Help desk
< February 10	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 12 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

February 11

Contents of section I want to edit don't appear on edit page

I wish to correct a misdirected link in the References section of the article on Stalking. But when I try to edit this section, all that appears in the edit box is one short line, not the whole contents of the References section. How can I edit this?Strippy6 (talk) 00:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The references themselves are in the article's body. Click the ^ next to number of the reference you want to edit to find it in the text. Then edit that section. Please see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners for more details on how references work. --Mysdaao ^talk 00:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

URL including square brackets

Resolved

How do you fix this? 84.41.34.154 (talk) 00:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC) Done... all done!!..Buzzzsherman (talk) 00:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Internet video

There are many websites offering video files in internet, the most famous would be Youtube. Is it OK to provide these websites links in the External link section in wiki articles? Arilang ^talk 01:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not explicitly prohibited (WP:YOUTUBE) but is not usually a good idea as you can easily run into copyright issues. Xenon54 / talk / 01:05, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's alright when the channel is an official channel, such as Hollywood Records (channel) or CNN (channel). However, videos uploaded by regular users are almost never appropriate, as ones of encyclopedic value are usually copyright violations. Liquidluck✽talk 02:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this news would change somethings?

"An ISP such as iiNet provides a legitimate communication facility which is neither intended nor designed to infringe copyright," Justice Dennis Cowdroy told the court. Arilang ^talk 12:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other place to put this?

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 20:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen several ongoing "discussions" about wikipedia sourcing, and I realize this is not the place to make a suggestion on how to fix it. However, I know that "Help desk is a highly visible page", so this will be noticed. Therefore the question: where would I suggest a method of completely fixing the issue at hand? My suggestion follows.

I know this would require software modification, but it should be possible to create three "views" of wikipedia, one for the common reader, one for registered users, and one for administrators. Then, use de.wikipedia-type content filtering or similar (for example, a certain number of editorial "thumbs-up"s, ala Urban Dictionary's ratings system) for publication of properly cited and formatted material to public-view wikipedia. On registered-view wikipedia, display everything that current wikipedia contains, including blatantly unsourced information (different from public-view), as well as editor's comments on the article like the current in-line source code comments. Then on administrator-view wikipedia, give the administrators one-click roll-backs for public-view wikipedia and simple tools that they can use for their administrator-ly duties. Instead of having anonymous edits go directly onto public wikipedia, have them post to editor-view wikipedia, and include on editor-view an easy-to-use history viewing setup. Have edits post instantly on editor-view.

This solution would eliminate badly unsourced and un-wikified information from public view and keep normal readers from dealing with annoying [citation needed] tags in the middle of print. I acknowledge that it would make simple edits and re-ordering of information take more time on public view and reduce the impact "notable anonymous users", but it would stop vandalism by anonymous users and keep public-view clean of editor-important-only things and unverified information.

So It Is Written, -- Nutarama (talk) 01:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Implementation of the de.wp filtering system is currently under discussion here at en.wp. You can find it at the Flagged Revisions proposal, and linked pages. There has been much discussion about how to implement this proposal; you are free to comment in any of those discussions, if you wish. Intelligentsium 01:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Intelligentsium -- Nutarama (talk) 05:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey help desk!

Your archivist tool is dead. Everything from Feb. 10 and now Feb. 11 is in the archive for Feb. 9! It'll be simpler to fix before it goes much farther. -- Nutarama (talk) 01:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reporting this. An editor accidentally removed the date headings in [1] two hours ago. Those days are not archived yet but are deliberately part of the same long page spanning the most recent several days. I am readding the date headings so the archiving will work correctly when the time comes. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

layman-isms

I have read many articles and FAQ points about contributing to Wikipedia. Still, I cannot figure out if adding metaphors or comparisons to common situations in order to help understand highly technical or specialized articles is ok. For example, I just read an article about whips (as the word is used in politics). I was having trouble understanding the political nuances, which interfered with me understanding what "whip" means. Then I thought to myself, "He's like an Outlook calendaring guru who makes sure that the most people attend the important meetings." I thought, I bet other readers of this article would understand that analogy. Should I edit an article like that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.205.232.225 (talk) 02:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't understand it and I already know what whip (politics) is. I haven't heard of "Outlook calendaring guru" which gives 205 Google hits while "party whip" gives 82700. "minority whip" and "majority whip" give more than 200000. Making your own metaphors without a reliable source is against Wikipedia:No original research although it may not specifically mention metaphors. Your metaphor also has some problems that I think makes it unsuited to explain a whip. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Before I say this, know that I am a Wikipedia fan. Although, due to the community-contribution nature of Wikipedia, it is not admissible in most university research papers... even in that context, it is valuable for the "References" section of each article. In fact, I've donated (humbly so) out of my own pocket. Having said that, please read into the following no implications nor cycncism... because they are not intended:

Wikipedia has MULTIPLE articles that link to Doc Brown's "flux capacitor" (an actual article in Wikipedia). There are Wikipedia articles on more X-Men than I ever knew existed. In that context, what is so wrong about making an analogy that my many peers would understand?

Again, please read no insult nor ill will into what I've said. I simply wish to explore the logic and limits of "Wikettiquite" :) If nothing more, maybe this message will have you considering a wiki of analogies :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.205.232.225 (talk) 04:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the biggest problem is that the kind of metaphors like you describe are very often culture/knowledge specific. Not everyone is familiar with Outlook, let alone its calendar features (I very rarely use the calendar in mine) and even fewer people know what the word "guru" would mean in the context of your metaphor. You would need to provide links to Outlook and Guru. So, for example, my mother would have no idea what Outlook is, and my niece would have no idea what a guru is. For similar reasons, we do not add layman's measurements to large quantities - things like "...equivalent to 30 football fields", "...the weight of 124 elephants" or "...as much water as held in 70 olympic swimming pools". If you attempted to add "...like an Outlook calendaring guru" to the whip (politics) article it would probably be reverted very quickly as "irrelevant", "not helpful", or "what?". You might even be accused of vandalism. Astronaut (talk) 13:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you find something unclear in the whip (politics) article, quote the exact sentences on the talk page and explain exactly which parts you don't understand. Other editors with knowledge of the subject can then discuss how best to clarify the confusing material, most likely without resorting to analogies with unrelated subjects. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, read by a global audience, not a creative writing project, so we avoid flowery or culturally-specific analogies. The main problem with analogies is that they are not identities, so it is difficult for the reader to guess exactly which properties of two objects are analogous. For example, cats are analogous to dogs in many ways (four legs, fur, tail, sharp teeth, warm blood) but obviously different in other ways. Someone who was unfamiliar with one or both could misunderstand a statement such as "A cat is like a dog" and picture a barking cat. Most likely, a party whip is different from an Outlook guru in some important ways. --Teratornis (talk) 19:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if a particular article is extremely technical and unlikely to make sense to the nonexpert, we can write a simplified version to go along with it. See for example:

--Teratornis (talk) 19:35, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I accidently deleted very first paragraph, while trying to add some info on Tirhut. I am trying to revert it back to what it was displaying yesterday, but can not do it. Please revert it back. Sorry,

Hi I accidently deleted very first paragraph, while trying to add some info on Tirhut. I am trying to revert it back to what it was displaying yesterday, but can not do it. Please revert it back. Sorry, Amarnath Jha

Fixed- I hope Tirhut looks like it should now. Thanks for reporting your problem! Don't worry about mistakes, almost everything on Wikipedia is fixed easily. If you can't figure something out, just come back here. If you'd like to learn more about editing, take a look at Wikipedia:How to edit a page. If you'd like to experiment, try the sandbox.

By the way, if you run into this problem again, click the "history" tab at the top, next to the "edit" tab. Then click on the date of the version you want to revert to, and then click edit and save- you'll have reverted back to the old version. Also, when editing try clicking the "show preview" button before clicking "save". If something doesn't look right in the preview, you can quit before saving. Thanks, Liquidluck✽talk 07:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

nickname

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 19:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to be "frisbeesandflipflops" but it looks like instead I am "Frisbeesandflipflops" with a capital F. I need to change this but do not know how. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frisbeesandflipflops (talk • contribs) 06:16, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but user names, like article names, are capitalized by default. You may, however, choose to create a signature so that whenever you sign your name on a talk or help page like this one your name appears in lowercase. You may do this by clicking "my preferences" at the top right corner and, on the "user profile" tab, scrolling down to "signature". Create your signature in the white box (for frisbeesandflipflops (talk), type ([[User:Frisbeesandflipflops|frisbeesandflipflops]] ([[User talk:Frisbeesandflipflops|talk]]), and click the check box beneath that says "sign my name exactly as shown".

Make sure to sign your posts by typing ~~~~ at the end of each of your messages! Thanks, Liquidluck✽talk 06:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And you can add {{Lowercase title}} to your user and talk pages so that they display with a lower case first letter (as I have done on mine). – ukexpat (talk) 16:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you! frisbeesandflipflops (talk) 19:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC) (I signed this time)[reply]

Who is Allowed to upload images, etc?

Greetings, I love Wikipedia for its extensive coverage of history, esp American history. Often times I will be reading about a subject for which there has been a (US) postage stamp commemorating the event. The US post office has, since 1847, the year of the first postage stamp (5 cent Ben Franklin) issued a wide variety of stamps depicting Presidents and other notable Americans, along with those commemorating historical events, etc. For example, in 1947 the PO issued a 3c stamp commemorating the 150th anniversary of the USS Constitution. It's an engraved stamp and depicts the ships sails and rigging quite clearly. I have an extensive US stamp collection I have taken many quality photos of and would like, where appropriate, to add them to the various historical illustrations. I tried to upload a photo-image of the 3c USS Constitution stamp but it says I am not an 'autoconfirmed used'. What do I need to do to be able to upload photo files, etc? User name: gwhickers

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwillhickers (talk • contribs) 06:57, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

After you make 10 edits and your account is 4 days old, it is autoconfirmed, which enables you to upload pictures (amongst other things).

However, you can immediately upload pictures to Commons, and use them on Wikipedia. Appropriately licenced images should be uploaded to Commons, as they can then be used by other language wikis and Sister projects. Smappy (talk) 07:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. You might be interested in joining WikiProject United States History and/or WikiProject Military history. Smappy (talk) 07:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I'm glad Wikipedia is useful to you, and thank you for offering to donate pictures. Since you are uploading images you took yourself of a U.S. federal government work, it would be very helpful if you uploaded them to the Wikimedia Commons, where free use works are stored, instead of uploading them directly to the English Wikipedia. You will need to create an account there as well, but here's a direct link to the form you will use to upload your image: link.

Autoconfirmation is required to upload images directly to the English Wikipedia in order to cut down on potentially non-free images (images which are neither in the public domain nor qualify for fair use). It occurs automatically when an account has at least ten edits and is at least four days old. Autoconfirmation also enables users to move pages to new titles and edit semiprotected pages such as United States, along with other permissions. Thanks, Liquidluck✽talk 07:30, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How to Edit Headline?

I can edit the article body, but not the headline. I'd like to delete the word "Gullichsen" from "Ahlström-Gullichsen family." I've cleaned up the article, but I can't access the headline for edit. How should I do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quercus2 (talk • contribs) 08:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The title shown at the top of articles is the actual page name - in this case, Ahlström-Gullichsen family. To change this, you have to move the page - but you cannot move pages yourself until your account is a little older, so please head over to Requested moves#Current requests, and add your request there, giving the reason. Smappy (talk) 09:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do I delete a Wiki book?

I've got an uneasy feeling I'm being spectacularly stupid but how do I delete a Wiki book (user book) that I created just to get some practice using the system, editing the book, etc? If I 'clear' the book or delete the last article, I can't save the empty book and there doesn't appear to be a 'delete' function.

Be gentle with me... *:) R L Lacchin (Gloucester, UK) (talk) 10:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only administrators have the option to delete pages. For pages in your user space such as this one (User:AstroWiki/Books/Scratch), if you place {{db-userreq}} on the page an administrator will delete it for you. Cassandra 73 (talk) 11:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help resolving a dispute

I don't know where to best put up this request for help in settling some kind of a dispute. I am really getting tired in a continued discussion with an editor over the proper way of editing articles, who keeps ignoring style guidelines, writing text in presentation style (bullet lists), informal tone, and worst, writing text based on original research that is mostly completely flawed, never referenced, and almost always inaccurate or simply plain wrong. Please take a look at various edits and discussions at User_talk:Eyreland, User_talk:Nageh, Concatenated error correction codes, Error detection and correction etc.

Maybe some more experienced can come up with better, more convincing arguments to the editor this is directed at. Thanks for any help. Nageh (talk) 12:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I asked for WP:3O. Nageh (talk) 15:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Picture upload

Hi

I'm trying to upload a logo to the box at "Energinet.dk" - as for instance on Dong Energy's site - but I can't seem to figure out how to do it. I'm able to upload an example file but can't put our own logo on the site. I'm cirkeling around when trying.

Can you help me?

Best regards Stine, Denmark —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lange1234 (talk • contribs) 13:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images are uploaded at Wikipedia:Upload, but only autoconfirmed users are able to upload images. Your account will automatically be autoconfirmed when it has made at least ten edits and is at least four days old. Your account has made enough edits, so when it is four full days old, you will be able to upload images. Once an image is uploaded, use it in an article by adding [[Image:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]] to the page, replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. Please read Wikipedia:Picture tutorial for more information. --Mysdaao ^talk 13:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Standard image advice message follows:

If you want to add an existing image to an article, add [[Image:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information.
If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must find out what the proper license of the image is. If you know the image is licensed under a free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure what license the image takes, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy. I hope this helps.

And as you have a conflict of interest, please read WP:COI. – ukexpat (talk) 15:53, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Boardman wiki page deleted

I tried adding details to his profile and it has been deleted.

Apparantly it was because the (A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

What does this mean ? Do the moderators not know who these people are ? He is listed on many pages for his presenting / Journalism work etc.

I feel the page for tie up some missing links on Wikipedia when the Mark Boardman page is added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.152.0.2 (talk) 15:34, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the page, it did not indicate why the person was notable enough to warrant an article. Furthermore, it also appeared to be advertising for Boardman. I would suggest reading our info on writing your first article. TN X Man 15:47, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

I wanted to upload a photo from a website. I found a similar image from the same site. I have tried to copy the licence page from the existing file, but change it to fit the image I wanted to load. Could someone please check that I have done all the legal stuff correctly? I don't want to get sued. •• Fly by Night (talk) 15:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine but the license is suitable for the image to be uploaded to Commons - so the image is tagged to be moved there. In fact, thousands of Geograph images have just been uploaded to Commons so it's always a good idea to check there first, Also, Geograph makes it easy to complete the copyright/licensing stuff - on the Geograph image page, just below the image is a link that takes you to a second page where there are various boxes, one of which contains all the copyright/license code you need for Commons, so just copy and paste it into the Commons upload form. – ukexpat (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Do you mean that I uploaded it to the wrong site? •• Fly by Night (talk) 16:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say "wrong", it's just that Commons is the best place for appropriately licensed media so that they are available for use on all Wikimedia projects. – ukexpat (talk) 18:57, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Error message when uploading the logo of my organisation

Trying to upload the logo of my organisation I receive this message:

This page is currently protected and can be edited or moved only by administrators.

Some templates and site interface pages are permanently protected due to visibility. Occasionally, articles are temporarily protected because of editing disputes.
The reason for protection can be found in the protection log. If there are no relevant entries in the protection log, the page may have been moved after being protected.
You can discuss this page with others. If you have noticed an error or have a suggestion for a simple change, start a [[[:Template:Fullurl:]] new section] and insert the text {{editprotected}} followed by your request. An administrator may then make the change on your behalf. For move-protected pages, see requested moves.
You may request unprotection of the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piotrfromtheese (talk • contribs)

It looks like you are trying to upload a file with a protected filename. What is the name of the file? – ukexpat (talk) 16:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After posting here you have uploaded File:EUREKA research and development logo.gif so I guess you worked it out. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Defaultsort/redirect cursor location

The last couple of days when clicking on DEFAULTSORT or REDIRECT from the WikiMarkup box it positions the cursor one character to the right of where it should be; you have to move back a character before pasting text... I'm using IE8 GrahamHardy (talk) 17:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It works fine in Firefox, so this is presumably one of IE's little perversities. The denizens of WP:VPT might know more. Algebraist 17:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It worked fine in IE until yesterday (10th Feb)... GrahamHardy (talk) 18:11, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have Beta enabled? Does leaving Beta solve the problem? --Shuhari (talk) 20:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't got beta enabled... GrahamHardy (talk) 21:03, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you have Experimental features enabled under Editing at Special:Preferences then try disabling. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no experimental features enabled... GrahamHardy (talk) 13:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Same problem here - IE8 on WinXP, do not use beta, no experimental features, haven't changed any gadgets or .js or .css Was working fine until a couple of days ago. DuncanHill (talk) 14:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked WP:VPT to visit... GrahamHardy (talk) 18:18, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems OK in Firefox 3.0.17 / Windows XP / Monobook / no beta / no experimentals. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:39, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

incorrect re-direct

From Bill Crosby to Bill Cosby...not the same person.

Bill Crosby was a blues singer that recorded for Columbia in the 1940's.

Please correct, Thank You... Bob Bergmann Owner BoogiebobsRecords.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.209.125.221 (talk) 19:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, when someone decides to write an article about the blues singer, the redirect page can be turned into that article. Until then there is no harm in having the redirect. – ukexpat (talk) 19:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was also posted to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment#incorrect re-direct and somebody changed the Bill Crosby redirect to point to William Crosby where Bill Cosby is one of three people. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:46, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving documents from Google cache

I am having some problems finding reliable sources to backup claims of Anna Nalick marriage. So far, I've only encountered two sources, one comes from a Los Angeles Times supplement, which apart from not being appropriate enough (it's an article about wedding cakes) only mentions she's married. Despite that, I added it to the article anyway.

The second one, despite again being not very appropriate (it's a mere "Congratulations" note), includes the wedding date and the city in which the rite took place. There are two additional problems with this source: first, the document is no longer accessible, and second, the only existing copy is located in Google's cache, in a HTML-only form, which would not be a problem except for the original document being a PDF, thus the layout is seriously mangled.

I'm thinking in using such cache copy to make a permanent backup with WebCite, but I wonder if there are too many drawbacks with the reference to even consider it for inclusion here.--Lashiec (talk) 21:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

help with posting photos

I have created a Wikipedia article and have photos on Wik. Commons that I want to add but cannot understand the instructions on how to do it. Pls. help. I am frustrated and don't know where to turn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gary reals (talk • contribs) 22:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let's assume you want to add File:Nelson Mandela.jpg to an article. If you want to add an image to the infobox of an article, type "File:Nelson Mandela.jpg" (no quotes) where it asks | image= . If you want to add an image outside of an infobox, type [[File:Nelson Mandela.jpg|thumb|right|100px|Caption]], which creates the image you see to the right. Replace "Nelson Mandela" with the name of the image you actually want to add. Hope that helps, Liquidluck✽talk 22:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But also note that there is no consistency among infoboxes. Some require a "full" link such as [[File:Nelson Mandela.jpg]]; some don't need the brackets, viz File:Nelson Mandela.jpg; and yet others don't need the "file", viz, Nelson Mandela.jpg. The relevant infobox's documentation is the best place to check requirements. – ukexpat (talk) 01:35, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sport or Sports in title?

I just moved the page Sport in Slovenia to Sports in Slovenia and the article's creator promptly moved it back citing the article Sport in Germany among others. I have never heard the singular form of sports used in this manner, has anyone else? I was about to move all pages titled in a similar manner but decided to consult first. Supertouch (talk) 23:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a speaker of British English I have no problem with Sport in Slovenia as a title. For example, see A Question of Sport. For me, "sports" would tend to indicate a number of specific sports rather than sport in general. Since these articles exist in their originally created form, and are OK in at least one variety of English, my instinct would be not to move, but Sports in Slovenia is a sensible redirect. Ka renjc 00:00, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But wouldn't Sport in Slovenia imply that only one sport is being played? The article deals with a number of sports? I checked on Wikipedia the definition seemed to support this understanding—unless of course that definition only indicates American usage. Supertouch (talk) 00:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's an American vs British thing. Compare BBC Sport. As Karenjc said earlier, "sport" is the more general term referring to all of recreation, while "sports" is a defined subset of activities. Compare Sky Sports for the latter usage. In America "sports" is always used, compare CBS Sports. Since the article deals with a European topic, "sport" should be used. Xenon54 / talk / 01:13, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

wikipedia traffic

Where can I find some information on the daily hits that the Wikipedia site gets? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.191.181.43 (talk) 23:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Statistics for links to all kinds of data of this type. Ka renjc 00:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More specifically, see Help:Pageview stats. Liquidluck✽talk 00:47, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]