Help desk
< February 28	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 2 >

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

March 1

Purge Problem

I have a link to purge my page and whenever I click it some other links cover up my rollback logo can anyone help? L07ChLeo3 (talk) 00:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's normal, purging the page messes up where divs put stuff. It will only occur for that page load though - whenever you don't purge it will not occur. — neuro^(talk) 17:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm New to Wikipedia...

Resolved

– ukexpat (talk) 19:07, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious...about how long does it usually take to get a response on a discussion page? Eatanorange (talk) 00:38, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most replies usually take up to 5-15 minutes but as you can see with my post above this is not the case :). L07ChLeo3 (talk) 00:41, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It depends entirely on the page and the post. An easy-to-answer question on the help desk will be replied to very quickly. An obscure or confusing post on the talkpage of a minor article can sit there for years. Algebraist 00:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also you can think about making a userpage; you can view mine for ideas. A userpage is a way of telling editors who you are so that they can interact with you on subjects with shared interests. L07ChLeo3 (talk) 00:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it applies to anything in particular you're trying to find a solution to, but I thought I'd mention: You can place the {{helpme}} tag on your talk page. Several experienced editors who enjoy helping new editors become acclimated to Wikipedia monitor those. It allows you to interact with an experienced user without being confined to a particular topic. — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 02:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll take your advice into account. I'll definitely make a userpage sometime in the near future. I'll also keep the {{helpme}} tag in mind. Thanks again for the help! Eatanorange (talk) 18:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Every new user should read this book, to avoid having to learn many things the hard way. --Teratornis (talk) 02:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Section

What would the URL be to edit a specific part of a page. L07ChLeo3 (talk) 01:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can edit a section by clicking on the edit link next to it. The exact URL cannot be given, since it changes from section to section. But it's something like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Page_name&action=edit&section=section_number

Where "Page_name" is replaced by the name of the page you're editing, and "section_number" replaced by the number of the section you're editing. Chamal ^talk 02:25, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page squeezing

I just did my monthly archive and now my talk page is squeezing stuff. I don't see that I removed anything that I shouldn't have.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fine to me. DId you, like, purge the cache and check again? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Left align header template

Can I left align my header at User:TonyTheTiger/Header template?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which bit? — neuro^(talk) 17:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I want to move all the GA and FA icons to the left.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Protection of a user talk page?

I noticed that Shalom Yechiel is retired from wikipedia according to his talk page. I then noticed that his user talk page was under full protection, so I checked the prot guidelines. There is nothing to indicate that a talk page can be protected simply because a user has retired. I see the user exercised WP:RTV, however there is nothing about protection there as well. Sephiroth storm (talk) 02:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The page history indicates the user had specifically requested protection as part of his Right to vanish. Normally, user talk pages are only fully protected if a blocked user is abusing the {{unblock}} template or are otherwise being disruptive. Xenon54 (talk) 02:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any precedent for this? I cant really see any reason to do it. Sephiroth storm (talk) 02:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend you take it up with the editor who did the protecting and courtesy blanking (Hersfold). From what I've seen of him, it's a reasonable editor who'd be quite happy to explain if asked. Just point out the policy and ask him what his reasoning was. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This follows both precedent and common sense. An unwatched user page is an open invitation to vandalism. Users can request this from any admin, and often make the request at the admin notice board. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 12:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wrongly accused

Resolved

– ukexpat (talk) 19:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i have a brother 12 hours away and is being accused of a crime and has no help what can i do for him —Preceding unsigned comment added by JONATHANCHAISSON (talk • contribs) 02:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot offer legal advice. Please see the legal disclaimer. Contact your lawyer. Chamal ^talk 02:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless he has other family already involved in getting him a lawyer, I suspect he'd appreciate it if you got him one. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:00, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If your brother is being wrongly accused by the authorities for something he didn't do, then the best thing to do is for him to get an attorney, who, if not affordable by your brother, is provided for free. If your brother is being wrongly accused outside of the legal system—for example, a fried of his accuses him for sleeping with his girlfriend—then you might want to phone the person who is wrngly accusing your brother; or, if you really love your brother, you might wanna travel and "fix" whatever's wrong. Either way, Wikipedia usually abstains from these suggestions, and a Q-and-A website, such as Yahoo! Answers, would be more appropriate. --96.232.59.156 (talk) 18:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please define 'established registered users'

I checked the "why create an account page" but it doesnt define it for me. I am trying to edit a page that is semi protected. The page zombie at the bottom there is a reference.(number 6 to be exact) that seems to be wrong. It seems to be referring to number 5. I was going to play around with preview to see if I could get it to work but i need to be an established user. What does this mean? And if the page needs fixing could someone do it? thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivtv (talk • contribs) 03:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia messages often link to relevant pages on words in the message. MediaWiki:Protectedpagetext has a link on established user which explain the requirements. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the ten edits requirement to Wikipedia:Why create an account? [1] The ten edits is a more recent requirement than the four days. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

House centipede pages

Hi, our House centipede pages don't work properly. There's a disambiguation page that should be the first stop. Instead the link goes directly to Scutigera coleoptrata from the side bar. From the "Search" page neither "house centipede" nor "Scutigera coleoptrata" get proper results. Instead one has to go via the "Centipede" page and a link in a table there. The second species known as "House centipede" isn't even listed there and is impossible to get to unless s.o. remembers the scientific name. Could someone please see if you could fix this. It goes way beyond my wikipedia-fu. THANKS.76.97.245.5 (talk) 09:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization matters in search when there are pages with different capitalization. I have redirected House Centipede to House centipede (disambiguation page) instead of to Scutigera coleoptrata. Does this solve your problems? If not then exactly what with which capitalization are you entering in the search box? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would this stage actress pass the english wikipedia's bio notability guidelines?

http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title=Donna_Rugay —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angdl (talk • contribs) 09:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

She would if I was in charge. But I'm not. The main factor is the number of reliable sources. The article you link to is a little thin on sources. It's hard to predict how the deletionists would react. Probably by doing what they usually do - deleting things. To secure the article, you'd like to have at least ten reliable sources. Maybe that is overkill, but most of our deletionists will never have heard of this actress, and she is young and just starting her career, which means you need to assert her notability beyond any question. You could skim around Deletionpedia for tens of thousands of examples of what the deletionists don't like around here. But it looks like you already have a perfectly fine wiki to edit over there, so why fight an uphill battle here? When someone is truly notable, they get an article here in due course. --Teratornis (talk) 11:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A quick Google search indicates she would be notable. You could always create a sandbox in your user space while you work on digging up the required refs. At least it would be a little safer from the ... ahhh ... "non-notable, non-encyclopedic, patrolling personnel" — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 14:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But the newspaper article is a notable source. 210.4.62.239 (talk) 15:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Only one notable source is not enough to satisfy the deletionists. See for example Wikipedia:Victim Lists. I personally do not find the arguments in that essay convincing, but lots of other editors do, so you'd better make sure a new article is not vulnerable to that line of attack. Consider, for example, what it means to truly be notable, like Christopher Hitchens. Googling for Hitchens finds 5,800,000 hits, and thousands of them are reliable sources by the Wikipedia definition. Hitchens is clearly notable, so nobody wastes time arguing that we should delete the article about him. I used the rule of ten reliable sources above because if you can't scrape together at least that many reliable sources about a person the deletionists have never heard of, they are going to be biased against him or her. Yes, this may be yet another example of English-speaking ethnocentrism, and terribly unfair, but that's what you get when you play on the English Wikipedia. You have to anticipate the likely attacks and counter them in advance. If the deletionists haven't heard of someone, make sure their first impression is that plenty of reliable sources are there. You don't want to leave any opening for deletionist sentiment to begin building against an article. Once people start thinking that way, it tends to become self-reinforcing. Confirmation bias kicks in, and people start looking for more reasons to delete. Another way to look at it: if you have to ask whether someone is notable, the deletionists will also ask, and more vigorously. Put yourself in the mindset of a deletionist, who is looking for any possible reason to delete an article. You'd better make sure a new article gives no possible reason. --Teratornis (talk) 20:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Godwin

I believe that the preface of the Robert Godwin article should contain a brief description of why the person is notable. A while back somebody added the fact that he was an author to the openening sentence, but then for some strange reason a user reverted this. I am unable to edit the article because it is protected. Thanks. 79.75.208.7 (talk) 14:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done - give me a shout (either here or on my talk page if you want is changed, expanded, painted pink etc.

(Possibly joking about painting it pink - my pink paint has run out).

Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 14:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How to create an article??

I am new to wikipedia and I have NO IDEA how to create an aricle. How can I do this? I want to do an article on my favorite DJ, a local DJ in Miami, to help her get more exposed. How can I start making an aricle abou her? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doworkfool (talk • contribs) 15:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Help:Starting a new page. You might also look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. Algebraist 16:00, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia should not be used to get your DJ friend more exposure. In particular, Wikipedia uses the "no follow" attribute (I think that's what it's called) which means that a Wikipedia article will not generate a higher Google ranking for your friend. If they are truly notable by Wikipedia's standards, then somone will come by and create an encyclopedia article. Astronaut (talk) 18:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Odd font

I am getting an odd font all the time on every page. I don't know what's missing. What's the "normal" font? I may have uninstalled it with a font manager. This one is difficult to read. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by BongoBern (talk • contribs) 17:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The normal font is Arial on article pages, and Courier New when actively editing. — neuro^(talk) 17:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Technically speaking, the default font is set by your browser, not Wikipedia itself. Arial is certainly the default here on my Windows Vista; a completely different font is the default on my Ubuntu Linux. If you're running Firefox (3, pos 2 also) you can see your default fonts by going to Options -> Content -> Advanced (under Fonts and Colours, about halfway down). There is listed the default font for most of the site ("sans-serif") and in the edit window ("Monospace"). - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 18:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought we had something in the CSS defaulting to arial, hm. — neuro^(talk) 18:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see the default is sans-serif:

body { font: x-small sans-serif; ... }

...which will then be evaluated by the browser. On a Windows machine the browser will probably use Arial as the default sans-serif font, but on a Mac or *nix machine Helvetica will be more likely. Interestingly, the CSS tends to specify Serif more explicitly:

font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;

Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 18:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I remembered it specified TNR, I guess that's why I thought it was explicit with Arial. — neuro^(talk) 19:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Font family (HTML). --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 20:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Placement of marker dots on maps in Settlement infobox

Looking at Waverly, Tioga County, New York, I noticed that the dot placed on the map of NY state appears to place the town in PA. The town is just in NY, right on the NY/PA border and indeed, using the geo location, Google Earth puts its marker on the town, on the NY side of the border. I couldn't work out how the red dot was placed in the infobox map, so perhaps someone can explain here (or provide a link) so I can fix it myself; or perhaps someone familiar with the settlement template can fix it for me. Astronaut (talk) 18:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like {{Infobox Settlement}} uses {{Location map}} to place the marker on the map in {{Location map USA New York}}. You could check the backlinks:

Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Location map USA New York

to see if other locations have the same offset to the south. If they do, then the coordinate boundaries in {{Location map USA New York}} may need adjusting. If only Waverly, Tioga County, New York is getting misplaced to the south, and all the other locations show up in the correct places, then I wouldn't know what to do. --Teratornis (talk) 20:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The same displacement also occurs with other NY towns along the NY/PA border. I now believe it is a problem with the map "edge coordinates" in {{Location map USA New York}}, but I'm nervous about changing it because it links to a hell of a lot articles. Astronaut (talk) 05:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dumb question, but I'm offering it along the lines of the old advice "fix the simple stuff first": have you verified that the correct latitude & longitude are being used for Waverly? In working with geo locations of Ethiopian settlements -- where the datum often varies by up to 5 minutes of arc -- there is an awful lot of inaccuracy out there. (I have seen two maps, produced by otherwise reliable sources, which differ on the latitude/longitude grid over the Somali Region of Ethiopia by a full degree; yes, that part of the world has not been accurately surveyed, but not that inaccurately.) One doesn't notice these inaccuracies until they're used in an environment where you can detect variations of a few minutes of arc -- which has been the case now with the common availability of GPS units. -- llywrch (talk) 21:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the geo-location provided in the article goes to the correct place (here is the link [2] which will go to Google Maps). Astronaut (talk) 05:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I edited a page and that part got deleted?

I put in a new section on the Sheffield page, called Twin towns, but it got removed later that day. The next day i put it in again, and it got removed again. Why does this keep happening?

Thanks, Hazzertbr —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.230.84 (talk) 18:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Though your information is correct, it was already covered in another section. If you take a look at the edit history, it's explained why your changes were reverted. --96.232.59.156 (talk) 18:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Click the "history" tab at top of a page to see the edit history. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:25, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Double redirect + lost history

Is there someone more technical that can fix this history to merge into this current history? There is a double redirect also here that should probably be fixed also (removed). The end result there should be one redirect of the spelling "Tertia Aemilia" to the current article of Aemilia Tertia. This way then all the history of the article will show, from "Started Article" on 18 January 2007. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 18:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, user:Teratornis just pointed me to Help:Moving a page#Fixing cut and paste moves in a similar case. I'm too tired to try this now, but I can try it tomorrow. If it still needs to be done in 18 hours, please drop me a note on my talk page. — Sebastian 08:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PDF Version with Mozilla Firefox Plugin

When I open a pdf version of a page with the mozilla firefox adobe acrobat plugin, mozilla firefox crashes. Is this because it is new; I haven't noticed the tool before but it could just be me being really inobservant. God Emperor (talk) 18:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The function is new but it's not a problem with WP, but with the way Adobe Viewer and Firefox interact, that causes Firefox to crash. You'll want to download the PDF (right-click, save as) rather than view it in Firefox. Firefox addons are available help you with this (I seem to remember one called "Nitro PDF"). - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 19:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could download Foxit Reader, which is a much better and faster application; it's free, and it comes with an almost perfect Firefox plugin. - Erik Baas (talk) 21:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Firefox extension PDFDownload offers several options for dealing with PDF document links in web pages. – ukexpat (talk) 19:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help With Deletion

Resolved

How do i get an administrator to restore a page to my userspace so that I can work on it. My page was on speedy deletion but i have changed and redone it excluding any language which could be regarded as advertisement. I would also appreciate if i would run the new edition through someone who can look at it to determine if it is passable before i save and upload it.Wamaina (talk) 20:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:WWMPD which leads you to CAT:RESTORE. --Teratornis (talk) 20:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Teratornis for your response. I have decided to contact one admin. to provide me with the copy of deleted articles for redoing.

I am not sure how that will work. Wamaina (talk) 21:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Userfication which will lead you to same place. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 21:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all for your help. Have written now awaiting the admins response. Wamaina (talk) 21:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see from Wamaina's discussion with the deleting admin that Wamaina is well aware of the issues with this page, and I therefore just restore it to User:Wamaina/The Village Market.

BTW, what's the correct way to do it? The way I did it right now was by copying and pasting the text, because I couldn't see a way to restore it to a different name. — Sebastian 22:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It cannot be restored directly to a different name. Restore it, move it (leave a redirect behind so the actions can be traced later), delete the redirect. Copy-paste destroys the page history and should generally not be done unless you email it. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - I see the point about the page history. (It now looks like I was the first contributor - I hope people won't think it was me who wrote it.) I will fix that. — Sebastian 00:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Moving a page#Fixing cut and paste moves might be worth skimming. --Teratornis (talk) 02:29, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Teratornis! Luckily it wasn't that complicated in this case, since the move target had no history other than my erroneous paste. — Sebastian 08:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all of you for your help in this discussion. Teratornis and especially Sebastian.Wamaina (talk) 14:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Making a "stub" for a topic.

How do I create a "stub" for my wiki page that was deleted ("New Energy Movement"). I just want to preserve the title while I edit the article to be more WIKI-worthy. I got the idea from another user who was the driving force behind getting the article deleted. I'm terribly strapped for time and only wish to reserve the title New Energy Movement for now.John W. Cornett (talk) 22:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need to "reserve" the title. There is no hurry. Just work on the article in your own time, perhaps in a user space subpage. Once you have an article that establishes the notability of the subject, and cites reliable sources you can create it again with that title. The only thing that could happen in the meantime is that someone else might create such an article with that title. In that case you could help by editing the article to improve it, add references, etc. -=# Amos E Wolfe ^talk #=- 22:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to the AfD, your original article was an unencyclopedic essay full of original research. And it was not just one person who thought so. Before you spend time writing a new version, be sure you understand that Wikipedia does not publish original research or personal essays. There is no way to reserve a title, and I agree with Amos E Wolfe that there is no need to do so. —teb728 t c 23:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OR for WP policy on original research. – ukexpat (talk) 19:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adding images to the user page

How do I include a personal picture on my user page without uploading it to the Wikimedia Commons? Is it permissible to upload a picture to the Wikimedia Commons for the sole purpose of displaying it on one's user page? Minetruly (talk) 23:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you don’t want to upload to Commons, you could upload to the File space of English Wikipedia. In either case you would have to license it under a license that allows anyone to reuse it for anything. —teb728 t c 23:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:User page#Images on user pages. An image can only be displayed if it's uploaded to either Commons or the English Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:21, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And if an image is appearing in user space, then it has to be freely licensed no matter where it's uploaded to. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 22:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Based out of"

Resolved

– ukexpat (talk) 21:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As in "the company is based out of Dubai". Is this standard American English or is it horrible in any variety of English? Should I always change to "based in Dubai" etc.? Itsmejudith (talk) 23:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are probably both acceptable in all but the most formal forms of American English, neither sounds wrong to my ears, but I would hedge towards the latter if I were concerned about being pedanticly correct. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Based out of" sounds like a midwestern idiom. Or maybe it is slightly hip-hop. See Straight Outta Compton and Straight Outta Lynwood. English is a tough old language, but one wonders if it can survive the never-ending assaults. --Teratornis (talk) 02:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Midwestern? I've heard this in several places and not all of them were in the midwest. But yes, I agree with Jayron. Dismas|^(talk) 04:29, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree too. Where in doubt, I prefer the more commonly used phrase. In this case "based in". - Mgm|^(talk) 09:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded, in my experience the "based out of" usage is solely an American English form, same goes for "outside of" as in "located outside of Philadelphia". IMHO both should be avoided. – ukexpat (talk) 19:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good, I'll keep changing to "based in", then. Strange that "in" and "out" can be synonyms, but there's no accounting for idiom. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

English is like that. Think of "up the street" and "down the street"... Mean the same thing. Or "pissed off" and "pissed on". Because, whenever I am pissed on, I am invariably also pissed off. c'mon people. That was a little funny. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It could also be a hybrid of "based in" and "operates out of". The second may be a more appropriate phrasing in some situations. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 22:40, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The people who know for sure are based out of Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language. --Teratornis (talk) 09:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pre tags help

Is there a way so that a pre tag can scroll? Like

blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah

but make that scrollable? kind of hard to describe, sorry.--Speakleft1 (talk) 23:29, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Like this?

blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah

— Sebastian 23:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, just adding "height:40px;" or whatever does exactly what I want. Thanks for showing me that, didn't think of it.--Speakleft1 (talk) 00:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]