Miscellaneous desk
< April 2	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 4 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference 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 reference desk pages.

April 3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurie_Baymarrwangga

Hello,

I have a specific question relating to this biography - it states that Donald Thomson photographed Laurie Baymarrwangga on Murrungga Island in April 1937 - I simply wanted to ask the author the source of this information and whether the photograph is published?

Kind regards,

David — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.108.157 (talk) 00:42, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

You should ask this at the Help desk.

Overall your answer is here: The source is Donald Fergusson Thomson, OBE (26 June 1901 – 12 May 1970) Australian anthropologist and ornithologist.--Freshman404^Talk 09:19, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can also contact with the writer here.--Freshman404^Talk 09:26, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Searching multiple locations on Craigslist with just one search

When you are searching for things on Craigslist, you start out by selecting the area (state, city, etc.) in which to search. Is there a way you can search for an item of interest in many cities/states at the same time? Or perhaps a search nationwide? I tried to do so, but I was not able to figure it out. If I was trying to find a relatively rare or obscure item, I would like to see if that item is available anywhere at all. I certainly don't want to do a search city-by-city, or state-by-state. Any way to do a more comprehensive area search? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:23, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Searchcraigslist.org does this through a custom Google Search. --— Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:59, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Amazing. Thanks. I never knew that existed. Thank you! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:14, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the above tip. I use this all the time, now. Many thanks! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:07, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New font/font size?

Has Wikipedia changed the font/font size that it's pages are displayed in recently? Looks much bigger/chunkier and more readable to me. Or is it just me? 202.153.41.162 (talk) 21:33, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just you but I don't find it more readable. --TammyMoet (talk) 21:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See this piece in the Signpost: Why we're updating the default typography for Wikipedia. --— Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:01, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like it. 82.44.76.14 (talk) 22:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC) They changed it; now it sucks.50.43.180.176 (talk) 22:27, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

At least it's not Ruin3d 4EVAR. - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 08:02, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is the name of the new font? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:50, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That depends on what operating system you're using and what fonts are installed. Your browser will pick the first available font from Arimo, Liberation Sans, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, or a generic sans-serif font. --Carnildo (talk) 01:11, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a former professional non-fiction editor, I've always thought that san-serif typefaces are a poor choice for reference works, because the numeral one (1) and lower-case letter el (l) are often indistinguishable, not to mention lower case eye (i) at low resolutions. Zero (0) and capital oh (O) can also be problematical. Admittedly these aren't problems in whatever particular font I'm currently seeing. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 13:35, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which... shows up on my display. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:54, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I did not have an italic version installed. I added Arimo. ... Now Carnildo or anyone, what serif fonts does it choose from for headings? → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 16:15, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The heading font list is Linux Libertine, Georgia, Times, or a generic serif font. --Carnildo (talk) 02:56, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fairly ugly. Was the "community" consulted about this, or did they just go ahead and do it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:22, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's been in beta for ages.

I don't know if they conducted surveys or anything, but there was certainly a lengthy process. APL (talk) 18:18, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"the numeral one (1) and lower-case letter el (l) are often indistinguishable": I would claim the opposite, that these are most problematic on Courier-style fonts and some poorly designed serif fonts. However, capital "i" and small "L" are problematic in sans-serif if the font doesn't specify different stroke weights (or if the renderer ignores them). I like sans-serif for both headlines and body, BTW.

The variable stroke width of the new serif headlines looks really ugly IMO; it's much more extreme on Firefox/Windows than File:New_typography_Vector_Linux_Ubuntu_Firefox.png suggests. Is there a way to get the old sans-serif font back?

How to override the changes — however, it only seems to work on that file itself. WP articles and this RD item still have serif headlines.

Changing Vector was a crime; they should have called it Vector 2014 while keeping Vector. - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 08:02, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]