Jump to content

Wikipedia:Village pump archive 2004-09-26

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ram-Man (talk | contribs) at 00:29, 12 February 2003. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
File:Village pump.JPG

Welcome, newcomers and baffled oldtimers! If you have a question about Wikipedia and how it works, please place it at the bottom of the list, and someone will attempt to answer it for you. (If you have a question about life, the universe and everything, go to the reference desk instead.)

Before asking a question, check if it's answered by the Wikipedia:FAQ or other pages linked from Wikipedia:Help.

Wikipedia also has a real-time chat channel. Visit Wikipedia IRC channel for more info.

NOTE - questions and answers will not remain on this page indefinitely (otherwise it would very soon become too long to be editable). After a period of time with no further activity, information will be moved to other relevant sections of the wikipedia (such as the FAQ pages) or placed in the Wikipedia:Village pump archive if it is of general interest, or deleted. Please consider dating and titling your discussions so as to facilitate this.

Moved discussion

See the archive for older moved discussion links.

HOW DO I CHANGE AN ARTICLE TITLE?
Hi!! For accuracy, the Disneyland Paris article should be renamed to the new title Disneyland Resort Paris but, when I go into Edit for an article, there is no option to change the title. How do I do this?
Thanks Arpingstone 15:34 Feb 3, 2003 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:How to rename (move) a page. - Patrick 15:49 Feb 3, 2003 (UTC)
Sorry Patrick, the instructions on the page you gave me (How to rename (move) a page) don't make sense. I quote - "When you've got your article up, click on the "Move page" link in the sidebar. You'll be asked for a new name for the article, and given the option to also move the article's talk page.". The problem is I can't find anything called "Move Page", not on the article page nor the Edit page. Help, again! - Arpingstone 16:20 Feb 3, 2003 (UTC)
Yes, I just edited this page to correct an omission in it. Please check. - Patrick 16:26 Feb 3, 2003 (UTC)
Thanks, Patrick, all is well now.
I was on Nostalgic, now I've reset my prefs to give me a sidebar. Arpingstone 20:04 Feb 3, 2003 (UTC)

How do you get straight to someone's talk page, other than clicking on the (Talk) beside the person's username on the recent changes page? (That's what I've been doing so far, but what if the person hasn't changed anything recently?Olivia Curtis

As on every page there is a 'Discuss this page' link on your sidebar and at

Was that an answer to my question, mav? Sorry, I'm not being sarcastic: I don't understand how the 'Discuss this page' helps you to get to an individual's page.Olivia Curtis

Currently, except on Recentchanges there's not a direct way to jump to some user's talk page. Click the name, which takes you to their user page, then hit "Discuss this page" to get to the talk page. Two click minimum. Or if you're feeling adventurous, type the URL directly into your browser. :) --Brion 19:47 Feb 3, 2003 (UTC)

Two more questions: 1) Do you have to log in again each time you visit a page in another language? Or do you have to create a new account within the section of wikipedia in that language? 2) If you e-mail another user through wiki, does s/he then see your e-mail address, or is replying also done through wiki? Olivia Curtis

1) Each language version has a separate set of user accounts. So if I go to the Japanese 'pedia (where I've not yet created a user account), I can use the same username, but will have to make a new account and log in again (so the second thing you said is right). 2) Yes, the person you mail through the 'pedia will see the email address you registered with, and can then reply by email to you if they want to. --Camembert

If you link to am external site, do you have to be reasonably sure that the site doesn't infringe copyright, or does it just not matter. What are the implications if you

  • accidentally link to a site that infringes copyright.
  • link to a site that you have doubts about the copyright status.
  • link to a site that you know full well infringes copyright.

The reason I ask is that on the Shorthand page I have added a link to the free handywrite shorthand page on http://personal.riverusers.com/~busybee/handy/handywrite.htm.

I am certain that the author of this page (and the handywrite shorthand system) intended to release it into the public domain, but a number of the consonant forms are copied from Gregg Shorthand. Now this may not be enough to infringe copyright, and Gregg shorthand may even be out of copyright, but I have slight doubts about the site I have linket do. -- Chris Q 10:36 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Whenever I click on the "Recent changes" page I'm successfully logged out. What's wrong? KF 12:24 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Immediately after posting this question I tried it again, and of course it's working now. Thanks anyway. KF 12:27 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)
If you're using Internet Explorer 5.5 or 6+, the software now allows some pages to be cached by the browser (this cuts down on gazillions of unintentional reloads by people using the 'back' and 'forward' buttons, which under our previous 'never cache anything' setup causes those browsers to decide to reload every page when you push 'back' and 'forward'). Recentchanges will cache until a new edit has been committed; this is usually only a few seconds, though. ;) If you didn't do a full shift+reload, then during the time between edits merely clicking on Recentchanges again would continue to give you the copy of the page from prior to your login. --Brion 19:09 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)
Not only Recent Changes, also other pages, I think. - Patrick 23:00 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)

Capitalization Rule

Why are some redirect pages for proper nouns, like JapaN, it's not just the beginning of the word capitalized, but the end as well? I've never seen a word's last letter capitalized. --Menchi 22:45 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

A relic of CamelCase, an old Wiki technique for creating links used in the early days of Wikipedia. I suppose such redirects might still be usefull just in case someone made a link to JapaN. -- Infrogmation 00:30 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)

wikipedia is a great reource and I came to it as I was researching how best to build a bibliography of books and content on material related to the Vedas, upanishads etc.

Examples of some of the material would be pages on

  • Hindu Gods & Godesses - There are numerous Gods and Vishnu has a 1000 names and for each name commentaries have been written.
  • Books and their reviews on Hinduism
  • Various noted eastern philosophers and historians.
  • Different philosophical doctrines and their relevant
  • Temples - their histories and other related information.
  • Mythological characters etc..

As you can see this list is both voluminous and eastern although the language would be largely english However, there would of neccessity be a lot of Sanskrit words and words from other Indian languages like Tamil.

Is this something that wikipedia could be used for and if not would a "sister" pedia be the appropriate vehicle. ajiva_rts 23:59 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Hey, we have a list of fictional cats -- we allow almost all material that is encyclopedically written. This sounds perfectly appropriate, as long as you write from the NPOV. Compare Yoruba mythology as an example for mythology pages on Wikipedia (not all of these may be brilliant prose). --Eloquence 00:06 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)


The article School sanitation seems a little odd and its related link about IRC reads like a business plan without saying much. Should either exist? If so in what form?

I've just completed some minor edits to an article (Franz Josef of Austria). On linking to that article from some other page via a redirect (Franz Josef I of Austria) I found out that that way I'm faced with the older version. Is this the rule, an exception, or is my browser again playing tricks on me? KF 21:56 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)

Try shift-F5 to reload. Pages are now cached (see above). - Patrick 23:00 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. KF 01:03 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)

When you move a page, the comment attached to the move appears to be "Moved to new_article_name", which is obvious from the name of the article. Wou;dn't it be better to have the comment as "Moved from old_article_name"? -- SGBailey 00:04 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)

It appears on the line of the old article name, and in the history of that, "moved to" makes therefore more sense than "moved from". It would be better though, if the name change were also in the history of the article with the new name (here of course "moved from"). - Patrick 12:09 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)
Also, the "N" for "new article" appears on the line of the old article name. I think it's far more logical to have this "N" appearing together with the new article name. D.D. 11:54 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)
But the article at the now article name isn't a new article: it's the old article, just in a new place. It's the old location that has the new content.
--Paul A 07:59 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)

Is there a way I can change the settings for "User contributions" in my preferences. Now it shows the last 50 articles in the last 5 days. I'd like it to show something like the last 100 articles in the last 7 days (after clicking on "user contributions" I have to click two more times to have that result.) D.D. 11:54 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)

The number of articles you can set, not the number of days (I think). However, you can bookmark http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Recentchanges&days=7&limit=100 , either in your browser or on your user page. - Patrick 12:19 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks, but the answer you gave me is for "Recent changes". I'm wondering about "User contributions". Any idea? D.D. 14:11 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)

http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=Dhum_Dhum&days=7&limit=100 -- sannse 14:27 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)

So today I switched to Mac OS 10.2 (from 9.2) and upgraded my Mozilla to 1.2.1. I checked the advanced recent changes block in my preferences, and I like it... but why can't I find my watchlist? Tokerboy 02:27 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

Um, where are you looking? Is there not a "My watchlist" link in the sidebar? Is there not a "Watchlist" item in the special pages dropdown at the top of the screen (or if using Cologne Blue skin, via the "Special pages" link at top of screen)? If not, under exactly what circumstances does it or does it not appear? --Brion 12:18 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)
Perhaps, just forgotten to login ? -- Youssefsan 12:27 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)
Aaah, I forgot I switched to Cologne Blue to see what it was like, and I never knew there was a link in the drop-down menu. Everything is under control. Tokerboy 19:13 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

What's happening with the orphaned/most wanted pages? I used to be able to access these on a weekend, before 3pm British time. Now I find I can't access them at all, although there's supposed to be a 12-hour window. Is there some problem? Anyone know? Deb 12:09 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

The slower special pages have been put on full-time blackout temporarily. This should be lifted shortly as performance problems are being resolved. --Brion 12:14 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

Has there been a change in the markup parsing code? five ' used to mean bold and italics but now it's coming out at italics only Mintguy

The text above is bold/italics in my browser; the HTML is correct: <strong><em>italics only</strong></em>. Have you, by any chance, switched browsers or changed your font settings recently? --Eloquence 20:59 Feb 10, 2003 (UTC)
Hmm.. I was using my laptop when I noticed it. I'm now back on my main machine and it's coming out correctly. I'll have to fiddle with the laptop tomorrow and see why it's not coming out correctly. Thanks Eloquence Mintguy
When you get back to it, try bumping the font size up and down. I seem to recall that bold-italic on some fonts at smaller sizes displayed as plain italic on my old Windows boxen. --Brion 01:29 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)

http://news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl=fc&cid=34&in=world&cat=china

"[China] invoked an accusation that resonates loudly in today's world: terrorism. Wang Bingzhang, a Chinese citizen with permanent residency status in the United States, was convicted Monday of spying for Taiwan..." GustoMacphisto

I think a rating system similar to amazon would work well on a site like this. That way if i want to use this for my kids school i can guage if it is a good article. This generally needed for subjects that the reason i am coming to the site is that i know little or nothing about the subject i am searching for.


Comments can be directed to sr

Logic and Wikipedia

Two16 would like responses to this:

  • Any article based on a logical fallacy has a point of view: its the point of view of the stupid.
But what if people cannot agree what is or is not a logical fallacy? --Eloquence 09:47 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)
Just to be pedantic it could be a perfectly sensible point of view but not correctly explained or justified in the article. -- Chris Q 15:06 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)

Well in principle the basics of logic are well accepted and there are several canonical books on the topic. Subtle logics such as Quine are not too far beyond the skills of a first year philosophy student. (though far beyond many university graduates.) In principle there is no difference between the processes in Epistemic communities in the flesh and on-line in this matter. What do you do in the other Epistemic communities that you inhabit? Two16

The (very long) list of logical fallacies goes far beyond the basic principles of logic and is hardly uncontroversial. Moreover, these concepts change over time. In addition to that, many views which are arguably not based on logic, such as religious beliefs, are represented on Wikipedia. It is not clear to me what you mean with "based on" a logical fallacy. Is an article that says "X believe Y" based on fallacy Y? I would not agree with what. Do you have any practical examples in mind? --Eloquence 11:03 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)

Your objection based on the inadequecy on the wikipedia's entry is noted: many of the samples are simply a diferent cute name for the same general fallacy. every single one I examined was . There are several accept nomeclatures of logical fallacy (one extremely popular example classifies logical fallacy into 14 different categories. Most university run courses in basic logic and reason which use tests and assignments to ensure that the people with the intellect of a small childern do not become philosophers ( or have an other profesion which requires rationality or reason). The culture of reason is still a sub-culture in the 'pedia. Cultures not based on reason are fundamentalist. I would be more than happy to provide examples from edit wars that I have sat through as a bystander and earlier examples where a neo-sprite ( me) was appling logic to people who simply couldn't use logic. Period.

Starting an article whose statement is impeachable on the grounds of some incorect thinking has the point of view of the ignorant.

At the heart of every edit war the is a logical fallacy on 1 or more sides. If you haven't seen logical fallacy in wikipedia (basically including any article without NPOV logical reason has fallen below the threshold of counsciousness. A very quick person will retrieve all this learning in single sitting.

Hard core examples from the science is found in the talk:scientific method and talk:EPR paradox. Any point of view which is based on logical positivism, or is a varient of it, is a logical fallacy.

Boolean logic doesn't change through time. It is a concretization of Indo-european modes of reason embedded in a symbolic language of language pure and applied reason.

with loveTwo16

the belief in the validity of logic and logical means of reasoning is a point of view. When wikipedia talks about positions that are universally acknowledged to be illogical it should say "position X is illogical". When wikipedia talks about positions that are believed by some to be illogical it should say "some people consider position X to be illogical". We should not say "position X is ignorant because it is illogical", because the link from illogicality to ignorance has not been proven and is itself disputed. In this way, we can satisfy both people who worship logic and people who blaspheme logic. Martin

Martin the wikipedia has a very specific meaning for POV and NPOV. Please read them so that you are informed about the nature of this dialogue. An example of a common logical fallacy still common in the scientific community is logical positivism which is refuted by the meta-mathematical doctoral thesis of Kurt Godel which refuted the ideas of the Vienna circle about science before they were even published in 1935. Many scientists are completely mistaken about the limits of their own field because they hold unreasoned positions that are equivilant to logical positivism. Any article which is writtten by someone who holds this logical fallacy will have the point of view of the ignorant. I have framed my arguement for logic, in the Sciences, because that field is considered by those who have never examined the subject to be Objective. I guess in this regard a should mention the philosophically indefensible philosophy Objectivism developed by Ayn Rand. No appologies will be given to anyone foolish enough to be a dogmatic Objectivist. Respect what she has to say of value, there is much, but don't be so stupid as to think it is not filled with logical fallacy.

Two16 - I consider your incorrect assumption that I have not read NPOV (et al) to be impolite, as is your incorrect implication that I am not "informed about the nature of this dialogue". Anyway, I'll see you at Goedels Incompleteness Theorem, if you want to pursue the point... Martin ---No desire to be impolite to you. I think you wear a white hat: Hanlon's Law Would you consider doing a close reading of NPOV because it can only be defended by those who know it cold..


I think this is a good idea. There are many situations where logic cannot be applied because of lack of knowledge, mainly disputed premises etc. I think, however it is perfectly valid to point out flaws in what are presented as logical arguments. -- Chris Q 15:34 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)

Disputed pemises are adequetly dealt with by correct use of talk pages and Wikipedian refactoring technique. Logic is a tool of Epistemic communities. Not

Access Counter

I noticed that the access counter were not working for some pages. (They all give 0 as the # accessed.) Instances I found: Pennsylvania German, Pennsylvania Dutch, Pennsylvania German language, Hutterite German. Is it just me?

Tomos 20:17 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)

Access counters are still disabled. The non-changing counters were being displayed briefly because someone overwrote the page-skin code without changing it. --Brion 21:57 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)

pop-up ad?

It seems that I keep getting pop-up ads when I download this page. I want to know if this is only me. Any advise is appreciated. Thanks.

Tomos 20:46 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)

I guess it's just you. What does this ad look like, and are you sure it's not related to another site you're looking at? Or if your browser has been compromised by spyware? --Brion 21:57 Feb 11, 2003 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_archive_2004-09-26&oldid=661378"