Jump to content

Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Remember the dot (talk | contribs) at 01:15, 21 October 2007 (→Javascript question (I think): check for updates, maybe?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
 Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous 
Shortcuts
The technical section of the village pump is used to discuss technical issues about Wikipedia. Bugs and feature requests should be made at the BugZilla since there is no guarantee developers will read this page. Problems with user scripts should not be reported here, but rather to their developers (unless the bug is exigent).

Newcomers to the technical village pump are encouraged to read these guidelines prior to posting here. Questions about MediaWiki in general should be posted at the MediaWiki support desk.


Nested tables class="collapsible collapsed"

If someone knows of a workaround for this issue, I'd like to know what it is too. I couldn't find anything for it in Bugzilla either.

I have some nested collapsible tables coded up roughly as follows: 

{|class="collapsible collapsed"
!Outer table header row
|-
| interesting information
|-
|
{|class="collapsible collapsed"
!Inner table header row
|-
| more detailed interesting information
|-
|
{|class="collapsible collapsed"
! Inner inner table header row
|-
| Even more detailed information that's not particularly interesting
|}
|}
|}

Here's what it looks like:

All of them should be collapsed by default. But when you expand the outer table, all the inner tables expand as well -- but their "show" links say "show". The Javascript apparently doesn't know they've expanded. When you click on "show" it changes to "hide", but doesn't do anything else. After that, the link works normally.

Any thoughts? TCC (talk) (contribs) 09:58, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you aren't using it in the way it was intended. Looks like it doesn't support nesting. I'll take a look around and get you an answer and the correct code in a bit. —Andrew Hampe Talk 23:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just so you're aware then, one requirement is to be able to specify the initial state, which is why I'm using the table instead of NavFrame, etc. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You can hide the nested tables by putting 3 NavFrames inside one collapsible table, e.g. {{Calculus footer}}. Even if you're nesting only 2 or less, you can add an empty NavFrame div to make them hidden. I don't know of a way to make the nested NavFrames expand by default though, unless you're nesting 2 or less. –Pomte 18:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is kind of the problem with using NavFrames, yes. In fits and starts I'm working on a change to the scripting to see if I can get it to work. Going's a bit slow though, as this is my first time working with either Javascript or the DOM. TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:07, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted it. I'd made a silly mistake about the order in which scripts are executed on a page load. It's probably very klugy, so I wonder if someone experienced in JS and the DOM could have a look at it and tell me if I've done anything boneheaded? See User:Csernica/monobook.js. And what might be the chances of getting this into Common.js? TCC (talk) (contribs) 07:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A little help with javascript

What's a way to execute a function on page load? Thanks, — Bob • (talk) • 07:41, July 31, 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind, I googled it. — Bob • (talk) • 08:01, July 31, 2007 (UTC)

overriding class="wikitables"

I need to override the wikitables class. Specifically, I need to replace its charming #f2f2f2 table header with another color. I tried adding style="background:red;" to the header to the header row but it seems that the wikitables class takes precedence over my customized style. So how can I override the wikitables class? -- Миборовский 05:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Put "class" before "style" so that it overrides properly. Anything more, and I'd need to see an example of what you're trying to do (you could set up a page in your userspace, for example). EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Order of class and style attributes on an element should not matter. Anomie 14:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it should; the "C" of "CSS" is cascading. Declarations that are made first are overridden by later declarations (ie: if Sheet X says that h2 tags should be green, and Sheet Z says h2 tags should be red, which ever sheet is included last will determine how it is displayed, but it can stille be overwritten by an inline style that says that that particular h2 tag should be blue). EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But if Sheet W says SPAN tags should be blue and an inline style says orange, <span class="SheetW" style="color:orange"> and <span style="color:orange" class="SheetW"> are equivalent (i.e. orange). Something similar goes for your example: <h2 class="SheetX SheetZ"> and <h2 class="SheetZ SheetX"> are equivalent. Anomie 21:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an example. --MZMcBride 06:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at MediaWiki:Common.css, you will see that the background color is being applied to the TH elements. Thus, you will have to specify the style override on each cell rather than on the row. Unless there is a good reason (not just "I like it better in this color") for overriding the class, I would advise against doing this as it will prevent user preferences or skins from overriding the color. Anomie 14:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsible tables

Hi, I'm using a local copy of mediawiki-1.9.3 and I can't get collapsible tables to work.

I have copied the code from articles elsewhere in this reference desk: 

 
 {| class="collapsible" width="60%"
 !colspan="2"| Fun with table columns
 |-
 | Column 1 || Column 2
 |}

It works here as you can see:

Fun with table columns
Column 1 Column 2

There was no common.js, so I created one in the root directory of the local wiki. I went to the common.js page on wikipedia, pressed edit, then copied and pasted the code into my common.js. It contains: 

function collapseTable( tableIndex )

I tried editing my LocalSettings.php and added the following lines at the bottom: 

// Rob's changes
$wgUseSiteCss = true;
$wgUseSiteJs = true;

I also tried using 

{| class="collapseTable" width="60%"...

but I'm not sure what I'm doing.

Can someone help?

Dragonfallrob 14:49, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is collapseTable the only function you grabbed? You also need createCollapseButtons and the call to addOnloadHook you'll find right below it. The class needs to be "collapsible".
You also need the var hasClass = (function () js near the top of the file.

TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the entire contents of http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Common.js. It contains the two you mentioned. I just re-copied it again just to be sure you are looking at the same code as me. The tables display, but are not collapsible. Dragonfallrob 08:32, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You will also need to copy the "collapsible" classes defined in Common.css. — Edokter • Talk • 17:34, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I don't see any related classes there. I also think that the redirect that you just used is invalid and should be deleted. Most likely Dragonfallrob's Common.js either doesn't work (try to insert alert(1)) or has some errors (look at error console in Firefox or Opera) ∴ Alex Smotrov 18:25, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are no related classes. Class "collapsible" is a pseudo-class used by createCollapseButtons to locate tables it needs to set up, but there's no code for it in any of the style sheets.
The only thing I can think of -- and here I'm just guessing -- is that Common.js isn't being loaded for some reason. If I'm not mistaken, it needs to be in the MediaWiki namespace. So you need to create a MediaWiki:Common.js.
If, as Alex says, errors are preventing it from executing to the point where the hooks are running, Firebug is a nice Firefox extension with a Javascript debugger. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may have cracked this one TCC. I looked for MediaWiki:Common.js and found a page with just a single comment on it. No code. Unfortunately, it won't let me update it. I'll have to wait a few days until the guy that built the Wiki returns - I assume he must have created some kind of admin userid that can get to it. I'll let you know how it goes. Thanks for now. Dragonfallrob 12:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Finally got the password. Pasted the code into MediaWiki:Common.js and everything works fine. Many thanks guys.Dragonfallrob 08:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.140.245.163 (talk) [reply]

I use Wikipedia very often in the course of my work. As a convenience, I've added a Wikipedia search widget to my browser's toolbar. When a query is entered, the search widget constructs a url using this template:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?go=Go&search=$ESCAPE(QUERY)

This should be equivalent to the Go button

Many queries exactly match an article title, except for capitalization. The vast majority of my searches are immediately redirected to articles. Only a few searches, perhaps 1%, return a list of results. I've set my preferences to restrict searches to the Main namespace and the Wikipedia namespace. I perform a few dozen to a few hundred searches a day.

Does this type of usage significantly affect server load? Various Wikipedia help pages suggest it does not, but I though I'd ask. There are a couple other ways I can achieve similar functionality without using Wikipedia's search function. —Ryan 02:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds just like the Wikipedia search that comes bundled with Firefox, so I doubt there are any problems. —Remember the dot (talk) 03:58, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All Wikipedia pages contain a tag that suggests to some web browsers (at least Firefox 2, and possibly others) that they should do precisely what you're doing now. Besides, the traffic caused by that option looks the same to the servers as traffic by users searching via the Go button on Wikipedia itself, and a few hundred searches a day is hardly anything compared to the number of searches on Wikipedia altogether. So I don't think you need to worry about causing excess server load. --ais523 08:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, it's pretty unlikely I'll single-handedly bring down all of Wikipedia. I haven't been worried about that since 2004! And while much has changed in the last three years, it sounds like search best practices are still the same. Thanks for the replies, Remember the dot and ais523. —Ryan 21:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the purpose of plainlinks, except to make a link that really is internal (to an edit page, or to special:log, or to history) look internal? Why, then, is it different in color? So many bytes have been spilled, so to speak, over this issue on various templates. Can someone explain this to me? —Random832 04:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In a way, because there is no guarantee it is internal. Plainlinks can be used for other stuff, and saying more is probably a case of WP:BEANS. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 04:08, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a long list of links, putting the external link icon next to each is ugly. Also it can be removed to prevent the remote possibility of confusing noobs in instructional messages with such links. That's about it. 1of3 00:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles I created

I heard that Interiot had a tool that indicated all articles created by a user but the script seems to fail and Interiot is AWOL. I'm not technically-minded at all but if someone who knows of an alternative and could ping my Talk page that'd be great Dick G 05:13, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I just came to ask the same question. Special:Contributions doesn't mark new articles and Special:Newpages on Wikipedia at least doesn't go back very far. How hard would it be to get Special:Contributions to mark new articles like Specia;Recentchanges does? Thanks all. - Taxman Talk 18:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There was another tool at http://tools.wikimedia.de/~escaladix/larticles/larticles.php but it doesn't seem to work either ∴ Alex Smotrov 18:25, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have a tool that can give user stats, see [1] for a list of the logs, Ill gladly run it for anyone who wants it. βcommand 20:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to know how to do this too. It drives me nuts when I want to go back to an article I created and cannot remember the article name, even though I try to keep lists, etc. --Mattisse 16:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Google page summaries

Google generally shows you a piece of text after the title of a page, and generally this is either taken from the page's text or from meta tags. Wikipedia pages have some relevant text which is neither. (For example, search for Al Gore; the snippet begins "Hyperlinked encyclopedia article about the current global climate change activist and former Democratic nominee for President, 45th Vice President..." which appears nowhere in the wiki markup for that page, nor, indeed, in the rendered HTML.) Does anyone know where it comes from? Marnanel 00:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think some Google employee typed that. - BANG! 00:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently it is the description submitted to the Google Directory [2]. Dragons flight 00:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I was wondering about that too. I gotta say I don't think much of these descriptions -- they read like advertisements. I'd rather see them deleted and let the articles be excerpted in Google's usual way. --207.176.159.90 03:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Afterthought: But then people who actually use Google Directory lose the benefit of them. Hmm. No win there, I guess. --207.176.159.90 03:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is not up to us to influence the way Google works. If you don't like it, you should discuss that with Google Nil Einne 11:44, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
With the exception of the Google Directory entry for Wikipedia itself. That was woefully inaccurate once, but within a few minutes of a thread starting somewhere here on Wikipedia complaining about it, the entry was corrected. It kind of reminded me of the story told about the Yalta Conference, where people in a closed conference room complained among themselves about the plants and the fish tank, and, as if by magic, a few days later the plants had been replaced and the fish tank freshened up. The thought was that the Soviets had the room bugged. Carcharoth 12:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Google directory gets its data from the Open Directory Project. Many Google search results use ODP descriptions, for example from http://www.dmoz.org/Regional/North_America/United_States/Society_and_Culture/Politics/People/Gore,_Al/ for the above example. You can suggest a new ODP description with "update listing" but the ODP editor who reviews it may reject it. It can take weeks before a changed ODP description is noticed by Google. PrimeHunter 02:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tracking use of magic words (again)

I'd like to raise this issue again, or if no-one here has any further advice, to ask where to go next. See here for the previous discussion. What I'd ultimately like to see is something like Category:Default sort key missing for biographical articles (probably on the talk page), so they can be worked on. At the moment, there is Category:Biography articles without listas parameter, but that only works from a talk page template parameter (specifically, listas in {{WPBiography}}) and doesn't truly reflect DEFAULTSORT usage (it would only reflect the usage if the two values were synchronised on all pages). Ultimately, it all comes down to this simple question:

"Which biographical articles lack DEFAULTSORT"?

Surely a simple question like that can't be that difficult? :-) Carcharoth 04:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:BOTREQ, or I may do this. βcommand 20:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Copied over to BOTREQ. Carcharoth 13:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic name disambiguation pages using DEFAULTSORT on biographical pages

I recently updated a disambiguation page (Aaron (name)) by looking at Category:Living people, which is fairly well sorted. I'm currently wondering whether to make another big push to get a supercategory set up for all people articles (dead ones as well as living), as the use of DEFAULTSORT seems to be fairly widespread now, so such a supercategory would really help with keeping dab pages up to date (similar in a way to how List of People by Name used to try and do this). Have a look at User:Carcharoth/List of living people compact index. It doesn't do anything the category system doesn't do already, but I think it would be nice to be able to do this for all people articles. Of course, getting an automated list would be even better. At the moment, the special prefixindex function will find all pages starting with a particular string, but what would be even better is if a page could be automatically generated to show all articles with the same surname in their DEFAULTSORT magic word! Of course, people would still be needed to annotate the dab pages, unless infobox information could be used to do that... I'm throwing this idea out here to see if people think it sounds feasible and worth the effort of finding people who could make this work? Carcharoth 05:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It might be possible to do via bot, but the list of disambigs would need to be generated by hand and the sort key that we are using. βcommand 20:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to copy this to BOTREQ as well. :-) Carcharoth 13:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pages stuck in a category

Sometimes, when a template is listed for deletion, all pages transcluding it will remain in C:CSD even after the template is fixed. You can see what I mean by looking at the history of this template: {{Ireland-writer-stub}}, which was fixed, but dozens of pages stayed in C:CSD until they were "touched" by me with edits like this: [3]. Is there a way to remove them from the category without having to make null edits? --W.marsh 13:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The job que is a background process that will "touch" all articles affected by edited templates and such, so no need for null edits. Except the que sometimes get very very long, so it may take a while for the update to probegate. Check Special:Statistics to see how big the current que is. If you can't wait for the que to catch up I'm afraid null edits are the only other alternative. --Sherool (talk) 14:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You can tack "?action=purge" to the end of the urls of the articles and the cat to attempt to nudge the updating process. It's like a "null edit" without changing the article. Gimmetrow 14:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thanks... I'll just wait, then... I wasn't sure if it would get fixed automatically or not. I tried the manual purge thing and it didn't seem to work. --W.marsh 14:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As an aside, you don't actually have to change the article when you touch it; just edit and save. It won't show up in the article history that way, either. —Cryptic 14:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's a great tip. I didn't realize you could make a true null edit that updates the article but doesn't show in the history. -- Satori Son 14:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oddness

Two years of ANI edit history seems to have disappeared. The software thinks that the intermediate edits exist, but refuses to provide a way to go to them. -Amarkov moo! 00:56, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI didn't exist in 2003. It looks like just Jayjg's edit is misdated. [4]. —Cryptic 00:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That would explain it. It's still odd, though. -Amarkov moo! 01:02, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This has been mentioned before. On WT:ANI I think. Maybe we need a FAQ for this? :-) Carcharoth 17:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, here we go: Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 4#Borked page history. Carcharoth 17:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[5] shows this is one of two Jayjg edits which are recorded as 4 January 2003 but apparently were made 10 March 2005. PrimeHunter 02:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Template:Infobox_neon is having issues with its "Triple point" entry. Someone more wiki-savvy might want to have a look at it. Aaadddaaammm 02:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was that the template was trying to perform a calculation to convert the value from Kelvin to Celsius, and the reference interfered with that. I've moved the reference into the kPa parameter (which doesn't need any calculations done to it) so that although the ref is in the wrong parameter, at least it's on the correct line of the infobox. Tra (Talk) 02:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Infoboxes with automatic unit conversions like that should probably have separate parameters for references and such. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 03:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blue

Is it just me, or have all non-mainspace pages turned slightly blue? - BANG! 04:09, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They've always been slightly blue. —Remember the dot (talk) 04:12, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so... Weren't they white before? - BANG! 04:16, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No. Perhaps your computer's color depth was set too low previously, making the pages appear white. —Remember the dot (talk) 04:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. That explains it. Thanks! - BANG! 04:19, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They are slightly blue! Wow, I actually never noticed that. Weird. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 04:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, some screens I've used show very light colours as white; I couldn't see the blue background on those screens (or even the infamous pre-ambox 'pastel-shaded box' backgrounds). --ais523 08:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Yep, but that can usually be fixed by twiddling with the monitor settings. BTW, the non-article space pages have not always been blue. They're a very light shade of blue in monobook since July 3, 2004.[6] Lupo 08:43, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Overlap

Screencap in Firefox 2.0.0.6) There seems to be a pretty bad overlap between the Wiktionary template and the cleanup templates.--69.118.235.97 12:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a known issue with most browsers. A solution is being considered. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:48, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I think a good solution has finally been found. Let's hope we can welcome this in the coming week. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with reverting back to the default skin

I am having problems accessing the Skin section in the My Preferences. Is there anything I can do. Caribbean1 15:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the FAQ section at the top of this page. The seventh bullet point may be just what you want.-gadfium 19:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Allocated portable IPs

Can someone clarify (with certainty) the meaning of "allocated portable" in terms of IP status? It's relevant to some blocks in this sockpuppet report. The Whois data is here. Thank you!--chaser - t 08:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Allocated portable" simply means that the address block was allocated directly by the national registry service, in this case APNIC, and is, thus, provider-independent. This means that the "owner" of the IP address can transfer it from one provider to another, as opposed to the typical model where IP addresses are "borrowed" from service providers and may only be used with that provider. The primary reason for acquiring portable IP addresses is to maintain the established reputation of an IP address when changing providers, and to ensure the flexibility to change providers without having to give up former addresses. I'm not sure, however, how this would play any role in determining whether two users are sock puppets of another, but that's your definition as requested :) AmiDaniel (talk) 15:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Then allocated portable addresses tend to be more static than the average static IP?--chaser - t 20:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm .. I certainly wouldn't jump to that conclusion, though I've not really thought about it in this sense. Whether an IP is "static" or "dynamic" is determined by the way that a service provider assigns addresses to subscribers, not by the way that the IP addresses are allocated by the IANA. All that "portable" means is that the IP address or block can be (not has been or will be!) transferred from one provider to another, and, in particular, the address cannot be resolved by provider due to this nature. What is usually (at least AFAIK) the case with portable IP addresses is that one company or provider subleases portable IP addresses from a higher-up provider with the condition that the subleasing company can maintain the same IP addresses when transfering to alternative providers if need be. Due to the expense, this is typically only done in regions with very competitive ISP markets (such as is certainly the case in many of the regions that APNIC services). The subleasing company will then provide connectivity to its customers through these IP addresses based upon its own internal allocation scheme--some may be provided to individuals, companies, servers statically, others may be used dynamically by one or many of its customers. For the most part, no individual will be the custodian of a single portable address. I would actually say that, quite on the contrary of being static, most portable IP addresses are likely shared by multiple individuals or entities, though this is also by no means compulsory. In short, you're far, far more likely to find out the exact nature of how this IP address is used by contacting Sri Lanka Telelcom than you are by asking me :) AmiDaniel (talk) 19:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your very helpful and informative answers, Amidaniel. I've learned a lot from this exchange.--chaser - t 20:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to help :) AmiDaniel (talk) 03:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The devanagiri character in Wikipedia logo is incorrect. It does not take the complex character rendering into account when rendering the phonetic "wi" in devanagiri. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manishxjoshi (talk • contribs) 12:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, a lot of people are aware, including The New York Times. It really should be fixed, but there are copyright and other issues, including the actual ability to recreate it. --MZMcBride 20:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is another FAQ isn't it? Is there a page where this is explained? Carcharoth 22:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If there isn't there probably should be. I wonder if Wikipedia has room for a project trivia page... :) Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 01:04, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is some very old discussion here. At the bottom of that page, there are links to more discussion. As for an actual FAQ, I don't believe one exists. --MZMcBride 01:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP:FAQ. This question is not frequent enough, based on a glance in there. There is Wikipedia:Miscellaneous FAQ#Can you tell me anything about the Wikipedia logo? 1of3 15:15, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Popups causing Internet Explorer to freeze up

Recently, Internet Explorer began to freeze up when I attempt to edit any article. The matter was resolved when I turned the popups off. When I turned it on again, the crashes occured again. However, I have no problems editing Wikipedia with popups when I used Opera. How can I fix IE? Thanks in advance.--Alasdair 14:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, Popups is not compatible with Internet Explorer. Sorry, that applied to Twinkle. Popups should work according to the talk page, but may have problems. — Edokter • Talk • 15:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Popups are sort of compatible with IE, but only to a limited extent. Most of the major features still work, but it's subject to periodic freezes, crashes, and so on. Also the menus aren't arranged as nicely in IE. Like most JavaScript on Wikipedia, popups were written with Firefox in mind. And while most things that work on FF work on other browsers too, IE is usually the exception. --VectorPotentialTalk 19:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What version of Internet Explorer are you using? —Remember the dot (talk) 20:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parameter expansion inside html

Is there any known workaround for the issue of template parameters not expanding when enclosed in html tags? Happy‑melon 21:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An example, please? 1of3 01:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Someclaim <ref name={{{refn}}}>{{{ref}}}</ref>
refn, at least, will not expand correctly, and all references will have the name "{{{refn}}}". I don't think ref will expand properly either. Happy‑melon 08:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is not that template parameters won't expand in HTML tags (<ref> is not a HTML tag), but rather this bug. --PEJL 08:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Have a look at the output of User:Happy-melon/sandbox2 - I know I'm missing closing braces somewhere but I'm going on holiday in 20 minutes time so I don't have time to check it! See also Help:Template#When parameters do not expand. You can probably see what I'm trying to do - have a definable reference name and a definable content. Any suggestions? Happy‑melon 09:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The bug noted above means that you cannot generate <ref> tags using templates. --PEJL 09:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ifeq help

Can anyone figure out why {{#ifeq:<nowiki>#</nowiki>99CCFF|<nowiki>#</nowiki>99CCFF|true|false}} returns false, and how to fix it to not return false (given the same input)? Thanks. --PEJL 08:31, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't use <nowiki> inside the comparison? Someone who is familiar with the code can tell you the details, but from my experiments it seems that each <nowiki> is changed into a unique tag something like �UNIQ5d22741068bd706c-nowiki-00000001-QINU� (the "�" represents codepoint U+0007) before parser functions are applied, and afterwards the tag is changed back. The problem with your ifeq is that it sees something like {{#ifeq:�UNIQ5d22741068bd706c-nowiki-00000001-QINU�99CCFF|�UNIQ5d22741068bd706c-nowiki-00000002-QINU�99CCFF|true|false}} and thus is always false. Anomie 11:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is it just curiosity or do you need to use this?--Patrick 11:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. This is not just curiosity, it causes a false negative at Template:Infobox Album/color/doc#Unit test. Can anyone think of an alternate solution? --PEJL 13:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See the example in my sandbox. The trick is to return #99CCFF for the color. You then have to make the comparison against exactly that, but it works, as does the return value since the space is ignored in the style specification. TCC (talk) (contribs) 20:36, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! (I note that the above doesn't render as intended, it should be: &#32;#99CCFF.) --PEJL 21:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know, but after 4 attempts just trying to type the damn thing correctly, I gave up on it. Too much coffee, not enough sleep. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i am new

I am new here, could anyone tell me how to get round? Mdhamiri 09:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mdhamiri, welcome to Wikipedia. I have given you a "welcome box" which you can read by clicking User talk:Mdhamiri. It has lots of useful links explaining how to get the best out of Wikipedia. Best wishes. DuncanHill 11:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Revision history of .."

Is there a piece of custom css I could use to not have to see the words "Revision history of .." in front of every page history title?--VectorPotentialTalk 13:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It can't be done in CSS, but it would be easy in JavaScript. You might want to make a request at WikiProject User scripts' request page. --ais523 14:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I created a Javascript to fix that the day they implemented it:
addOnloadHook(function(){
    /* Fix the title of the history page */
    if(wgAction=='history'){
        document.title=wgPageName.replace(/_/g,' ')+' - Wikipedia History';
        var h=document.getElementsByTagName('H1');
        if(h.length){
            h=h[0];
            while(h.firstChild) h.removeChild(h.firstChild);
            h.appendChild(document.createTextNode(wgPageName.replace(/_/g,' ')));
        }
    }
});
Works fine for me. Anomie 02:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Works perfectly.--VectorPotentialTalk 17:35, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a bug filled on missorting categories?

Category sorting system doesn't recognize various diacritical characters, forcing us to ignore them in category sorting - which can have small impact but also pretty major. Is there a bug filled on that we could vote upon? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  17:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is actually the third-most-requested feature ever (after single user login and anon-only blocks): see bugzilla:164. --ais523 08:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Calling ye template gods

Don't know if this is possible, but I have a question. Can you pass a variable from one template to another? I came across the {{Johnny Cash}} template and loved its format for things that have many groups and subitems. Each group is collapsible AND you can set a parameter so for a certain group, only that group is shown. For instance, if you go to the June Carter Cash article, only the Family group is shown, all others remain collapsed. You do this why adding the group's paramater you want such as {{Johnny Cash|family}}, so the Family group is now shown. I took this concept and rewrote several university templates including {{University of Oklahoma}}, {{University of Texas at Austin}}, {{Oklahoma State University}}, {{University of Michigan}}, {{Ohio State University}} and maybe a couple others. I decided it might be worthwhile to create a template to make converting these easier. So, today I created {{Navigation with collapsible groups}}. But, after creating in my userspace and moving the template space, one huge issue occured to me. Can I pass the paramater from the article to the university template to the base template. So far, no success. I've tried dissecting the code to {{Navbox}} and {{Navbox/core}} to see if something similar is done but I'm getting a headache from staring at it for so long. Any help would be appreciated (I hope I described the issue well enough).↔NMajdan•talk 20:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can pass parameters into and through a template, but not out of one. For example, article calls template A with a parameter intended for template B (and A calls B). Inside A, you would have something like param = {{{param|}}}. That passes the value from A's caller (the article) as a named parameter for B. Hope this helps, Andrwsc 20:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I think that worked!↔NMajdan•talk 01:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Linking a citebook to an article

Hi, I just found an article which cites a book by someone who has an article (currently orphaned). How can the citebook thing used for the reference be made to link to the author please? DuncanHill 23:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ilink the name of the author or use the parameter authorlink (authorlink=name of the target article). There should be more details on the template page.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - I did the authorlink thing and it worked! DuncanHill 01:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bad tfd effects on tagging

re: this tfd is biased because the {{tfd}} wasn't tagged inside the title of the template box. I had to {{lts}} four other templates before I could figure out where the "orphaned" template deletion message was located. I'm not sure of where she applied the {{tfd}} closing '}}' pair, and the history diffs aren't displaying the change in red as usual. Can some template savvy Admin take a look and get the tfd message inside the title section, with a proper subst. I think the tfd needs closed and reopened with a valid tagging. Best regards // FrankB 02:30, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed. —Cryptic 02:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. The instructions on Template:Tfd are quite clear but a useful sentence "This code will work as is; there is no need to replace PAGENAME with the actual page name." wasn't included in the instructions I was following on Wikipedia:Templates for deletion, and I needed that clarification! I've added it there now, to avoid anyone else making the same mistake. My thanks to Cryptic for sorting it out. PamD 07:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have my preferences set to underline links, but until today I never noticed the navigation and interaction links on the left being underlined. Has something changed, or am I just going noticing this for the first time? I'm using IE7 for a browser. Coemgenus 15:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They should underline when you hoover over them. That's being governed by Wikipeia's CSS styles (which does override your browser settings). — Edokter • Talk • 15:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but I'm not hovering over them. They stay underlined all the time now. Coemgenus 16:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, that is weird. Nothing has changed as far as I know. Have you tried clearing your cache? — Edokter • Talk • 16:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Bypassed it, with no effect, then cleared it, also with no effect. This is kind of weird. Even the symbols and character links on the edit screen are underlined. Coemgenus 17:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this edit did it. Probably needs a partial revert. --- RockMFR 18:11, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was that edit (requested by me). Technically, if you set "Underline links: Always" in preferences, you want all links underlined. But since users are already accustomed to "normal" portlets and specialchars, this needs to be put back into Mediawiki:Monobook.css ∴ AlexSm 18:50, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
/* Not underlined links in portlets/specialchars even with pref "Underline links:Always" */
.portlet a, #editpage-specialchars a  { text-decoration: none }
.portlet a:hover, #editpage-specialchars a:hover { text-decoration: underline }
P.S. This setting takes effect through http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=-&action=raw&gen=css ∴ AlexSm 18:50, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This should be fixed. WP:BYPASS or WP:PURGE as necessary. Sorry for any issues. --MZMcBride 03:33, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Issue with Tnavbar-header template

Can somebody take a look as this issue and see if they can figure out what is wrong? The fontcolor parameter is applying itself correctly to the vde, but not the title and its negatively affecting many templates, such as {{University of Oklahoma}}. Its protected, so if you see the problem but can't edit the template, let me know. Thanks.↔NMajdan•talk 20:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the title is linked using [[ ]], which itself overrides any font color specified outside the [[ ]]. There is no easy fix for this, but you could try this as an (ugly) workaround in the University of Oklahoma template:
title=[[University of Oklahoma|<span style="color:#fff">University of Oklahoma</span>]]
— Edokter • Talk • 22:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info. I was thinking that was the issue looking at the generated HTML. Unfortunately, that solution won't work for me. The {{University of Oklahoma}} template is actually generated from another template I made called {{Navigation with collapsible groups}}. I guess I'll just drop the vde until I find a better solution. Thanks.↔NMajdan•talk 13:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, wrapping the entire link inside a font tag also seems to work... — Edokter • Talk • 17:23, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needing the <references/> tag

Editing a section

Say you edit an article section to add a new <ref> item. When you Show Preview, the preview shows the article text but not the references, so you don't actually see the change you made. Or if you added text and a reference, you see part of the change you made, but not all of it.

When I run into this problem, I usually work around it by temporarily adding <references/> at the end of the section. Then I Show Preview, fix any errors, remove <references/>, and Save Page. But that's obviously error-prone, because one's instinct is to Save Page as soon as the errors are fixed, and it's all too easy to forget to remove the <references/> tag and have to go back and do it afterwards.

A technical workaround occurs to me. I suggest that if a section being edited contains a <ref> tag but not <references/>, the software should append a template reference like {{preview-references}}, which would expand to something like 

    ---
    ''The section being previewed contains the following references, which in ''
    ''the complete article will appear at the &lt;references/> tag:''

    <references/>

Of course, if you're editing only the text of the section and not the references, you don't really need to see them expanded, and they're just an annoyance. An alternative approach would be a separate Preview References button, but that seems like overkill to me.

Checking consistency

On a related point, for both a section and an article edit, it would be desirable to trap the case where the article contains one or more <ref> tags without a <references/> tag that will expand them, or where it contains two or more <references/> tags. (Experiment indicates that each <references/> expands all <ref> tags appearing earlier in the article, so there must be exactly one <references/> tag that is after all <ref> tags.) I suggest that when a Show Preview is done, a check should be done on the entire article as it would exist if Save Page was done at this point, and if any of these erroneous situations exist, a warning should be issued (either within the preview window or elsewhere, but prominent enough that it won't be missed).

I think this should be a warning issued at preview time, not an error message preventing the save, because you have to consider what happens when someone adds the first reference to an article. If they do it during a section edit, they don't want to be blocked from saving because they forgot to add a References section first. Similarly, someone doing a cleanup pass through an article from top to bottom in order might add several references, saving sections one at a time, before they get to the end and add References. But they need to be reminded to add that References section.

Or thinking bigger

Or, thinking bigger, perhaps there's a better approach -- although I guess I can't be the first person to think of this, so perhaps there are good reason why it isn't being used. But right now it seems to me as though the Right Thing is to forget the whole idea of explicit <references/> tags -- send a bot through Wikipedia to get rid of them and their associated sections -- and instead simply have the whole section 

    ==References==
    <references/>

appended implicitly to the wikitext of any article containing a <ref> tag, at the time when the wikitext is rendered into HTML. (Or some equivalent behavior.) And the same for any section when it is being previewed.

This change, of course, would address both of the issues covered in my other two points.

--207.176.159.90 23:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On that last one, the only problem is that the references section is very often not the last section in the article, and really shouldn't be. The point of using the tag is to allow some flexibility in exactly where the references are placed and in formatting them. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
However, if (1) one or more <ref> tags were encountered and (2) no <references/> tag was encountered in the wikitext, then it might be a good idea to add something like "ERROR!! No <references> tag was seen. ERROR!! - Cited references were:", and then to add an implicit <references> tag. -- Boracay Bill 03:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A warning message, rather than an error, likely would be a useful and not particularly difficult feature to implement. The notion of auto-adding the references tag, however, leaves open a whole slew of problems, one of which Csernia above alluded to. The exact nature of how the references block is to be added to pages is quite intentionally not explicitly defined. Where the references block occurs in an article should be left up to the author of the article, to allow him the option to format it as he wishes. There are many cases where it is in fact correct to not have a references block -- consider a template or infobox that cites various sources; it is usually better to have the sources cited in this template included in the references block of the page in which the template is transcluded than in the template itself. In fact, I very much so believe that one of the greatest problems with Cite at present is that it does not allow editors enough ability to customize how references are used on a particular page -- this proposal seeks to make their usage even less customizable for the sake of alleviating a very minor inconvenience. One thing I believe to be quite imperative to implement is the ability to define different classes of reference types within a given page, such that, for instance, "notes" and "sources" can be separated from one another. I also believe it important to allow articles to make use of different forms of in-text citation, i.e. MLA, which the current system does not. Much discussion about a reform of Cite has taken place recently, and we will likely soon see some changes to the system. Worth reading would be this recent thread on Wikitech-l. AmiDaniel (talk) 03:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, if there's a whole slew of problems, forget that proposal. But I would like to see my first two subsections addressed in that case. --207.176.159.90 05:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your first two subsections are do-able. Unless there are objections, I'll try to implement something this weekend. In any case, Cite has a lot of problems that need to be addressed -- you've barely hit the tip of the iceberg :) AmiDaniel (talk) 06:33, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
AmiDaniel, are there cases where a <ref> tag has been encountered and yet it is still correct to not have a references block? In that situation, is it more useful to have the references expanded at the very end of the article headed by a warning message, to have the warning message appear but the unexpanded references remain hidden, or to have the unexpanded references remain hidden with no warning (current behavior)? -- Boracay Bill 05:46, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sure there have been. I can't think of one on enwiki off the top of my head, but I know that I have implemented templates of this style myself. The issue, however, is not about whether it should be okay to have a ref tag without a references tag; rather, it's about whether the decision of where or if to place such a tag should be made by the software or by the editor. IMO, the correct behavior would be to warn the editor, and the editor alone, following the saving of an edit that there are reference tags with no matching reference block. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:30, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(next 50)

In the edit history page of every article, there are links like

(previous 50) (next 50)

Unfortunately, since the history is listed in reverse, the "next 50" in order of listing is the "previous 50" in chronological order, and once I get back past the two pages of entries, I always find myself clicking on the wrong link and going forward in time instead of further back.

Could another wording be found, such as

(50 older) (50 newer)

or

(next 50 later) (next 50 earlier)

or something like that?

--207.176.159.90 05:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See MediaWiki talk:Nextn for an explanation of what goes wrong when we try to change them with the current software. I don't think the problem would be ridiculously difficult to sort out, but it requires developer intervention, and developers tend to be busy. --ais523 09:28, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Call me crazy, but..

..am I the only one who sees an (udnu) button in the middle of the sandbox history page? I checked, it's not in the edit summary, the software is somehow producing a backwards undo button, for this one specific revision!? Backwards AES, or is someone testing some weird javascript, css, or other in the sandbox?--VectorPotentialTalk 13:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, looks the editor just put in the 'reverse' unicode character in the edit summary, which is used in Arabic and such. — Edokter • Talk • 13:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind then. --VectorPotentialTalk 13:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can't upload files to commons

Can somebody help me here? For some reason, I am unable to upload image files to wp:commons. When I type into the "destination filename" gadget, this weird red light icon flashes next to the gadget, and when I hit the "upload" button, nothing whatever happens. I've tried uploading files from external websites and my own PC, makes no difference. The image copyright selection box is set to "US federal government" so that isn't the problem. Left messages at wp:images and wp:commons village pump but got no response. Thanks. Gatoclass 04:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have the answer, left a amessage on his talk page. Will know for sure when he gets back to me. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually Tom's solution didn't work but I've figured out part of the problem. For some reason, when I try to upload jpegs directly from Navsource Online, or even when I save them to my PC and try to upload them from there, Commons won't recognize them. But if I take the same jpeg file and save it in MS Paint as a jpeg, suddenly Commons will recognize the file and I can upload it.
Trouble is, MS Paint is a rather limited program that doesn't seem to be able to handle pictures beyond a certain size and I don't have another paint program, so I'd still appreciate it if someone could figure out why this is happening. Gatoclass 11:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot upload images directly from another web site. You must save them to your computer first. As far as image editors, I recommend the GIMP. The GIMP for Windows can be downloaded from http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/
There might be a problem with your web browser. What web browser are you using? —Remember the dot (talk) 20:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki:Sitenotice not appearing

Over at the Kannada Wikipedia, someone tried to set up a new site notice, but the message does not appear at all now, no matter what it's set to. It's not the site notice ID because the message does not appear for anons either. -- Prince Kassad 12:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The old sitenotice has been replaced for now by the central one for the upcoming fundraiser. --brion 18:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to customzize my monobook.css so it would display all interwiki links at the bottom of the page instead of a box on the left? Here is a random example from the mediawiki site. --(cubic[*]star(Talk(Email))) 13:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need to put special character in article title, but not in URL

Hello, I am trying to figure out how to implement something that is in use at two articles. For reference, please visit Natto and I Heart Huckabees. The URLs, respectively, read as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natto and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Heart_Huckabees, but the page titles are Nattō and I ♥ Huckabees. The special character is used in the page title, but not in the URL.

I would like this to be implemented at We Love Katamari, with the heart symbol visible in the page title, but not in the URL. As visible in the image in the article, "We ♥ Katamari" is the correct spelling of the title of the game. If you could explain how to do this, rather than just doing it for me, I would greatly appreciate it. If the process requires administrator tools, please feel free to go ahead and do it. If you have time, I would still like to hear how it is done. Thank you very much! Photouploaded 15:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The true url to I ♥ Huckabees is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_%E2%99%A5_Huckabees, I Heart Huckabees is a redirect to the true article title. So basically an article can use any Unicode characters, and for convenience a redirect page can be made. 1 != 2 16:07, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, I don't understand. Is it just a simple redirect? Photouploaded 16:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, those are simply redirects; look at the top of the page, you'll see a small notice syaing "Redirected from...". So the special characters are in the URL, with a non-special URL redirecting to the actual article.
You can move a page to a title containing a ♥ (which is however discouraged), and a redirect will automatically be created. — Edokter • Talk • 16:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is. However, reviewing that article's talk page reveals that the page used to be at We ♥ Katamari and was moved after overwhelming consensus on the talk page. Moving back to We ♥ Katamari would require restarting a discussion there and obtaining consensus for the move back. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 16:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I did respond there. Now I am aware of the issue. Currently, some article titles are permitted to have special characters, and others are not. If you would like to weigh in on this inconsistency in the interpretation of Wikipedia policy, please visit Talk:We Love Katamari#Accuracy dispute. Photouploaded 16:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Javascript question (I think)

I am using Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.8) Gecko/20071008 Firefox/2.0.0.8 and Windows Vista. Recently I have been having trouble on Wikipedia doing simple things like getting the cursor to move in the text. Navigating while editing within the text of an article is more and more difficult and unreliable. Easily (and for seemingly no reason) all or parts of the text gets selected (turning blue or gray) and usually I have to leave the page and then return to alleviate this problem. Because I do not have this problem other than on Wikipedia, I am wondering if this is a Wikipedia problem. (Also, it is very easy to lose control - have the text jumping around or scrolling out of control - as if javascript (or whatever) is operating too fast. Am I making sense in this question? Thanks, --Mattisse 15:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you editing long pages (i.e. pages with source text at or greater than 32kb)? That's been known to cause problems with some browsers. Nihiltres(t.l) 16:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Easy way to find out if it is indeed a script causing your problems, is to disable Javascript in Firefox, then see if the problem still exists. — Edokter • Talk • 16:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, long pages probably. No problem posting here today. Also, often there is a long lag before something shows up. Yesterday I found I had signed twice several times because the first time nothing seemed to happen. But when I looked in Preview I saw two signatures. Also, I posted the same message three times on one user's page because I kept getting "Wikipedia is having a problem" messages and did not know it was posting, making that user very angry as he thought I had done it intentionally and called me "childish". Thanks for your response! --Mattisse 17:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know this is a generic response, but have you gone to Windows Update in the Control Panel and checked if there are any reliability updates that for some reason haven't made it to your computer yet? —Remember the dot (talk) 01:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page linking to a redirect to itself

Hi!

I just edited MV Liemba to unlink Liemba which, of course, redirects to MV Liemba. Aren't there bots that do this, like for double-redirects? Or do they need a tweak? Saintrain 18:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Technical feasibility of an IP block/range block for a specific article

So here's something I just thought of that probably (a) has been asked repeatedly, and (b) is impossible. Would it be technically possible someday to modify Mediawiki to be able to block a certain IP (or, even more usefully, range block some IP's) from editing a particular article?

I thought of it because someone using IP's in the range 41.242.xxx.xxx think this is the most hilarious thing they've ever seen, so they've added it to Libertarianism about 9 times in the last week, using 6 different IP's. If this continues, no solution is really satisfactory: it seems that rangeblocking would be overreacting, as it would block a big chuck of South Africa from editing; page protection isn't good either, as this particular article gets a lot of good edits from IP addresses; and just watchlisting and continually reverting each time and moving on (what I'm doing now) is getting annoying.

Now, if you could range block for just that one article, (or, put another way, protect the page only from a range of IP addresses) you'd only prevent a large portion of South Africa from editing one article for a while, instead of all 2+ million; not perfect, but damn close. Obviously this solution doesn't exist now, but my question is, would it be technically feasible to add this feature? If it's a stupid idea, I'll tuck my tail between my legs and go home; if not, I'll explore Bugzilla for the first time. --barneca (talk) 00:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)&oldid=165958875"