Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors

Please submit error reports only for content that is currently or will imminently appear on the Main Page. For general discussions regarding the Main Page, use its talk page.

National variations of the English language have been widely discussed previously: Wikipedia does not favor any particular variety of English. While Wikipedia aims to use language common to all English varieties, some differences in spelling, grammar, or terminology may differ or be absent in a reader's preferred variety. For guidance, see the relevant style guide on the national varieties of English and the comparison of American and British English.

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 14:18 on 7 October 2025) 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.
• Actual errors only. Failures of subjective criteria such as interestingness 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.

Launch of Apollo 11 on a Saturn V

• ... that the force developed by the engines of the Saturn V (pictured) during testing shattered the windows of nearby houses?

The main force developed by a rocket engine is its propulsive thrust. This did not break windows as there was no connection. Instead, what broke the windows was the sound of the engines, which is a side effect. After some digging to establish more details, I have amended the article to read, "When all five J-2 engines were tested together at the Stennis Space Center, the roar shattered the windows of nearby houses and so they were tested singly thereafter." I suggest that the hook be amended as follows:

• ... that the roar of all five main engines of the Saturn V (pictured) shattered the windows of nearby houses during testing?

Andrew🐉(talk) 06:51, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More worrying, this appears to be an apocryphal story. From the source: "The story told around those parts is that the original test specification was to fire all five J-2 engines at once, but the first time it was tried, the thunderous roar it created caused windows to break for miles around. ... Any truth to this? I can’t say that a tour guide ever told that story, but I have certainly heard it repeated at Stennis from time to time." This should probably be pulled. RoySmith (talk) 11:17, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was planning to raise the same issue. There were no contemporary reports in newspapers of window breakages, which seems like it might be quite a big deal. And the launchpad was a long way from settlements. Seems like it might be some hyperbole that was inserted by someone after the fact but then sort of became an accepted story, repeated on the nasa website.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:33, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Juxlos: RoySmith (talk) 11:45, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We do reliable sources. TarnishedPath^talk 14:06, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are two cited sources at the end of the relevant sentence. The first supports the hook explicitly and in its own voice: "windows shattered in nearby communities". RoySmith is quoting a user-generated comment on the second source, which otherwise doesn't mention windows; presumably it supports some other part of the sentence. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:12, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Here's another source which is more specific:

  "...when a Saturn V first-stage booster was fired for the first time, the noise and blast from the most powerful rocket ever built in America shattered a bank window in the town of nearby Picayune."

  That's just one window though so perhaps the hook should be

• ALT ... that the roar of all five main engines of the Saturn V (pictured) shattered a bank's window during testing?

And here's a even more substantial source:

"With Boeing's test conductor James Dezzo at the console, the giant rocket roared to life at 5:21 p.m., and the sound thundered across the piney woods for 15 seconds. A brilliant red and orange flame streaked out from the base of the flame-deflector bucket into the air. Unlike the invisible S-II liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen flame, the RP-1 kerosene and liquid oxygen flame was so bright it produced huge flashes of light as the five F-1 engines rumbled and clattered. The low-frequency sound produced by the test-firing was heard as far away as Picayune, Mississippi, and the sound waves shattered a plate-glass window in a downtown Picayune bank building."

Andrew🐉(talk) 12:43, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It still seems like this is hearsay, maybe based on something that was invented after the fact. It seems unlikely that a bank window would be shattered by a rocket test and no local press report on it at all. And if window shattering was a side effect of launching this rocket, why was it just that one time? (also, if we do amend it I don't think we should say "roar", that doesn't sound very encyclopedic in tone and this wasn't the "mission" that Katy Perry was involved in  — Amakuru (talk) 14:08, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Needs updating to "2025" and "229 Nobel laureates". — RAVENPVFF · talk · 10:11, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The current text includes a superfluous definite article.

"known as the slender speedwell"

might better be revised to

"known as slender speedwell"

which better accords with the text of the main WP article anyway. ShoneBrooks (talk) 14:18, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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