Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day/Archive 4

RSS Feed
The POTD RSS image feed is broken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.216.218 (talk) 17:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know if there is another feed, but this one appears to be working properly. Regardless, the RSS feed is done independently of Wikipedia. User:Skagedal wrote the script to generate the aforementioned feed.  howcheng  {chat} 19:50, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

January 3, 2008
I strongly object to running the image of any political candidate the day before an election. Disclaimer notwithstanding, this is poor form. Durova Charge! 00:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, and was thinking of complaining myself. I as trying to find out who's in charge, but a discussion here works too. —Random832 00:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * To be honest, the disclaimer makes it worse! It's a good photo, but I think replacing it with a bunny or something, and running this at some point when we don't feel the need to footnote it, might be easiest for us all. Shimgray | talk | 00:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems to have been replaced by the one from this time last year, which is suitably neutral Shimgray | talk | 01:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

It was an honest mistake -- totally did not realize it was the Iowa caucuses already. I guess the best time may be when someone has already clinched the nomination, which could be as early as Feb 5.  howcheng  {chat} 02:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help. I also raised this at WP:AN and it got taken care of very quickly.  And I appreciate how this was an honest mistake - the elections get earlier every year.  Yet it's the kind of quirky thing that just might get noticed in the mainstream press...and you know how they'd spin the story.  Glad we didn't go down that path.  Cheers,  Durova Charge! 18:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Pictures of the Day and the Featured Content page
The Picture of the Day for October 4, 2005, and October 20, 2006 (same picture) was deleted due to improper licensing (it was from stock.xchng). The Picture of the Day for October 28, 2006, has also been deleted (don't know why). These deleted images are causing redlinks to appear on the Featured Content page instead of images when it pulls up those dates. Is there some way to prevent it from trying to pull up deleted images or could we perhaps substitute other images retroactively to replace the ones that were deleted? Kaldari (talk) 00:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

March 15, 2008 POTD suggestion
is a relatively new FP. Since St. Patrick's Day is to be observed on March 15 of 2008 (to avoid conflicting with Holy Week), it might be an appropriate choice for POTD for March 15. Spikebrennan (talk) 22:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Size
Is there any way I could make the picture of the day with text and picture (default) appear smaller? wwe socks sign 04:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure. If you want a fixed size: [[Image:|180px]]. For a variable size you can replace the "180" with (for an 80% size for example). Then for the caption, use .  howcheng   {chat} 16:33, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

April 1?
suggestion... -Miskaton (talk) 15:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The POTD has to be a Featured Picture first. Discussion is (minimally) taking place at April Fool's Main Page/Today's Featured Picture.  howcheng  {chat} 16:27, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

IE7 main page TFP issue
copied from Talk:Main PageNil Einne (talk) 13:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The Today's featured picture section is a little narrower than the rest of the sections. Who can fix this please? ~ RayLast  « Talk! » 20:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me (latest Firefox, 17" LCD, 1280×1024). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 20:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me, too. Could you perhaps show us what your alternative is in the userspace, or something? J Milburn (talk) 20:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe he/she's referring to this Image:En.wikipedia.org.Main Page.showing FP issue.2008.04.08.png‎ which occurs in IE7 (but not FireFox 2). To be honest, I don't think I would have noticed this before, so I have no idea how long it's been like that. Nil Einne (talk) 21:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note that this problem occurs today as well, I presume it's related to the template not the picture. Would it be better to copy to the VPT instead? Nil Einne (talk) 13:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It's definitely the template or some right and left margins set on it. The title of this section is wrong since I've tested it with IE 6 and it still shows the problem. ~ RayLast  « Talk! » 12:58, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I found what the problem is. It can be viewed from different angles. It's either that the featured picture section is narrower, or that the featured articles, did you know, news, and on this day are too wide. I would say the latter. This is the code that is currently being used: -Today's featured article, Did you know> {|style="border-spacing:8px; margin:0px -8px;" {|width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="vertical-align:top; background:#f5fffa;" ... That makes the upper section wider. You could either edit it to be 0px, which I suggest, or changing the featured picture's section to be -8px instead of 0px. The last option would make the featured content to be wider (4px to each side) than the rest of the content. The result can be viewed in my Main Page sandbox.
 * class="MainPageBG" style="width:55%; border:1px solid #cef2e0; background:#f5fffa; vertical-align:top; color:#000;"|

There you have it. The dirty work is done. Someone please fix it? ~ RayLast  « Talk! » 13:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Copyright vio?
With POtD having a policy (I think) about copyrighted pictures not being eligible for featured status, I'm a bit confused as to why and how Template:POTD/2008-04-17 has come to be.  crassic ![ talk ] 03:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That's just someone who created a POTD blurb on their own (happens frequently, I have to say).  howcheng  {chat} 06:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay. I was just curious. Thanks. ;)  crassic ![ talk ] 11:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion for 15 May 2008

 * See also Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day.

I don't understand how the pictures of the day are chosen, can users simply create an entrance?

I would like to suggest an image for 15 May 2008: Image:HerdenkingVuurgrensRotterdam1940 2007 edit1.jpg. It shows the commemoration of the Rotterdam Blitz of 15 May 1940. – Ilse@ 15:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Featured picture, 7th May 2008
Given their frequent use as shock images, was a picture of a giant spider really appropriate for the main page? It gave me quite a scare. Vashti (talk) 11:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Why 2 versions?
This is probably an FAQ, but why is there both a protected and an unprotected version of the Picture of the Day? According to Picture of the day/Guidelines, "Having two versions allows non-admins to make updates to the POTD caption while it's protected, but prevents vandalism from appearing on the Main Page." At least in my case, I would be more likely to notice a caption change at WP:ERRORS than at the unprotected version. Every once in a while, someone fixes the unprotected version and mistakenly thinks he has fixed it, but the error continues onto the Main Page. The Main Page is the version everybody sees. So simplifying this duplicate system would stop a major source of Main Page errors. Art LaPella (talk) 01:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Totally late reply, but I have all the POTD templates watchlisted (since I create them) and I log in at least once a day, so I usually catch those. Also, since copyediting of Main Page content is highly sensitive, you might also think of this two-step process (editing the regular POTD template, followed by the copy of the change to the protected template) as a pseudo-flagged revisions. Also, having a subst'ed version for the Main Page allows us to do make Main Page–specific edits (e.g., "View the animation", "Need help viewing this video?") that don't fit into the structure of the template.  howcheng  {chat} 17:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

request to remove Credits from all PoDs
I've brought this up before, but it's been a while, so here it goes again.

Please consider removing all credits from PoDs. Just as there is no ownership of articles, there is also no ownership of images. I realize listing credits is an attempt to attract image submissions, but credits go against the very core of Wikipedia. Kingturtle (talk) 18:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I know what you mean, but I think it is important to note in any discussion like this that all images and articles are owned by their authors. Authors are required to allow modifcations and reuse, etc. in order to participate in Wikipedia, but that's not the same as saying their is no ownership.  Dragons flight (talk) 18:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I have tried to be moderately bold with this issue, discussion is on Main page talk.--Commander Keane (talk) 05:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


 * It ended up archived at Talk:Main_Page/Archive 144. To my mind it remains as icky as ever to be crediting images any differently in TFP than anywhere else in the project. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Gadget
I created a gadget to add a POTD to Facebook, Hyves, iGoogle, AIM, Blogger, MySpace, Vista Sidebar etc. as gadget. Check this site: http://gadgets.videgro.net/?page=2#wikipediapotd Vdegroot (talk) 07:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Synchiropus splendidus featured pictures not in "Picture of the day"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Synchiropus_splendidus_2_Luc_Viatour.jpg

Why this picture has not gone to "Picture of the day"?

It is yet "featured pictures"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lviatour (talk • contribs) 09:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It's still in the queue. There is currently about a five-month wait between promotion and POTD appearance.  howcheng  {chat} 17:31, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * thank you --Luc Viatour (talk) 19:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Italicisation
"Bibliothèque nationale de France" should be written in italics, because it is a foreign word. That's all. bsrboy (talk) 18:09, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Idea for wallpaper app.
Is there any programming genius out there who could design an application which users could install to automatically change their desktop wallpaper to set to the picture of the day? Its just an idea, but I feel it would be extremely popular and would gain a wider audience for each image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.135.72 (talk) 20:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Navigation suggestion
Looking at Template:POTD/2008-11-25, I thought that it would be nice to have a navigation bar where I could move to Template:POTD/2008-11-25 or to Template:POTD/2008-11-27. DRV has such a navigation bar (see, for example, the top of this page. -- Suntag  ☼  13:10, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅  howcheng  {chat} 19:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Tomorrow's pic
First of all, I want to say that I am okay with my picture not being picture of the day if that is the consensus, but it would be a shame if it was inadvertently skipped. My picture Knot Table, was promoted 6/11/2008. Today's featured pic was promoted 6/08/2008 and tomorrow's was promoted 6/29/2008. According to the project page, pictures of the day must be featured pictures already, and they are generally picture of the day in a FIFO order, with some exceptions. Now I realize that my picture might not be the most interesting, but I was hoping that some people that saw it might be interested and start learning about knot theory because of it. But whatever the consensus is, I will support that, I just don't see any reason for just randomly skipping my pic so far. If anyone could explain this that would be great. I realize this is a huge conflict of interest on my part, and so this will be my only attempt to try to get it on the main page, I will still argue my case but if consensus goes the other way, I will quietly step out of the argument.  J kasd  06:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Darwin portrait for Darwin Day
Although it's a recent promotion, I've tentatively scheduled a portrait of Charles Darwin for February 12, which is Darwin Day: POTD/2009-02-12. I hope that's okay.--ragesoss (talk) 19:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion for April 23rd, 2009 (anniversary of Shakespeare's death and putative birthday)
The Cobbe portrait was recently announced as a possible portrait of Shakespeare, drawn from life. An image of this portrait was recently promoted at WP:FPC. I think this would be a topical picture for 23 April, 2009 (Shakespeare's putative birthday and the anniversary of his death). This is also the day the portrait will go on display to the public at Shakespeare Birthplace Trust. Ronnotel (talk) 14:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2010
There may be some weirdness going on with the archive. Specifically, there's a page for Picture of the day/March 2010 with a picture. My guess is that this should have gone into March 2009, but as I'm not active in this area perhaps someone else can have a look? AngoraFish  木  09:48, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposed changes to the Featured picture process
'''Please help determine the future of the Featured picture process. Discussions regarding the current issues affecting featured picture contributors can be found here. We welcome your input!  Mae din \talk 18:40, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion for July 20
This is the 40th anniversary of the 1st moon landing. There don't seem to be any Featured Articles that are up to snuff for WP:TFA, so at the very least there should be a picture. Smallbones (talk) 15:59, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If Apollo 11 Launch2.jpg of the launch is used, then it should be on 16 July. Other options for 20 July include Aldrin Apollo 11.jpg, Apollo 11 bootprint.jpg and 5927 NASA.jpg, but they have all been POTD before. 21 July is another possible date for displaying one of the Lunar surface images, which would be the anniversary of the moonwalk itself. -- G W … 18:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This image is now scheduled for July 16.  howcheng  {chat} 00:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:Picture of the day For March 4th 2010
I posted this image as POTD for the date march 4th 2010, as the date coincides with the festival Ayya Vaikunda Avataram. The template (Template:POTD/2010-03-04)is remaining undeleted while the schedule for the whole month(Which I created myself) of march 2010 was deleted. Now my doubt is, Is my image remaining as the 'PICTURE OF THE DAY' for the date march 4th 2010 (or) the image was removed from that date too?. If removed, Is it possible to post it again? If so, what should I do to take it into the schedule? Any body please clear those thing, Thanks. - Vaikunda Raja (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You can leave it as-is. There's no need to have the monthly page for March 2010 yet, as it's too early, and that invites vandalism.  howcheng  {chat} 00:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * So you are telling that the image was still the "POTD for March 4th 2010", right? And shall I confirm that, that particular date was reserved for the image and anybody else creating a schedule in future will be aware of this one? - Vaikunda Raja (talk) 12:38, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Possible image for August 19, 2009
I would like to suggest that ths image be the featured image of the day for August 19th. He was a Medal of Honor recipient and this would be his birthday. --Kumioko (talk) 18:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I completely missed this. I can do it for next year, though.  howcheng  {chat} 19:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

POTD credits
Another discussion at Talk:Main Page has started regarding the removal of photo credits on the POTDs. Please join in. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:29, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I have a great idea for an upcoming picture of the day!


Can't think of a better option from the recent FPs. Nezzadar  ☎   04:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, this will make it to POTD in about 9-10 months when it's its turn in the queue.  howcheng  {chat} 06:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

A long way off...
...but the attribution on the image for 15th August is probably wrong and I don't believe the original uploader is still active. "J. Cooper Sr" is probably James Cooper who was an engraver, not an illustrator. I'm guessing the "Sr" addition to his name is probably a misreading of the "Sc" after his name in the image which is short for "Sculpcit" ("he engraved"). I'm going to change it, but just bringing it up here in case there is some other evidence for a "J. Cooper Sr" as the illustrator. Yomangani talk 00:28, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Picture of the day photo credits requests for comment
Requests for comment/Picture of the day photo credits --MZMcBride (talk) 02:32, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Notifications
Many articles never make it onto the mainpage, but avenues such as TFP provide a chance for some articles to have their day in the sun. Having a great photo on the mainpage attracts a lot of attention for an article, unfortunately while the images may be of top quality the articles often aren't. Would it be possible to add a notification to the talk page of the article the picture is a subject of? This would give someone the opportunity to at least give the relevant article a proofread, perhaps drastically improve it. A day or two is long time when you're anxious not to present a crappy article to the public and to make the most of your opportunity. I noticed today that the Featured Picture on the mainpage is of Leeds Castle, a fantastic building and which many people might have been interested to find out more about as a direct result of it being on the mainpage. Unfortunately, today they were presented with this disappointment, with as much information on trivial details such as TV appearances as history. Leaving a notification on the relevant article's talkpage will not guarantee the article's improvement, but it at least gives someone time whereas at the moment it appears to be sprung on an article without warning. When a picture of Chapultepec Castle was in the TFP slot on 5 December 2009 the views spiked to 6,000. An increase of this magnitude is a massive amount for most articles and I think TFP is missing a trick here. Nev1 (talk) 19:45, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a good idea. The only caveat is that sometimes the POTD blurb is written only a few hours before its appearance on the Main Page.  howcheng  {chat} 03:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikitext broken somewhere
POTD wikipedia is not displaying the image. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 01:42, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Everyone should install User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js
Hi all. Just dropping by to suggest that editors install the above script to their Monobook/Vector skin as appropriate. What is does is to highlight links to redirect pages, pages that are up for deletion and disambiguation pages by changing the colour of the displayed links from the standard blue. The last one is most useful, it identifies where a link does not go to the intended target and should be fixed before going up on the Main Page. This will help us catch caption errors BEFORE they go up on the Mian Page. I will be suggesting this to all editors involved in the FA and Main Page content processes. Regards. Zunaid 08:14, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

February 1 - Tue
I'm not sure what this is... Is it the first picture of the day on wikipedia? I think there should be something to explain its presence. Its just... there. -- Usyflad 10  00:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't understand what you mean.  howcheng  {chat} 02:32, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

March 15
Is the Picture of the Day for March 15 really supposed to be File:Example.jpg?  Sophus Bie  (talk) 05:05, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Someone created a test page. It happens now and then.  howcheng  {chat} 16:46, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

PING!
June 12 is less then 30 minutes away.  — Edokter  ( talk ) — 23:36, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

June 16 has not been scheduled yet, and we're already 75 minuts in.  — Edokter  ( talk ) — 01:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Run my picture (and FS's) picture please?
I've never been on the POTD before, can we go with this at fullwidth or close to?

[[File:Painted Turtle Distribution alternate.svg|center|thumb|alt=Map of North America showing the subspecies' specific ranges in different colors|800px|

Native range of the painted turtle (C. picta) Dark grey for national borders White for state and province borders Dark blue for rivers, only showing those in article

{{legend|#e96969|border=1px solid #e96969|Eastern (C. p. picta)}} {{legend|#e9b669|border=1px solid #e9b669|Midland (C. p. marginata)}} {{legend|#9ce99c|border=1px solid #9ce99c|Southern (C. p. dorsalis)}} {{legend|#6982e9|border=1px solid #6982e9|Western (C. p. bellii)}}

Intergrade mixtures (large areas only) {{legend|#f48134|border=1px solid #f48134|Mix of eastern and midland}} {{legend|#a7b467|border=1px solid #a7b467|Mix of eastern and southern}} {{legend|#b48e74|border=1px solid #b48e74|Mix of midland and western}} ]]

TCO (talk) 01:37, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

A terrible oversight(?)
What are the odds that the FPOTD on July 12, 2011 is a being taunted by a capitalist caricature the same day the top line DYK is the Medal of Honor Award winning soldier Leroy Petry highlighting his being presented the award today? Tacky doesn't begin to cover it. If it's a simple mistake perhaps we should look at closer coordination of front page materials if not then I'd ask why is the DYK and FPOTD being used to editorialize? TomPointTwo (talk) 18:11, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * In what way is it tacky? By coincidence we appear to have two items on the front page which show war from two different angles. Is there a particular reason not to have the two on the same page? bobrayner (talk) 18:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course there is, it creates a terrible impression and undercuts Wikipedia's credibility. It screams editorialism, whether it's the case or not. TomPointTwo (talk) 18:52, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * How does it "undercut Wikipedia's credibility"? Wikipedia isn't required to portray an absolutely one-sided and consistent front page; nor should it. A good encyclopædia should contain contrasting content which considers different viewpoints. Like it or not, in reality - and in reliable sources - some people get medals, and some people oppose war. Wikipedia is not going to improve its image or credibility by quietly hiding one of them because it seems to disagree with the other. That way lies madness - today we also have a DYK hook about booze, seemingly incompatible with an OTD about mormons - which of those would you hide? Such contrasts are a daily occurrence. bobrayner (talk) 19:06, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Leave it as-is. This kind of thing has always been an issue: the difficulty veterans have in getting jobs once they come back. It was a problem following WWII, Vietnam and also the Gulf conflicts. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:57, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * SO you support the front page's current configuration because you support the editorial picture is creates? You're advocating using DYK and FPOTD to advance a particular POV? TomPointTwo (talk) 19:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you advocating censorship? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:06, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Messages and ideas are censored. Is there a message with the juxtaposition of these two front page features? TomPointTwo (talk) 19:22, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know. Is there? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:47, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * There's either a POV being pushed and I'm censoring or there's no POV being pushed so there's no harm in changing the POTD. Can't have it both ways. TomPointTwo (talk) 19:57, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The third option is that it's just a happy coincidence. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Happy huh? If that's the case then swapping out the POTD won't be censoring anything, will it? TomPointTwo (talk) 20:31, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "Happy" as in "funny" or "humorous". Just my opinion. I doubt the average reader would notice. I certainly wouldn't, if you hadn't brought it up. Meanwhile, your speech pattern reminds me of another editor, who was banned around the time you turned up. Be careful. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:34, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Please. TomPointTwo (talk) 20:40, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:41, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I realise I'm late to this particular debate, but I wanted to encourage the POTD/DYK teams to specifically not make procedural changes to prevent such things as this from happening. Like others, I don't see any underlying message with these two items appearing together. Contrary to Tom's view that 'if there's no message then there's no problem with swapping out the picture', I would contend that doing so would create a dangerous precedent. If the argument 'two elements of the main page combine in a manner I find insulting' is accepted, it opens the door to a plethora of potentially 'insulting' combinations, such as an Israel-focused DYK with a Palestine-focused FA, or an Irish POTD appearing with an English ITN item. It's important that no such precedent is set, on the grounds of common sense, no censorship, and to expressly to avoid the slippery slope. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 02:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Certainly removing one of the items an not the other, as TomPointTwo seems to be advocating, would have shown a very clear editorial message. APL (talk) 03:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)


 * File:After the war a medal and maybe a job2.jpg, as with other FPOTD's, was posted throughout the entire day from 00:00:00 UTC to 23:59:59 UTC. The Leroy Petry article was posted on DYK at 16:00 UTC. As it was that late in the day, from a procedural stand point, it normally would be highly unlikely an admin would swap the FPOTD for that type of editorial reason. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:24, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, you would have had a much better chance of getting the POTD swapped out had you made the request soon after 00:00 UTC.  howcheng  {chat} 23:55, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Objection to Keep Calm and Carry On as POTD for 7th Oct
I think the Keep Calm and Carry On image is a very poor choice for POTD.

With the best will in the world, I really hate this rendering of the poster. The font weight seems just a little too much, and the letter spacing is completely wrong - much too close together. The colour is completely wrong. These things being the case - certainly the last two - it just is not the same as the original. I'd much prefer that we either had an accurate rerendering of the original, or simply use the photo of the original. We gain nothing, IMO, by using something so different from the original and passing it of as if it were the real thing.

In view of this, I think it a very poor choice for POTD. Why on earth are we giving prominence to what is, frankly, a faithless rendering of the original? --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:27, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It's simply that image's turn in the FP queue. I make no judgments on the relative quality of the image when making the schedule.  howcheng  {chat} 04:32, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Mmm, for 7th Oct 2011 the POTD is an Indian glass house (File:Glasshouse and fountain at lalbagh.jpg), but on the glass house image page it says
 * For the Keep Calm file, it says on the image page
 * I'm not sure how the error crept in. Picture of the day/October 2011 and the image pages need to be updated.--Commander Keane (talk) 05:05, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * User:J Milburn moved the Indian greenhouse to October 7 from October 9. I've fixed the notices.  howcheng  {chat} 08:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how the error crept in. Picture of the day/October 2011 and the image pages need to be updated.--Commander Keane (talk) 05:05, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * User:J Milburn moved the Indian greenhouse to October 7 from October 9. I've fixed the notices.  howcheng  {chat} 08:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Aussie wildlife
I have nothing personally against the fauna of Australasia. Much of it is pleasing to the eye. But the proportion of POTD that comes from this category is extraordinary. Is this reflective of the content of the list of Featured Pictures that have not yet been posted to the main page? Kevin McE (talk) 13:22, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes. One of our most prolific contributors takes photographs of those species. Makeemlighter (talk) 01:26, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Unhappy!
Hello All, I have been editor on Wiki since only few months from now. But have never dealt with pictures. But many of my friends, including me, feel that the POTD isnt interesting anymore. They of course dont know how a picture becomes a Featured Picture, the criteria required for it. For curiosity, i have been through few evaluations. Looking at the comments there, the technicalities discussed liked colour tones, cropping, resolution, lighting, noise, etc. stand valid for featuring a particular picture. But making it a POTD doesnt really get justification. I am unaware of the selection process and also would not be very interested in getting involved. But just that i have heard many disappointed comments recently, i though i should put them here. Few recent disappointing images were Africa 15 Dec, Anscombe's quartet 11 Dec, Desargues' theorem 2 Nov, Hawker 30 Sep, & so on..... -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 13:29, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The POTD is selected from the Featured Pictures on a first in, first out basis, roughly in the order of their promotion (accounting for anniversaries or other relevant dates, and also to make sure we have a variety of subjects). That means almost all Featured Pictures will eventually get a turn as POTD (with a few exceptions). There is no "voting" system like for TFA, it's simply a queue. I'm sorry that you have found some of the selections to be disappointing, but they are interesting to others. FPs on Wikipedia tend to emphasize the encyclopedic value of the image, meaning that in addition to being technically well done, it needs to be relevant to the article(s) in which it's included. If you are more interested in just the visual impact of the image, might I suggest the Commons picture of the day.  howcheng  {chat} 17:17, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

April 1: discussion initiated
Interested parties may wish to contribute here. Kevin McE (talk) 14:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

March 11
Why was this picture chosen as POTD so soon after it had been promoted. Was it international mushroom day or something?  God Emperor Talk  13:13, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * OK so creator of the photograph did this, and he also posted a POTD notification template on his user page beforehand, in an effort to make this seem legit it would seem. Obviously he wasn't counting on the fact that the template would transclude his own signature on the post.  God Emperor Talk  13:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

?
Is there any support for having POTD categories? It wouldn't need to have voting, since that would take up a lot of time, so it wouldn't be a featured picture. Instead, how 'bout just a random picture greater than, say, x days old (to attenuate the rif raff) from each category (Space, Natural phenomena, People, etc.)? I really just want to see an astronomy picture of the day style template and thought others might want the same or something along those lines :) Tom.Reding (talk) 16:13, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Bad Layout
The layout seems to have gone squiffy in the last couple of days. I get a large area of white at the top of the page because of the contents and tools boxes on the right, I need to scroll down to see the POTD.--Light.olive (talk) 10:33, 7 March 2012 (UTC) Maybe it happened at the same time as the fix to the template but the layout has been fixed too now 194.201.250.209 (talk) 08:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:POTD wikipedia is broken.
Template:POTD wikipedia is broken.


 * -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 01:59, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Excuse me, but it's been a whole 32 minutes. Why does the TFP show "(Check back later for today's)"?? That makes no sense given the huge one-year backlog discussed above&mdash;is it possible for non-admins to create this using a photo that's already been approved and have admins post it on the Main Page (or maybe there are no approved images ready?)? ~ AH1 (discuss!) 00:32, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, now what? Also the POTD wikipedia template hasn't been edited since 2008, so why is there a syntax problem? ~ AH1 (discuss!) 01:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * It looks like the problem was this space. But things are cached, so I'm still trying to get it to work. Prodego  talk  04:09, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Actually it was both that and this - . Prodego  talk  04:19, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

The vulgar, repetitive and solescistic use of "via" must stop! It must only be used in the geographical sense, not as a substitute for "from" or "by" or any other preposition! Furthermore, it must not be used as a substitute for a prepositional phrase, such as “by the agency of.” Let's leave crude journalese to the journalists and the manure spreaders they work for. Let's aspire to a better, clearer and honest prose style. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autodidact1 (talk • contribs) 04:41, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Uncited claims in today caption
I have made this edit to today's caption. One of the claims is entirely unsourced. The other is either unsourced or badly worded, depending on how you interpret a claim of the heaviest armed ship vs the one with the largest calibre gun. --Dweller (talk) 12:55, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Clumsy sentence
"Two samples of crystal bars of pure zirconium on a white glass plate showing different surface textures, made by the crystal bar process, and a 1 cm3 cube of it for comparison."

Better would be:

"Two crystal bars and and a 1 cm3 cube of pure zirconium on a white glass plate. The bars, made by the crystal bar process, show different surface textures."

Rich Farmbrough, 21:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC).

"Picture of the day" of the day before
I was thinking of having a gallery of three pictures, including as the first one the "picture of the day", as the second one the "picture of the day" of yesterday and as the third one the "picture of the day" of the day before yesterday. But I have no idea how to code it. Getting the picture of the day for a specific date is explained but it isn't the problem.--Razionale (talk) 14:50, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You'll want to use the parser function. For example,  for the previous day's POTD. — howcheng   {chat} 20:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not working for me.--Razionale (talk) 00:23, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Now it is! You have to use for yesterday and  for the day before yesterday, etc.--Razionale (talk) 00:29, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

TAFI being deployed to Main Page on April 15
This is a notice to let you all know that Today's articles for improvement will be deployed in just under twenty-four hours. For those who have not been following the developments of the section, it will be placed on the left side of the Main Page, beneath DYK, as at Main Page/Tomorrow. This should not affect POTD substantially. Comments and questions should be directed to Wikipedia talk:Today's articles for improvement. --  tariq abjotu  00:15, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Request for comments on the Main Page
The 2013 main page redesign proposal is a holding a Request for comments on the Main Page, in order to design an alternative main page based on what the community asks for. As this may affect your project, I would encourage you to leave feedback and participate in the discussion.

Evad37 (talk) (on behalf of the 2013 main page redesign proposal team) 00:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

You really need to address this sort of behaviour
Talk:Main_Page Chaosdruid (talk) 12:51, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * If you want to report yourself, try WP:ANI, but I suggest as an alternative calm down and learn to politely report errors (which you yourself could have but did nothing about). Nil Einne (talk)
 * I did politely report an error.
 * I am not uncalm. The edit summary was totally out of order, and you know it was. How can I report something before I see it? Did you expect me to trawl through all pages everyday to find them?
 * A "fair enough, but please report this sort of thing on the POTD page", or something similar, and "please strike/delete (whatever was offending you)" would have been fine. Escalating things by trying to make me look stupid is not the way to do things, especially when someone is not familiar with every operating procedure from the main page through to each "of the day" group.
 * I would have fixed it myself if I had been able to find the page but, after trying for 15 mins, I gave up and posted that message. Chaosdruid (talk) 13:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Didn't your mother ever tell you that you'll get more flies with honey than with vinegar? Calling it a "grammatical atrocity" makes you look like you're ranting and nobody is really interested in helping the crazy person. "This sentence doesn't make much sense" would have sufficed, and if you really wanted to be helpful you could have suggested a replacement. Also, for future reference, at the top of Talk:Main Page there's the "Main Page toolbox" with links to the various Main Page pieces that can be edited. Most of those are protected, but the "POTD regular version" is not. — howcheng  {chat} 18:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that - I will copy that link for future reference :¬)
 * To be honest, I only had 15 mins, as I was showing someone Wikipedia for the first time during a visit.
 * I could have been more tactful, that is true. Chaosdruid (talk) 20:44, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Unused FPs
File:Fredrik Pettersson.jpg is listed on Picture of the day/Unused with reason "No context available. Used only in one stub article." I don't know what the editor means by "No context" but i thought of informing it here that User:Resolute has expanded the article Fredrik Pettersson from stub. The image can feature on main page now, i suppose. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 09:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll schedule it ASAP. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the day - other Wikipedias
Hello,

I noticed that one of was promoted to 'Featured Photo' and was elected 'Image of the day' on August 19th, 2011 on Hebrew Wikipedia. Is this worthy of mention, and if so, how would I go about tagging it on English Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons? Thanks for any insight, cheers. THE PROMENADER  07:01, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I may have answered my own question: the template:Assessments. Unfortunately I can't link to the Hebrew FA Nomination Page using the 'henom=' attribute - I'm sure that it's my English input messing things up. Can anyone help? Thank you…THE PROMENADER  09:08, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You should ask at Commons:Template talk:Assessments. I'm afraid we are not very familiar with that template. — howcheng  {chat} 19:55, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, done. Thanks! THE PROMENADER  05:36, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Possibly disturbing pictures of the day

 * After a discussion with David Levy and a few other users at the main page last May, I am attempting to see if we can use some of the images at Picture of the day/Unused. My plan, assuming the community goes with it, is to use these images only when they would be particularly significant to a date (i.e. on anniversaries) and never too close together. Is there any objection to using these images? An example follows:


 * Any feedback would be appreciated. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:12, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * As we near the 36th anniversary of the eradication of smallpox in the wild, publication of this photo would be entirely appropriate as a reminder of what used to be–and still could be, since the remaining stocks of smallpox have never been destroyed, and the sequences of several variants are known. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 10:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * As far as can tell, there are 5 images there which are flagged as too graphic (plus another 3 or 4 which are flagged because they would raise immature catcalls).  Of those, the one for Death and Culture lacks a significant anniversary, as does the one for Lynching.  Agreed that the smallpox image and the holocaust image should go out on some kind of significant anniversary, since both are topics of very subsantial importance, but I'm not sure that such an argument can be made for The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife or the pictures held back due to fear of catcalls.  In general, I'd say raise the paticular pictures here as the anniversaries approach, and point out when one of pictures with a stubby article gets enough expansion to be featured.  MChesterMC (talk) 11:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC)


 * It must be some cultural thing with which I'm not familiar, but what is this "fear of catcalls"? A fear of something seems a weird reason for a global encyclopaedia to not do something. It doesn't seem very concrete. HiLo48 (talk) 11:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * This is for file:DefecatingSeagull.jpg, file:Indecency2.jpg, and file:Michele_Merkin_1.jpg, each of which is on that list since it would invite excessively peurile comments, or comments implying that the picture was only chosen because the subject was hot. It's a subjecive choice, but for those three examples, it seems a pretty reasonable one. MChesterMC (talk) 12:34, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It's safe to say that The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife or anything explicitly sexual has next to no chance of reaching the main page. I'd find my head on a pike if I suggested it (Wikipedia may not be for children, but "principal of least astonishment" is still a consideration, and two octopuses having oral sex with a nude swimmer is well outside "least astonishment"). The other "catcall" articles would have a better chance, though I agree with MChesterMc's suggestion that discussion be initiated here first for these potentially controversial images.
 * As for the lynching and suicide: the lynching one is certainly important to have (and we've had more explicit on the main page, see Lynching of Jesse Washington), so I was thinking something related to the first anti-lynching legislation passed in the US. The Japanese suicide image was taken after the Battle of Tarawa, so November 23-ish would perhaps be acceptable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:04, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * As an aside, why are some images on Picture of the day/Unused censored? 109.158.9.48 (talk) 20:20, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The editor who started the page, Howcheng, started that. Logically, it's consistent: if one is withholding an image because it is disturbing or sexually explicit, one does not parade it around the Reichstag building in a Spiderman suit. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:24, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

This picture is absolutely horrifying. But necessary. I was aware that smallpox is disfiguring, but I never understood until I saw this what it really means and why eradicating this disease was such a milestone. I think it's important to keep this image in place, catcalls be damned. Ronnotel (talk) 19:09, 6 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I never understood why the Michele Merkin photo was held back. Was it the last name? Or the immense amount of leg? The photo would've been shown forever ago and no one would've remembered it by now, right? It's only on the page for 24 hours (I'm assuming) and sometimes a bit of eye-candy is a great way to skyrocket views on Wikipedia. Kate Upton was a hit; I don't remember any catcalls anywhere (granted, she's not parading around in a bikini). Anyway, I can understand the more grotesque images' positions in this debate, but a photo of a pretty lady on the Internet is absolutely nothing new. I see worse images on Huffington Post. – Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 05:00, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

This disease was once the leading cause of death globally. While a case has not existed in humans since 1978 it still exists in the laboratory in the USA and the former USSR. Not something we should forget about. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 00:52, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Userbox is broken
Userbox usage and POTD wikipedia are broken. This happened sometime in the last year, I assume something about the way templates work has changed... anyone know / can fix? ··gracefool&#9786; 06:37, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm unaware of anything that can be done to fix it. Perhaps Howcheng would know? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:45, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not really sure what's causing the issue, but it seems weird that there's an extra space after the file name: 4 cilindros y museo BMW, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-28, DD 02.JPG when there's no such space in the template code itself. Nothing seems to have changed with any of the relevant templates, so I have no idea what would be causing this. — howcheng   {chat} 06:59, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Found it! POTD/2014-04-10 (and all others as well) contains a linebreak because of a  sequence. This will need to be rectified ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:POTD/2014-04-10&diff=603526700&oldid=600676136 like this]) in wherever that code comes from POTDstart. —  Edokter  ( talk ) — 00:17, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

The long queue to POTD on the Main Page

 * This thread is a shared transclusion. CLICK HERE to edit. (Click here to view page)

This needs to be archived. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:27, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Controversial image that should be removed from POTD queue
The file File:Michele Merkin 1.jpg is in the queue for POTD and is intended to run on the Main Page on June 25, I think. As you can probably tell if you click on the file, I think this will be highly controversial if run. It will only bring about another round of "Wikipedia is sexist" accusations. Also, it's important to think of the readers. People come to POTD for landscapes and wilflife photos etc., not seminude pictures. See WP:principle of least astonishment. Finally, there is one procedural reason to oppose, which is that the photo is no longer featured in the Michele Merkin article and thus the blurb would have to be rewritten. Thus, I hope this can be removed from the queue. --Jakob (talk) 23:17, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Addendum: It's also on WP:POTD/Unused. For a reason. --Jakob (talk) 23:19, 9 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Jakec - Please provide a reliable source for the claim that "People come to POTD for landscapes and wilflife photos etc., not seminude pictures.". HiLo48 (talk) 23:27, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Jakec, this is only temporarily queued, until May when I start a discussion to see if general consensus is against running this or not. The blurb there was written when the image was still in the article as an example of what the blurb would look like (similar to the smallpox discussion last year). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:26, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, never mind. I'll wait until the discussion in May then. --Jakob (talk) 00:34, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Another image that I think should not be POTD
I have no problem with Featured picture candidates/Roadkill being a featured picture, but surely it is too graphic to be a Picture of the Day.

I noticed it in the queue only a few days in the future. Can someone think about unqueuing it while there is still time?

If there is already a discussion of this, please show me where. (Reply here.) I can't find any reference to a page where Picture of the Day candidates are discussed, only featured picture candidates.

--50.100.193.30 (talk) 22:28, 11 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Agree.  North8000  (talk) 12:02, 12 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Why hide a scene that anyone could randomly see while driving along the highway? (I will never understand censorship.) HiLo48 (talk) 12:48, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Hilo. It's a fact of life. The Circle of Life is not all baby lions and bowing antelopes. There's decaying deer and scavengers as well. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:04, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * There's censorship and then there's taste. "It's a fact of life" does not mean that it belongs on the front page of your encyclopedia. --50.100.193.30 (talk) 11:53, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * And that image came and went without a single complaint at T:MP. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:04, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I am glad to hear that I was an outlier on this. But this still leads to me to ask again -- wait, I'll make it a separate question, below. --50.100.193.30 (talk) 04:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Userbox
— Preceding unsigned comment added by CFeyecare (talk • contribs) 00:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)