Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 December 15

= December 15 =

How do I redirect?
I see the directions for redirecting pages within wiki, but what about directing similar search terms for pages? I.e. for the Optimer Pharmaceuticals page, if someone searched for "Optimer", they should be able to go directly to the Optimer Pharmaceuticals page. Thanks for your help. KDR 21:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdrichards (talk • contribs)
 * There are several companies named Optimer. Unless one and only one brand is famous, the proper thing to do is either create a disambiguation page, or if only one of the companies even qualifies for an article, either don't create a redirect i.e. leave the page red or, if the dominant company goes simply by "Optimer," create a redirect or move the page.  For technical help, read Redirect.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  21:18, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


 * But at the moment there is only one company named Optimer that has an article on Wikipedia so Optimer could be a redirect to Optimer Pharmaceuticals. When and if there are other Optimer articles, the redirect can be converted into a disambiguation page. – ukexpat (talk) 21:23, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


 * This is where good judgment comes in. If more people think of something else than the Pharmaceutical company when you say "Optimer" then redirecting it is worse than leaving it red.  Of course, if more people think of something else that should be your next article :).  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  22:18, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Asking for arbitration/moderation in an article.
Hi,

What can I do when editors in an article behave in a callous and inconsiderate way, constantly promoting their view points and forcefully editing out other people? This happens A LOT here.

Case in point the David Letterman article. Based on the opinions of 2-3 individuals I am unable to classify Letterman in the Sex Scandal figures category as he rightly deserves to be for his concealed sexual relations with his subordinates, as widely reported and verified in the news all over the world.

This seems to be racially motivated as in similar (and arguably less severe) situation Tiger Woods has gone without question in the said category.

Can you advice me as to how to open this up for a vote or arbitration?

Thanks.

And please consider hiring professional editors.

94.71.212.239 (talk) 22:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, we don't hire editors... it's a volunteer-based community here. However, many editors are professionals in certain areas.  fetch  comms  ☛ 22:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. But this was not my query. You answered to an aside at the end.

Any way here again my edit in the talk pages has been deleted in the Letterman article, someone please intervene.

94.71.212.239 (talk) 23:13, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: this IPs edits to the article talk page consists of calling other editors dishonest racists, rantings against Wales, declaring an intent to edit war and continue to add these vile comments, and calling the removal of such talk page invective "censorship". All of these lovely things can be seen in the revert I just performed here. Tarc (talk) 23:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I dare you to quote my "rant" against Wales, come one quote it here. Because again, as per your policy you are being dishonest. The vile things is racism in practice at Wikipedia and censorship. But don't worry you are not going to get your way in whitewashing this article. 94.71.212.239 (talk) 00:04, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The passage in question was "And Wales has the guts to ask for funds on top of every article. What a parody" as seen in the linked diff above. Granted it isn't as egregious as your blasting of other editors as racists and such, but it was still a piece in your overall soapbox-ish tirade. Tarc (talk) 00:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I hope you post/file a complaint. I saw an interesting page about Administrators and the rules that they must live by, such as fairness, not using their power in abusive ways, etc.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ADMIN  Maybe this page will help you?  I'm honestly shocked by the rude, grumpy, and infuriating admins who rule the roost here on Wikipedia.  Where do they find them?  Why can't they find volunteers who are helpful and reasonable people, and are not so adversarial and grumpy?  Good luck, Wikipedia, trying to get donations.  If you're asking for our money, you must institute a policy of quick accountability for admins who are grumpy, rude and adversarial and who abuse their power.  Eric Scubeesnax (talk) 07:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * In answer to your question "Where do they find them?" - admins are chosen by the community (see Requests for adminship) - by which I mean all of the community: editors, admins, bureaucrats, stewards (if we had any on Wikipedia, which we don't) - the only exceptions is that blocked users and IP users can't vote. If the original poster has a complaint about a specific admin (or admins), then the first place to discuss this would be on their talk pages. Further complaints can be taken to the Admin's Noticeboard Incidents Board.
 * For what it's worth, many of the admins that I have come across are helpful and reasonable people - just like most editors that I have come across. Yes, some of them can be adversarial at times, and grumpy (hell, they are humans you know) - but I have also come across a lot of editors who are like that! I think if we banned all users who are adversarial or grumpy at times, we would have very few users left! --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:54, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

(undent) To the original poster: the pages linked under WP:EIW detail Wikipedia's procedures for handling content disputes. Note that in most disputes, the side which spends the most time reading and following the friendly manuals tends to win. In particular, the rules are heavily stacked against people who believe they do not need to read the rules. So, on Wikipedia you have the power to select your fate. If you don't like Wikipedia's rules or don't want to read them, you can start your own wiki. Thousands of people have done this. Wikipedia cannot be all things to all people. --Teratornis (talk) 21:47, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

(undent) To Scubeesnax: the best way to avoid making the admins grumpy is to read and follow Wikipedia's instructions. Wikipedia's user interface is very permissive - it lets you do almost anything you want - and this encourages some people to hastily conclude that if something is possible, it is therefore allowed. Unfortunately, wikis like Wikipedia don't work that way. The software is very permissive, but then hours or days later, other users will see what you did, and quite possibly change it. Thus the key to successful editing on Wikipedia or any wiki is learning to predict how other users will react to whatever we want to do. That's just the reality here. I'm not saying everybody will want to work this way. Only a small percentage of Wikipedia's registered user accounts have a lot of edits. Most people seem to poke around a little and then leave. Only a few will put in the effort it takes to learn the rules and work in harmony with the other people who learned the rules. But it is possible. Even people who strongly disagree with each other on various issues are able to edit harmoniously together on Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Um, are you actually reading the links provided above, or looked into the matter at all? We have an editing decision reached by consensus that a single IP editor refuses to abide by. Said IP user had edit-warred to insert is/her preferred version of text and then edit warred on the talk page to retain a passage that calls other editors racist. Tarc (talk) 13:41, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the information (and extra thanks to Scubeesnax for saying it like it is, and being supportive, and not patronizing as per the usual treatment here), I will prepare by digging my teeth in some of the material to see how I should respond and proceed. 94.71.133.172 (talk) 23:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Getting Rid of Accounts and Changing Their Usernames
I have two questions to ask you:

1. Is it possible to get rid of, destroy, or remove your user account in Wikipedia after once you've created it? If so, then how can you do it?

2. Is it possible to change the username of your user account in Wikipedia after once you've created it? If so, then how can you do it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.166.182 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 15 December 2009


 * A1: If the account has any edits, including deleted edits, no. But if the only edits are to the account's user page and user-talk page, and there are no other substantial edits to the talk page, the pages can be deleted.  If it has no edits then deleting it is moot, but it can be renamed to another name if someone else wants to use this name.
 * A2:Yes, see Usernames.
 * If you have major privacy issues, you can email Special:EmailUser/Oversight for assistance. Sometimes they can help, sometimes they can't.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  01:03, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * For the sake of clarity, once an account is created, it cannot be deleted, but it can be renamed. User pages and user talk pages can be deleted (and thereby turned into red links) by an admin and users can blank their own user pages and user talk pages as they see fit (in which case they will remain blue links and their history visible unless oversighted). Users can also exercise their right to vanish. – ukexpat (talk) 02:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: User talk pages are sometimes preserved due to special circumstances. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  14:37, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Due to the fact that Wikipedia content is licensed under the GFDL, all edits must be kept for attribution purposes, and so your account cannot be deleted. You do, however, have the right to vanish, which you can exercise by (1) requesting your user page (found at Special:Mypage) and/or user talk page (found at Special:Mytalk) be deleted, by adding the template to them; (2) requesting to change your username to something that is unconnected with you (possibly a random collection of letters and numbers); (3) never logging in to your account again. The "right to vanish" does not mean anyone has the right to a fresh start under a new identity. Anyone who wants to continue editing should request a change of username instead so edits can be reattributed.  --Mysdaao talk 02:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * User talk pages ARE NOT eligible for speedy deletion, and even in "right to vanish" will not normally be deleted. See Right to vanish. DuncanHill (talk) 14:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Donating
If I donate to the foundation, will they send me tons of junk mail or share my contact with a mailing list for other orgs to send me tons of junk mail? Also, is the system set up so that CheckFree online bill payment would send donations directly into their bank account electronically, or would they have to mail a check? PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 02:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The place to start is this page, where there are links to FAQ etc. – ukexpat (talk) 03:03, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

How to post a video/movie?
How can I find out how to post a video/movie? There are zillions of them on Wiki, for example on Barack Obama's page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_obama (near the bottom, just above the references) where he posts a weekly address. Also, I'd like to upload an audio file and make it playable. But I have no idea how to do it properly. Who can I ask? My best for the Holidays! Eric Scubeesnax (talk) 07:04, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Videos are posted the same way images are. Through the uploading page linked on the left and using the same formatting as images to put them in a page (using File: instead of Image: in the link). Like images, the copyright rules also apply to videos: they need to be free or have a particular good fair use rationale. The file needs to be in an OggVorbis format. - Mgm|(talk) 09:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * And this is Wikipedia. Please don't call it 'Wiki', as it is one of many thousands of those. --ColinFine (talk) 23:26, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Passport for my son
Respected Sir,

My name is Manish Indian National, I married to a Yemeni national girl while I was working in yemen I had one son from her, now I need to bring my wife & son to India what should I so, as Indian Embassy refused to give Visa to my wife & passport to my son, I have submitted my marriage certificate, birth certificate of my son, even after all this they are delaying the matter and my family is in problem without me.

Kindly suggest me the way out from this problem.

my email id is

With Best Regards

MANISH —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.73.172.245 (talk) 08:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, this looks like you would require legal advice which we cannot give. Pedro : Chat  08:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Consider http://answers.yahoo.com for general advice which is sometimes accurate but sometimes not accurate. Also consider contacting the Embassy of India in Sanaa. Maybe consider contacting an Indian lawyer familiar with immigration matters. Wikipedia is not a good place for this kind of advice. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Other possible places for help is the the Wikipedia Reference desk, the Hindi Wikipedia Reference desk विकिपीडिया:रेफ़रन्स डेस्क, Answerbag, and Fluther. Yahoo! Answers has a travel section to India and an immigration section.Civic Cat (talk) 19:31, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Linking to another page
I created a link to 'computer telephony integration' on a page by using the double [] notation, but the link doesn't work; when clicked an error messages suggests the page doesn't exist. However, if I put 'computer telephony integration' into the search box I find the 'computer telephony integration page' (albeit it has a note stating redirected from 'computer telephony'). If I use 'computer telephony' for the link, I get a similar result. I can also search on 'computer telephony' and get the same page I get when I search on 'computer telephony integration'. How can I fix this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by WIKIPICT (talk • contribs) 09:28, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The link to computer telephony that you put in Aculab works, so I assume you mean the category Category:Computer telephony integration which is redlinked? Redlinked categories are not a problem if they are left (it just means that there's currently no category page created). I will try to sort out the category page though. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I have created the category page, and added a few other articles to it as a starting point. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 10:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

image and heading help
I was recently looking at the Noumea article, I am using beta and realised it needs a cleanup in the placement of images and sections. It is not something I am familiar with and am sure there is a tag I can put there that will direct an experienced editor to the page Matt (talk) 10:53, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've put the ones that weren't in the infobox in a gallery format near the bottom. It's not a permanent solution, but it should work until the article is expanded and has more space for images. - Mgm|(talk) 12:08, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the word I was looking for yesterday was layout, I will have a hunt around and see what guides there are, and thanks for the help Mgm Matt (talk) 02:05, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * WP:LAYOUT? – ukexpat (talk) 16:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Why auto-reload?
Why does the first page which I browser every day always auto-reload? Only this Wikipedia has such a problem. --百楽兎 (talk) 11:22, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I have never experienced this or seen it reported. I guess it is something on your end. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe, but only occurred in English Wikipedia. I am using Google Chrome. I guess there can be something unsuitable in Mediawiki:common.js.--百楽兎 (talk) 13:02, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

lanjauge
where is urdu lanjaue n vikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.154.24.163 (talk) 13:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The URL of the main page of the Urdu Wikipedia is http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/ ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:34, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Need an article changed asap if possible! Thanks.
Hello, my name is Michael Reed. I am a teacher/webmaster for Howe Military School in Howe, IN. I noticed that when bringing up information about our school on wikipedia, it says that that school was founded by Elias Howe, inventor of the sewing machine. This information is incorrect. The correct information has already been added below the article by someone else. However, can the first paragraph at the top be removed that references Elias Howe, since he had nothing to do with Howe Military School?

Thanks,

Michael Reed

Link to article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howe_Military_School  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmubronco81 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Better (internal) link Howe Military School. --ColinFine (talk) 23:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

How do I search for articles starting with the word "List", but exclude redirects?
I've been using the prefix search but many of the results are redirects. Is there a way to search for lists, or any other article with a prefix, without having to see all the redirects? 90.219.50.135 (talk) 17:02, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't get redirects in prefix searches, for example http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=prefix%3AList&go=Go. Are you referring to Special:PrefixIndex? That includes redirects but they are easy to identify because they are in italics. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

How to cite references?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Calmer_Waters#stupid where he writes "However, I prefer using the tool in the edit screen for setup when possible"

Question 1: How does one do this? Where is the clickable "button"?

Question 2: Can you fix reference 25 and 29 so that I can see how you do it. 25 and 29 are the same reference. One shouldn't repeat it twice but use 25 twice.

Thank you. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 21:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * A1: One uses the named reference approach. See the tag  before the cite in the first example at Calmer Waters' talk. The clickable button is the button in the WikiEd plug-in, enabled (or not) in your preferences. Click that, click the button for the type of source, and then see the "Name" field.


 * A2: I'd be glad to try if you'll identify the page in question! --AndrewHowse (talk) 21:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I found and fixed it. The reference was used three times. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:02, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. That's why I asked that it be fixed twice and I was going to do it to fixed the 3rd time.  See, I'm not lazy! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:40, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Missing revisions
Can anyone see the following revisions? If not, what happened to them ? --Drogonov 22:15, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I cannot see the revisions, either. I am on Firefox 3.5.5 under Ubuntu 9.10. I would hazard a guess at it being some sort of weird database error, as the revisions do not appear to be oversighted. You could ask over at the technical village pump. Xenon54 / talk / 22:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Odd, something is broken in the wiki. It looks like all edits between http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Elephant_Man_%28film%29&oldid=9292943 (21:01, 11 January 2005) and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Elephant_Man_%28film%29&direction=next&oldid=12776317 (02:37, 25 April 2005) got fubared.  They show up as blank versions, which isn't logical.  They should either be there, be missing entirely and not in the edit history if they were deleted but not restored, or have strike-throughs if they've been rev-deleted or oversighted.  Well, probably not worth fixing.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  22:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

How to find editors who will email authors
Hello. Can someone direct me to a page or area that lists Wikipedia editors who are willing to email authors with questions. Thanks! Manyhats (talk) 22:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I doubt such a page exists. Why would special people be needed to send emails? Algebraist 22:37, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If you are a registered user, go to Special:Preferences and fill in your email address, then go to the user or talk page of the person you want to talk to, and click "Email this user" in the toolbox on the left side of your screen. If you don't see the "Email this user" link then the user has not enabled incoming emails, and nobody can mail him unless they know his email address. You can, however, leave a note on his talk page asking him to mail you. He'll have to set up his preferences, and he may choose not to for privacy or other reasons. When you email a user, they get your email address so they can reply off-wiki. Some editors don't like using email for that very reason. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  22:44, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Remember that anyone can edit any article. If you are talking about the author of an article, this can be thousands of people. If you have a question or comment about the article itself (not the article's subject), then go to the article's talk page by clicking the "discussion" tab at the top of the page and leave a note. If you have a general question about how Wikipedia works, then this is the page to do it. Xenon54 / talk / 22:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * There is such a page or place because I used it earlier this year. There was a long list of editors who are available by email. I'm actually trying to find the page here so I can then know where to look for a similar page on a few foreign language versions of Wikipedia. Thanks.Manyhats (talk) 23:01, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * This list may have been part of some coordination or other (i.e., OTRS, sysops, etc.). Do you recall the purpose of this list? Intelligent  sium  23:08, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe it may have been a list of part-time or former editors willing to volunteer their time/help, but am not sure about this. I think I may still have contact info for one of them, will email him and see if that's where I came into contact with him. Manyhats (talk) 01:28, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Are there any experienced editors here who can help me with a WP:CABAL?
Me and several other editors are trying to edit our article on the Climategate controversy to follow WP:NPOV and we're encountering stiff resistence from other editors. The dispute was brought up at the WP:NPOVN. An uninvolved editor examined the issues and confirmed that the article is isn't following WP:NPOV just as we were saying. You can read his/her post here But there's a group of 5 or 6 editors who still refuse to follow WP:NPOV. Are there any experienced users who are willing to help me deal with this WP:CABAL? Basically, I'm looking for a mentor. Someone who's already dealt with a WP:CABAL before (hopefully about a different topic) and can give me advice on how to go about resolving the issues. Thanks! A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 22:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Repeat after me: There is no cabal. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  22:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The "uninvolved editor" who you say examined the issue is an anon IP who has only made that one edit to date. That is far too fishy to be reliable or trustworthy. Tarc (talk) 13:38, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Given the depth of their analysis, I think that they're an experienced editor who decided to log out of their account so that they could give a neutral analysis without retribution. In any case, I'm still looking for a mentor who's dealt with WP:CABAL issues before. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 14:23, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If talk page discussions are not taking you anywhere, follow dispute resolution. You're unlikely to fine a "mentor" here at the help desk. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 14:36, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Linking to a version not explained, bad anchor link, confusion
I wanted to link to a particular version of a page on someone's talk page. I found Help:Page history, but that doesn't actually tell you how to do it! It has a link to a non-existent section Help:URL, but that page doesn't quite tell you how to do it either. It only says "However if you want to link to ... certain specially generated Wikimedia pages (such as a past version of an article), it is necessary to provide the full URL. This is done using external link syntax." Both pages are confusing because it's not clear if they're talking about links within wikipedia pages (where several syntaxes are possible) or linking to them from outside wikipedia (where you must use a full external URL). On a Wikipedia page, is there a template or trick to link to a particular version? If not, that first section should simply say something like
 * You must use a full external URL, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carbon_footprint&oldid=331849271 to refer to a specific page version from a Wikipedia page (you can't use a Page title-style link).

Thanks for all you do. -- Skierpage (talk) 22:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Look a little further down the page Help:URL and see the 4th bullet after "Extended URLs are used:"
 * I'll look at that anchor link too. --AndrewHowse (talk) 23:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've corrected the anchor link. The pages are referring to using the full URL, which can be used from within Wikipedia or on other websites.  There is a template,, which can be used on Wikipedia to create a link to an old version of a page.  However, it's not necessary, and it creates a regular external link to the full URL anyway, so it's just a little shortcut if you want to use it.  --Mysdaao talk 23:25, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Jamestown
WHYDIDENGLANDFOUNDJAMESTOWN —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.193.67 (talk) 23:15, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You might find what you are looking for in the article about History of the Jamestown Settlement (1607–1699). If you cannot find the answer there, you can try asking your question at Wikipedia's Reference Desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except about how to use Wikipedia, which is what this help desk is for). I hope this helps. --Mysdaao talk 23:34, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * In addition, please refrain from shouting or typing without spaces. This is considered impolite, because it may be difficult for some people to understand. Intelligent  sium  00:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I didn't recognise the question as a real question, and was considering deleting it as vandalism. --ColinFine (talk) 00:52, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Redirects
If I'm being dim I apologise, but I am having no success in finding out how to create a redirect - in this instance from Preciosity to Préciosité, or even better, move the existing article to Preciosity, and redirect from Préciosité. Thanks, Awien (talk) 23:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Instructions for creating a redirect are at WP:R. Instructions for moving a page are at WP:MOVE, and doing so will automatically create a redirect from the old name to the new. However Préciosité is already a redirect, to Précieuses, so if you move it you will create a double redirect. This works, but is not recommended, so you should then go into the redirect page (you can get there by picking the 'redirected from' link on the destination page) and edit it to a single redirect. --ColinFine (talk) 23:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Awien (talk) 23:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia main site in Russian?
Recently, I noticed that when I go to the main Wikipedia page (www.wikipedia.org) my browser (Firefox 3.5.3) indicates via a Google dropdown below the tabs that 'This page is in Russian. Translate it using Google Toolbar?' This never happened before, and I wondered if this was an indication that my computer has been infected with a virus or trojan horse of some kind, or if it's a quirk with Wikipedia and the Google Toolbar? By the way, the page displays just as it always has: primarily in English, with the Wikipedia 'globe' logo and the various languages arrayed around it. Anyone else notice this? Thanks.PVarjak (talk) 23:53, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * It's probably because the www.wikipedia.org page contains many different languages in about equal proportions, which probably causes the Google toolbar's autotranslator function to shit itself. I would pay it no mind.  -- Jayron  32  06:34, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * :But it's a new phenomenon, and Wikipedia.org has been one of my main tabs for a long time. Does anyone else's Firefox with Google Toolbar indicate something like this? 98.109.81.242 (talk) 23:11, 17 December 2009 (UTC)