurate. The cited source says this remnant is "older than most" of its type. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:42, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "oldest known" in the current version might well be interpreted as referencing the date of its discovery rather than its creation. So maybe, "...one of the oldest Type Ia supernova remnants known in the Milky Way?" JMCHutchinson (talk) 13:58, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next DYK

Next-but-one DYK

Today's OTD

Tomorrow's OTD

Day-after-tomorrow's OTD

Friday's FL

Monday's FL

Today's POTD

Tomorrow's POTD

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