Help desk
< February 15	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 17 >

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 16

Edit counter not working

Also, the edit counter is down.When I click on it, instead of showing the number of my edits, it says enwikipedia is not a valid wiki Please inform whoever manages the edit counter of this problem. Thank you. Immunize (talk) 00:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are several edit counters; you don't specify which one. Remember the most reliable counter can be found at Special:Preferences. Soxred93's counter was giving that error earlier today but it now seems to be fixed. Xenon54 / talk / 02:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was soxred 93's edit counter, and as far as I can see the error has been fixed. Immunize (talk) 15:09, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They seem to be out of synch. For me, Special:Preferences shows 6236; Soxred93's shows 6248 (including deleted) and 6240 (excluding deleted). --Redrose64 (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question for an admin

Hi. I was just accused by a User:Seregain of making vandal edits to Wii Sports, but the only article I was editing was List of controversial video games. I asked him to show me the edit he was talking about but still haven't received a reply. If there's an admin avalible, I would appreciate some assistance. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.136.35.108 (talk) 00:38, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin, but the user was likely talking about this edit, which occurred from your IP address. If you want to avoid this, I recommend registering an account. PDCook (talk) 00:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks.--94.136.35.108 (talk) 00:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone, especially an IP shouldn't be warned for an edit that happened over a week ago. It is a very good possibility that the person behind the IP has changed since then. That warning should not have been given. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 00:52, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One cannot assume such a thing. Yes, the warning should've been given when the edit happened, but it didn't. If this person does not intend to register a username, then the warning should remain in case the other person, if he exists, starts vandalizing again. Seregain (talk) 01:26, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We do assume that all the time. IP warnings start over all the time because we can not say it is the same person editing. We should assume good faith that it is someone else and not assume it is the same person. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 02:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One of Wikipedia's best qualities is that its users will never be forced to register an account. However, anonymous editing has its shortcomings - IP addresses for most ISP's can change at the drop of a hat. In large corporate/school networks, external IPs can change with each page load. It should never be assumed that two edits are by the same person, unless there's good reason to believe otherwise: usually it's because (a) the edits are close together or (b) the edits are similar or (preferably) the same in nature. If a warning isn't given when the edit happens, it shouldn't be given at all. By the time someone else notices there isn't a warning, 9 times out of 10 the IP will have gone to a different user. Xenon54 / talk / 03:08, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are many instances of IP addresses only contributing disruptive edits, sometimes over a period of months or years. One of Wikipedia's worst qualities is that its users will never be forced to register an account. Jan1naD ^{(talk • contrib)} 09:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I too am puzzled by the claim that one of Wikipedia's best qualities is that its users will never be forced to register an account. First, because I haven't seen any persuasive evidence that unregistered editing creates net value (that is, do the positive unregistered contributors outweigh the negative ones, and would requiring registration drive the positive unregistered contributors away? I've never seen anyone even attempt to prove this), and second because the premise of the statement isn't entirely true - we already "force" users to register accounts if they want to do a list of things that keeps increasing over time, such as edit semi-protected articles, upload images, create new articles, etc. It's possible that the trend to restrict unregistered users will continue to grow, until Wikipedia will have all but required editors to register. --Teratornis (talk) 08:22, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Date from UTC in the 'in this day' context.

While I realized that GMT is the rule of the world, that does not lay to rest the question to what date 'On this day' should apply in each time zone. In particular, on 10:05 EDT January 15, or 03:00 UTC January 16, the 'On this day' refers to January 16 rather than 15.

While this is of minor concern to us EDT uses, there exist UTC+12 and UTC-12 users to whom this is half a day out of synch. Surely the conversion to standard time should for this purpose should not be insuperable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.102.176 (talk) 03:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would mean serving different versions of the Main Page, to ALL users. Unfortunately the Wikipedia servers would not be able to cope with that. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 12:26, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unrevertable vandalism

Someone please check the vandalism by this edit. When trying to undo the vandalism, it reverts to a spam list and cannot revert. Benjwong (talk) 03:34, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done I reverted back to what I think is the last good edit and removed the blacklisted website. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 03:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've found that a site on the spam blacklist can be restored by rollback; if there's a good reason for the blacklisted URL to be present (I've run into that kind of situation once), you can post a request at WP:AN if you don't have rollback yourself. Nyttend (talk) 04:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to do a normal revert and it did not work manually or with undo button. Is this the same as rollback? I have no admin rights. Thanks for fixing. Benjwong (talk) 04:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, rollback is different; see Wikipedia:Rollback feature. Nyttend (talk) 04:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NOINDEX

I want to prevent indexing for a specific page in my userspace, but I can't find a help page on how to do it. Do I type __NOINDEX__? I'm extrapolating from __NOTOC__, which I use frequently. And while we're on the subject, is there a page that contains a list of __NOthisorthatortheother__ commands? Nyttend (talk) 04:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Use __NOINDEX__ or {{NOINDEX}}. See Help:Magic words. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:36, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How to design this template?

Resolved: Gonzonoir (talk) 11:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi i want to make one for my favorite club, but I can't seem to find the template for this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Kilda_Football_Club#Players_and_staff —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eathb (talk • contribs) 11:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The template in that article is Template:St Kilda Football Club Squad - you could base your template on that by clicking "Edit", copying the contents to a new template, and substituting the player names, club name, and colours as appropriate. Help:A quick guide to templates does exactly what it says on the tin, and Help:Template gives an exhaustive breakdown of how templates work and how to create them. Does that help? Gonzonoir (talk) 11:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah that was what i was looking for. Thankyou. Eathb (talk 11:50, 16 Feb 2010

You're welcome. Gonzonoir (talk) 11:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Technical issue in Chełm#.22Wise_Jewish_Men_of_Chelm.22

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 17:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The [edit] links for this section and the preceding two sections seem to be tied to the top of the lower illustration. As you change the page width, these three [edit] links (which appear on the same line) seem to move with the illustration, and do not appear with their sections.

I've viewed the page under Opera, FireFox, and Chrome, and in all three the issue occurs.

Screen shots are available.

Is this a bug in the Wikification software?

~~Ð’n ^talk 11:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have just met WP:BUNCH. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 12:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh! Well, then, I'm glad no one else has fixed this yet, as I'm happy to learn about this little fellow and how to deal with him! We can consider this issue resolved... ~~Ð’n ^talk 14:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Older version of an image

Hi, I want to use the former version of an image file. (This file had been created in 2006 by a user and just a few days ago, some other user has edited it; but the new version is faulty.) How can I add the former version ? Thanks. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:16, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to revert the image to the previous version, click the revert link to the left of the version you want to revert to. If the file is from Wikimedia Commons, you will need an account there in order to revert images. Before you do this, it is a good idea to talk to the user who uploaded the new version that you believe is faulty.

If you want to keep the new version but use the old version under a different name, you can do so by clicking on the old version in the file history, save it to your computer, and upload it again using a different file name. --Mysdaao ^talk 13:23, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

how can I send this page to a friend?

Dear Team, due my less knowledge I could find any button where I can send this page to a friend !? kind regards

student —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.79.145.105 (talk) 13:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Send them a link to the page via email. Supertouch (talk) 13:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) You can send the URL of the page you want through an e-mail. Near the top of your browser there should be an address bar that contains the URL of the page you are looking at. Copy that address and paste it an e-mail that you send to your friend, who can use that URL in their browser to load the same page, as long as he or she has Internet access.

Another alternative is to save it as a PDF, but you need an account for that. If you create an account, there will be a link on the left side of every Wikipedia page that says "Download as PDF" which allows you to save that page as a PDF file, which you can then send. --Mysdaao ^talk 13:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Energy efficient Gear Boxes

How worm reducers are less energy efficient gear boxes when compared to helical gear boxes ?

How much percentage saving in energy can be achieved by using helical gear boxes in place of worm gear boxes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vssajeevan (talk • contribs) 14:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried the Science section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. TN X Man 15:13, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving

My talk page is becoming fairly long (76 kilobytes), but I do not currently want older posts on my talk page archived. I am correct that it is not mandotory to have older posts on my talk page archived, right? And if I choose I to archive, how do I go about doing it. Any help would be much appreciated. Immunize (talk) 15:52, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not mandatory, but is recommended (ease of reading, etc.). MiszaBot is most commonly used to archive pages and you find more information on using it here. TN X Man 15:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I might consider when my talk page becomes much longer than it is currently, but right now I think it would be best if all previous topics of discussion on my talk page were visible. Immunize (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd like to see an example of archiving in action, you can see my talk page and associated archives. On the other hand, this user choose not to archive. It's your call, either way. TN X Man 16:08, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are descriptions of different techniques at WP:ARCHIVE. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:20, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

security question

I just got an email in Russian saying that someone on the Russian wikipedia requested a password change using my username (I don't actually know Russian, but thanks to Babelfish, I did figure out the general gist of the message). Does this mean someone is trying to hack into my account? If so, what should I do to ensure the security of my wikipedia account?--little Alex (talk) 17:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily a hacker. Have you unified your accounts? If so, it is possible that a user on Ru Wikipedia thinks that it's their user name and is trying to change the pw. I am pretty sure that if you take no action on the e-mail the pw will not be changed. – ukexpat (talk) 17:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ukexpat is correct. Receiving one these emails does nothing unless you act on it. Once in a blue moon, a vandal will send one of these in an effort to cause panic, but it actually does nothing. TN X Man 17:26, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hidden edits on talk page

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 19:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't figure out why the edits at Talk:European colonization of the Americas don't show up, can anyone help me fix it? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 17:15, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "close comment" wikicode was missing a dash. I've fixed it up for you. TN X Man 17:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. No wonder I couldn't figure out what was wrong! Clearly needed expert attention. Dougweller (talk) 17:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're too kind. :) I've found that if large chunks of text go missing, it's either a goofed comment code or a misplaced ref tag. TN X Man 18:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to find a bit of amusing vandalism

I once saw an edit which read something like, "Beetles do not wear yarmulkes, because they are not Jewish". This must be in someone's "funny vandalism" section of his or her user page, since that's the only way I would have seen it, but I checked some pages and couldn't find it. This edit came up in conversation and I would like to be able to show it to someone. I am just wondering if, by any chance, someone is familiar with this edit or knows a way to find it? Keepscases (talk) 18:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you cannot find it with Special:Search, then the edit is probably buried in the history of some page, where it is no longer visible to the search tools that I know about. Celebrating clever instances of vandalism on Wikipedia simply encourages more vandalism, however, so please don't do it. If you want to read something funny, check out Uncyclopedia which is an entire site dedicated to screwball nonsense like this. --Teratornis (talk) 08:28, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have a 'template' for an article about a film?

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 03:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that Wikipedia is missing an article about a particular film and wish to create an article for it. I'm wondering what's the best way to get started. Do we have a 'template' or boiler plate that I can use to start the article? By 'template', I don't mean one of the Wikipedia templates such {{NPOV}}, I mean a sample or example article we can use as a starting point so that we can follow best practices? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 18:20, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I am aware of. The best approach would be to follow the layout and format of an existing film article and refer to WP:MOSFILM. Also please bear in mind WP:NFILM. – ukexpat (talk) 19:11, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It's a home movie I made so I'm sure it meets notability requirements! J/K. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 02:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

user-agent: huh??

Since when does wikipedia *require* a user-agent header?? Undo that braindeath, please. What browser people are running is none of a site's business if the user chooses not to reveal it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.70.42.13 (talk) 18:51, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User agent is a standard part of the HTTP protocol. You have not characterized the problem to a point where I can understand or resolve it. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 19:34, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Totally interjecting here, but what exactly is a user agent? If someone can explain that, I could probably understand the asker's question. The article on user agent didn't do much but give me a headache. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 20:29, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The user-agent as meant here, is a header send by the client, to the server along with every request for a page. Last night the search and API servers were so overloaded with idiotic commands by people who try to data-mine Wikipedia for information to use in SPAM, that action had to be taken. During that it was discovered that the requirement for a User-agent (which the foundation has had for years), had been broken for a long time. It was fixed. User-agents are required, because developers want to be able to recognize VALID tools. If a VALID tool becomes abusive (too many requests, or broken requests), they can resolve the problem. If a tool is clearly spoofing (faking) its user-agent, or does not provide one and is abusive, the clients will simply be firewalled and you won't be able to use Wikipedia at all. If a user doesn't want to reveal it's browser, he is allowed to set a very common, but fake, header. This is no problem. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 20:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Since earlier today (yesterday?). Er, not wanting to get into the merits (or not) of concealing your UA, why not just provide a false one? - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 20:57, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, providing a false useragent is certainly plausible for users of certain non-Microsoft browsers. User Agent Switcher for Firefox and related browsers is an example. The extension allows you to appear as anything you want if you tinker with the settings: IE, Opera, Safari, Konqueror, wget, even a Googlebot. If you don't already use Firefox it's a good reason to start. After you switch your useragent, you can go to a website such as http://www.wieistmeineip.ch to verify that it works; as an example, before and after switching. Xenon54 / talk / 22:39, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, all counterarguments thus far are specious, as you point out a client can set its User-Agent header to anything it wants [or null]. Using something that can be completely controlled from outside as an anti-spam measure is naive at best.

To "characterize the problem" if a browser [or protective proxy that it's running through] doesn't send a User-Agent header when going to the HelpDesk page, a page simply saying "please provide a User-agent" or some such is displayed and no real information is returned. This is incredibly stupid, as if I then send something like "User-Agent: fuck off" with every request then it works fine. What knowledge has anyone gained from that header??

FIX IT. Don't rely on externally settable fields.

The Help Desk is for asking questions about how to use Wikipedia. The volunteers here have no power to make the changes you think should be made. Discussions about technical issues like this one should occur at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). --Mysdaao ^talk 13:27, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Want to help?

Do you have the burning desire to help out other editors, but come to this page and find questions are answered before you even get a chance? Solution at hand - editors are posting requests for help at WP:FEED and more than half the requests are languishing without a single comment. Then, if you look at those that do have a comment, most could use a second pair of eyes. here's your chance to opine on Philosophic Burden of Proof or French Bull or both. And more. Thanks.--SPhilbrick T 21:11, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will get back to helping out there as soon as I can. – ukexpat (talk) 21:36, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have added it to my watchlist and will see if I can be useful there. Ka renjc 23:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of school articles

What's currently accepted for school articles' notability? I know the norm has typically been that all high schools are considered notable, then it was all schools are notable, then it was no schools are notable... I have contemplated making a stub about West Franklin High School, but I dislike creating articles only for them to be deleted. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 23:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Schools lists four failed notability proposals on the matter plus two failed proposals regarding naming conventions. Currently school notability appears to be under the jurisdiction of organizations and companies, although I can't tell how that directly applies to schools. I would look to see if guidelines have been laid out by WikiProject Schools, and if they have not, I would then ask on the talkpage. Xenon54 / talk / 23:34, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The common practice is that average schools below the high school level are seen as nonnotable, but only the average schools; nobody disputes that even the smallest school can be notable if it passes the general notability guideline. Nyttend (talk) 01:56, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In general, high schools are notable by default (though I disagree with that), but unless there is something especially notable about a lower level school (including a notable alumnus), it's best to write a paragraph about the school at the School District's article. Woogee (talk) 23:03, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]