Wikipedia talk:Reference desk/Archive 38

message: yeah. --Dweller 22:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Dweller/Dweller's Ref Desk thread of the week award]] - Sixth award 

message: See the comments above. I wrote a script to add a navigation box to the bottom of the RDs for convenience, and put my various tries at WP:RD/TOOLS. Check em out. I didn't want to put them in a subpage of my userpage, because maybe other people have scripts to share? --⁪frotht 03:32, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference Desk Tools 

message: I toned down the language in this template, which is nominated for TFD. Please feel free to evaluate it and change it if necessary. bibliomaniac15 04:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't the text intended as a reply on the RD pages themselves? It now sounds like something to put on a user talk page.  --Lambiam 10:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Dyoh]] 

message: Click here to learn more about it. a.z. 18:07, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: March? What does this have to do with anything? --⁪frotht 05:01, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The cycle is repeating itself. See this. a.z. 05:03, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  And what purpose does it serve to make that association? Rockpocket 17:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  So people don't freak out. It's to tell them that they can relax because everything will eventually be OK. A.Z. 02:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whew thanks for pointing that out, I was getting mad :[ Why do people think they need to remove these questions? If people answer, they're the ones breaking the rules. Can't we just reply "sorry can't give advice" instead of censoring questions? The correct form is "they edit question sections we edit only our own answers" not "we edit both question and other peoples answer sections", and while we have the technical ability to edit out of our bounds, it's bad netiquette. So stop :X --⁪frotht 23:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe your comment is just part of the historical cycle. Gandalf said "If it follows previous patterns, the current debate will reach a peak soon and then die down in a week or two." Maybe reactions like yours make people stop deleting questions. Then, after some time, they feel comfortable enough for starting to delete questions again, so the cycle continues. A.Z. 04:19, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The reference desk historical cycle 

message: Can someone review this comment and figure out what (if anything) User:65.163.112.225 is complaining about?  I'm currently on the R/V Wecoma in the middle of Dabob Bay with not nearly enough bandwidth to properly investigate.  Thanks. —Steve Summit (talk) 06:54, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind. —Steve Summit (talk) 07:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  little archiving help? 

message: We have a winner --Dweller 09:21, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Dweller/Dweller's Ref Desk thread of the week award]] - week 7 winner 

message: Should we have a list of regular contributors to the Reference Desks? I think it would be useful to have it in case you're working on an article in need of expertise. bibliomaniac15 00:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You should be looking for :Category:Wikipedians who contribute to the reference desk (except none of the regular contributors seem to have added themselves to it). Rockpocket 02:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're working in an article in need of expertise, I think it would be best to contact the contributors at the reference desk. A.Z. 02:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Me, I'd say "no".  I'd say that WP:OWN applies just as strongly to the Reference Desks as it does to the rest of Wikipedia.  And of course there's already a perfectly good way of contacting the regular contributors at the reference desks: by posting a question at the reference desks! —Steve Summit (talk) 02:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree. It's much better than trying to figure out which contributor can help with which subject, and then asking them for help on their talk pages. On the reference desk, everyone gets to know what your question is, and everyone can help. A.Z. 02:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In regards to the category cited by Rockpocket above, maybe one of the reasons people don't add their names is that they're unaware of the existence of the category.  That was certainly the case in my case until now.  Categories are a feature of Wikipedia that I have a rather distant relationship with, I must say.  Is there a way of being alerted to new categories as they get invented?  --  JackofOz  —Preceding comment was added at 12:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty much not, I should think, unless whoever invents the category has the gumption to alert those likely to be intersted through a talk page which those people are likely to see. A historian might be able to tell us if that was the case with the category in question. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Well I popped myself into the category. Can't do any harm. Lanfear's Bane | t 15:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of contributors? 

message: And the Computing Desk gets off the mark. Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Computing#EMail_ID_-_3rd_post --Dweller 13:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For people who don't frequent the C desk, this guy has been asking for personal info about that Playmate for awhile.. age, weight, etc --⁪frotht 23:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Dweller/Dweller's Ref Desk thread of the week award]] - Eighth award 

message: Can someone go to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives add the appropriate links for October, November, and December 2007?  Thanks. —Steve Summit (talk) 05:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Steve, I was about to ask but didn't want to divert attention from the above! - hydnjo talk 16:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Done. Took a while to find where the section was hidden... Call me crazy, but I expect an 'edit' button to allow you to edit a section :) Skittle 19:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks!  (And I confess it was that same hide-and-seek issue that daunted me from just doing it myself...) —Steve Summit (talk) 19:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Fixed :O --⁪frotht 23:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's hidden here, but don't tell anyone. Skittle 00:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I already fixed it what more do you want from me >:( --⁪frotht 02:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What? After you said that, I had a look and thought you'd just taken the 'edit' button out. I assume I missed something. My reply was more to Steve, and to my future self in case I wonder where the page is again... Skittle 07:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yah, I did. Those aren't actually sections, they were just spots where the original page designer used  to size his font, which produces a header, and apparently when transcluded produces a broken header. It was some bad code that I fixed. If you want me to actually add real sections I can do that too :x --⁪frotht 13:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's fine now, but I'm wondering whether a link to the editable pages might be handy somewhere. Seriously, the only way I could find them was through Google; I wondered whether they were deliberately obscure! We are going to need to edit them again in a few months, so being able to find them is useful. Skittle 16:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, yeah transclusion syntax is a little obscure. If there's no namespace given then it's in the Template: namespace (which they were in before I moved them) and if it starts with a single forward slash then it's relative to the current (sub)page. --⁪frotht 19:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  little archiving task 

message: Big it up for the f**king brilliant Languages Desk. () --Dweller 12:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur, good f•ck•ng choice. (I can't believe I missed this thread, I f•ck•ng love swearing me). Lanfear's Bane | t 12:44, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that a quote from a Viz character? Roger Mellie? --Dweller 14:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh no, that's just me typing and sounding a little Welsh, I rarely read Viz. I just love swearing, it puntucates speech so wonderfully. You can have profanity serve as noun, adjective, verb, whatever you need, for instance - "F*ck that f*cking f*cker". Beautiful. To think people assume that those with poor lexicons abuse profanity to cover their ignorance. I love the c**t word even more but I save that for special occasions. Lanfear's Bane | t 14:45, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Which reminds me of a joke - Four letter word, ends in u-n-t, and is another word for a woman. That's right, a-u-n-t.
I feel that I should point out that when you bowlderise the word by using asterisks you aren't actually swearing :-( If you want to say fuck just do so, it's a fine olde english word and our article on it is very informative. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 00:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I suspect you've not yet read the thread I gave the award to. --Dweller 16:03, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right on the button. Ignore me I'm an idiot. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Naa, you're just hum*n. :-) --Dweller 09:32, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dweller's ninth award 

message: I recently was bold enough to remove what I took to be a question soliciting medical advice, and caught some crap for it. Actually, it was a question solicting medical advice. Thing is, I see one practically every day on Science or Misc, and I feel a crusader-like urge to sweep them away in keeping with The Guidelines (caps added for irony). Am I the only one who sees it? Please look at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#Lights_at_night_appearing_.27blurred.27 on Science and tell me why that is not another of these questions. --Milkbreath 16:06, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the answers were probably OK, some were definitely not.  The answers of the form "You have medical condition X" are clearly inappropriate.  Friday (talk) 16:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (EC) I don't think it is a medical advice question, so much as a question of human physiology. If someone asked why they had spots before their eyes when feeling faint, it would be fine to direct them to the Phosphene article. For all I know there is an article on the visual effect the OP is querying. Clearly it would be possible to answer the question so as to give a diagnosis or other medical advice, but that would be to overstep the mark. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Yep, that's a classic sign of a request for medical advice.  'I have symptom foo...', 'should I be worried', 'is this caused by disease/disorder bar...' are the Medical Advice Trifecta.  As a compromise, I've left the original question in place as well as the first response which gave (sound) advice to seek the opinion of a qualified medical professional, and added an HTML comment reminding editors not to offer further advice.  If further advice does appear, I'll remove the entire question and replace it with a template in line with the guidelines. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Incidentally, the one-a-day background rate seems pretty steady; it lines up roughly with what I saw when I did an analysis of the problem back in January. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:06, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm with you on this one, Milkbreath. Although I believe questions like this can be partly answered with general, non-medical responses, inevitably someone wades in with an amateur diagnosis. Its better to cut it off at the source when the OP is soliciting medical advice. Others feel its simply just not worth removing some medical questions/answers when it means reaping the whirlwind from disgruntled Wiki-libertarians. However, ToaT has taken the plunge. Brace yourself. Rockpocket 18:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I really thought it was one of those "I see floaters in front of my eyes what are they" type questions - and as such harmless - nevertheless - caution is the better part of valour, or something - I'm sure you did the right thing.87.102.7.57 18:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Preventing Wikipedia (and the Wikimedia Foundation) from getting sued isn't the only – or even the most important – reason why requests for and offers of medical advice are barred from the Ref Desks.  There has been extensive discussion on this topic before; feel free to search through the archives of this talk page for more of it than you'll ever want to read. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I prefer "Taliban", please. I'm of the "Medical Advice Taliban". You sidestep Godwin's Law that way, too. --Milkbreath 17:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical advice 

message: It seems that this discussion has pretty much dried up, probably since this talk page is the only page on which it is referenced. Does anyone have any ideas how better to promote the color discussion page?--VectorPotentialTalk 21:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't mean to be rude, as I know you have gone to some lengths to be inclusive about this (and that is to be commended), but perhaps its time to make a decision regarding the colour issue based on the discussion that is already there. There has been plenty of opportunity for people to contribute and no-one appears inclined to express strong feeling about it. Lets be honest, people who frequent this page are not normally shy about expressing their opinion strongly, yet no-one has done so. I suggest you be bold and implement something. If someone bitches about the changes, then you can point them towards the 6 month long discussion. If lots of people complain then it might be worth reverting, but at least it would stimulate debate on the issue. Alternatively, you could interpret the inactivity as indicating people are happy with it the way it is, but my feeling is that no-one is that bothered either way as long as the colours are not too garish.. Rockpocket 22:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On a related note, does anyone know if changing the name of the header would confuse Scsbot? Right now  is transcluded on all the desks, ideally I'd like to color code all the desks, which would mean putting a different header on each page. --VectorPotentialTalk 00:23, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, no confusion at all. —scs 02:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

text: It shouldn't, considering that it used to transclude /how to ask and answer and changing it to /headercfg didn't break the previous bot. Additionally, the color you changed it to looks terrible :[ --⁪ffroth 00:46, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That means it worked, as I've just attracted more attention to the color scheme of the reference desk than has been paid to it in the last 6 months or so (; VectorPotentialTalk 00:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I undid the tentative change- when you're ready with nice looking color coded desks (very good idea) do it all at once. Remember to take advantage of the flexibility in different colors for highlights and headers, it looks much nicer --⁪ffroth 00:53, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Idea: Try using some of the pastels from the main page. You can see the exact colors used at WP:COLORS --⁪ffroth 00:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've userfied the entire style change discussion, and I'm tempted to tag what's left of it with .--VectorPotentialTalk 20:56, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Colo(u)r Collaboration - Please Help Out!]] 

message: It's unimportant but my question was archived but not placed in unanswered questions - I got not replies by the way - here - Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Computing/2007_October_13#ray_node_traversal_image
I don't really expect you (whoever you are) to go through checking.. so maybe there would be a way to automatically place unanswered questions in the right place - just an idea. Is too impossible?87.102.17.46 20:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a bot that archives the page, , run by owner . You could always ask him if there is a way his bot could differentiate between answered and unanwered questions. To be honest, I don't think Wikipedia:Reference Desk archive unanswered is active anyway , so you would be better off if you took the advice at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives, "If your question has been archived but you feel that it hasn't been adequately answered, copy and paste the archived discussion as a new question." Rockpocket 21:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unanswered questions

message: The links up in the Choose a topic: box aren't hyperlinked at this time (except for "Archives"). - hydnjo talk 23:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed! - hydnjo talk 23:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry :( Laïka messaged me about it and I was able to fix it immediately. I was sloppy --⁪ffroth 23:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing links

message: I think I am hallucinating. The top right part of the page with the quick links to other reference desks has colors now ... multicolor bands. Was it always that way? --Kushalt 14:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia_talk:Reference_desk/Computing#Color_coding_the_desks - apparently it was an attempt to mimic the web design at clubseventeen.com...87.102.16.28 14:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (After EC) It's all new in the past 24 hours or so, though the "Colour collaboration"  (click on multicoloured dot at the top right corner of this page) has been going on for many months. Bielle 14:58, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry, we can't give medical advice on the reference desk; if you think you might be hallucinating, see a medical physician immediately ;-P Kuronue | Talk 15:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:   Hallucination  

message: How can you tell whether a user is a sock puppet? There is a question, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous#stay_or_leave, that was posted twice in the space of a minute (21:11 and 21:12) by an IP address. I and another user deleted one each, inadvertantly erasing both. A minute later, a new registered user posted again the exact same words. The question itself is on its face suspect to my mind, but the circumstances are even more so. --Milkbreath 00:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sock puppetry can be identified by editing pattern or by checkuser. This really sock puppetry though, as its likely that a person who edited anonymously decided to create an account because their question was deleted. The question seems heartfelt enough, if not really appropriate for the desks. I think the answer offered is fine, and we probably leave it at that. Rockpocket 00:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. I thought I saw other clues, too, but no biggie. Murder will out, they say. Thanks. --Milkbreath 01:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'll keep and eye on the account and IP and see of anything out of the ordinary turns up. Rockpocket 01:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sock puppet? 

message: WTF is going on with the RD hedre header? - hydnjo talk 02:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no problem :| And if you're using "going on" in a progressive sense, nothing further will be going on with it unless vectorpotential tweaks the colors a little --⁪ffroth 02:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 'twas a temporary lapse of coherence within the header that was resolved shortly after my post. I'll wait a bit before letting my anxiety rule the keyboard again ;-) - hydnjo talk 10:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: O ya, 3 or 4 times I had a large change to implement.. I have to have like 15 tabs open and race from tab to tab hitting Save page as fast as I can but until I get to that last tab it's messed up. And of course it's really not fun when things don't work after the massive change.. I don't exactly have time to debug, I have to race through every tab again reverting my edits and it takes like 5 agonizing minutes knowing RD users are seeing a giant explosion of wikicode :P So yeah I'm not surprised that someone tried to load a page while things were unstable. --⁪ffroth 23:55, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Header problem

message: In the banner at the top, I'd like to suggest the relevant name (Humanities, Computing, etc) be put in ALL CAPITALS, or at the very least, in Initial Caps, to help the name stand out better and lower the risk of people asking questions on the wrong desk.  --  JackofOz 06:37, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome to the HOMEWORK HUMANITIES Desk. (Sorry, sorry, one of my bugbears). I don't know about this idea, I mean it does say Wikipedia:Reference desk/Name of Desk at the top of every page. Lanfear's Bane | t 12:40, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it does, and that strengthens my case, actually.  We have, eg. Wikipedia:Reference desk/Mathematics but "Welcome to the mathematics reference desk".  Doesn't that seem inconsistent to you?  It does to me.  --  JackofOz 02:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

text: It's lowercase because it doesn't make sense to have a random cap in the middle of the sentence --⁪ffroth 15:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it makes a lot of sense.  And it's far from random.  It's capitalising the one word that identifies this particular sub-page of the overall Reference Desk, and distinguishes it from the other sub-pages. --  JackofOz 02:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I think it doesn't make sense. In the interest of neutrality, here's a link to the configuration page. The "fullname" field for the desk objects controls exactly what appears there --⁪ffroth 05:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I won't be making any changes without a consensus.  Seems I'm a lone voice here.  Ah well, it was ever thus with geniuses like me ...  :)  --  JackofOz 05:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I get what you mean (I think). I suppose it depends on whether you think of it as just one of many references desks, and it happens to be on mathematics, or whether you think of it as The Mathematics Reference Desk. Skittle 15:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly.  I'm thinking from the perspective of our users, here.  Wikipedia can sometimes be a bit of a minefield for the uninitiated (and not only them, either), and just that extra squidgeon of reassurance that they've come to the right page to ask their question would be a positive thing.  If the ref desk in a real-world library was physically separated into different sub-desks, one for Humanities, one for Mathematics etc, each sub-desk would have a sign telling users which one it was.  That sign would not read "mathematics reference desk", but "Mathematics Reference Desk", or even "MATHEMATICS Reference Desk".  At the very least it would be "Mathematics reference desk".  I'm simply suggesting we emulate that here.   --  JackofOz 23:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Welcome to the WHATEVER reference desk

message: I've removed four duplicate questions in the past couple of days, and I know others have removed dupes too. I just wondered if anyone can think of a reason for this sudden spate of them. They don't seem to come from the same user. Could there be  something awry with the posting procedure that people are not understanding? Or could there be a bug somewhere?--Shantavira|feed me 08:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is very slow of late. (Maybe meant as an incentive for people to donate?) A result might be that people post a question, can't see it saved before their patience runs out and then decide to post it again without checking if the first save actually worked. Because it's especially the saving that is slow, or at least appears to be. Later it turns out the edit has been saved, but there is no feedback. DirkvdM 10:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the new RD colours. They are clogging the gears of knowledge and slowing Wikipedia as they have to be handpainted from behind your screen by "Evil Wikifaeries" (not Wikifairies, those are good). Down with pastels. Take off every zig. For great justice. Lanfear's Bane | t 11:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was actually worried about that since I added several kilobytes of pre-expand include size, but after doing the math it's really irrelevant compared to the massive size of the desk content itself --⁪ffroth 18:31, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I doubt they're submitting full page edits since it's unlikely they'd know ==the syntax== for making a header line. The RD has so many problems I think because it's edited so often- caching is barely any good since I bet there's an edit for every 5 or 10 views max.. with other pages performance problems are barely noticed because only the first person after an edit experinces any slowdown before it's cached, but here we sort of get shafted :[ --⁪ffroth 03:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate questions 

message: Well, something is (or somethings are) definitely wrong.  There've been a bunch more duplicate questions, and while slowness causing inexperienced editors to multiply submit is certainly a plausible explanation, it's odd that there are so many of them all of a sudden.
I'm also having horrible problems with the archiving bot.  At first I thought it was just because my DSL seems to be going south, but now I'm wondering how much has to do with Wikipedia wedgitude.
The bot is getting a "server error" on almost every single edit it submits.  The edits seem to be going through okay anyway, but every time I get one of those errors, I have to double check to see that nothing got screwed up.  (This isn't just paranoia: the bot has screwed up a couple of the desks recently for this reason.)  But having to double-check everything kinda defeats the purpose of having an automated bot in the first place, and it's a miserable nuisance when Wikipedia and/or my own corner of the network are so slow.
Some of the desks haven't been archived in 2-3 days, and are now twice their usual size.  Unfortunately it's the larger ones, so the problem is exacerbated.  And I'm starting to wonder if the problem isn't exacerbating itself in more ways than one: the server errors I'm getting seem to be correlated with submitting an edit to an entire long page (as opposed to a section edit).  If this is true, the problem is only going to get worse: the longer a page gets, the harder time the bot is going to have archiving it, and the longer the page will get.  If there are inexperienced editors doing page edits instead of section edits, they're probably getting lots of these server errors, too, and if they're assuming from the error message that they need to resubmit their question, that would explain the duplicates (since, as I said, despite the server error messages the edits do generally seem to be going through).
Anyway, enough rambling.  But if anyone has any more ideas or tips about what might be going on, please share them.  (I haven't had any luck so far with either the wikitech mailing list or IRC channel). —Steve Summit (talk) 01:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt they're submitting full page edits since it's unlikely they'd know ==the syntax== for making a header line. The RD has so many problems I think because it's edited so often- caching is barely any good since I bet there's an edit for every 5 or 10 views max.. with other pages performance problems are barely noticed because only the first person after an edit experinces any slowdown before it's cached, but here we sort of get shafted :[ --⁪ffroth 03:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  getting worse 

message: 50% consensus is unsettling for an idea I wasn't sure would work well in the first place.. I removed the rainbow of tabs, which incidentally allowed the 'external' parameter to actually work. So it's a good thing, sort of. Dirk seems determined to start votes for every change, so expect those soon I guess.. I don't really see any potential problems with the way things are now (especially no problems with the lack of inconsistent, ugly, redundant icon page :/) so I won't be asking for opinion or changing anything for awhile. Of course if there's consensus that the color coding idea is stupid then I'll remove it; I mean that I won't be making any additional changes. Ya so the rainbow is gone --⁪ffroth 21:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: remove the colours are still present in the side bar. One recognisable colour would do on the side bar, or none at all. I can barely see the colour indicators, and have no use for them.87.102.94.157 12:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  pony rainbow removed 

message: Does anyone know why things are so bloody slow tonight.  Posts are taking forever!  Clio the Muse 00:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the servers are being flooded with donations! - hydnjo talk 00:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If by "flooded" you mean "one every 48 seconds" then yes. However, since the servers manage to cope with about 30,000 pages being viewed every second plus 175 edits every minute...I think they can cope with the extra load of one contribution every 45 seconds!  But, yeah - wiki has been S-L-O-W today. SteveBaker 01:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually by "flooded" I meant to make light of this annoyance that is frustrating for all. :-)  - hydnjo talk 01:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just over on the wikitech IRC channel, and while no one there seems to know what's going on, either, I did learn that the hit rate is now up to 40k/sec... —Steve Summit (talk) 01:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad to hear it's not just me.  Last weekend, I couldn't edit at all, not even to come here and ask what was happening.  I just timed out time after time, so I gave up and did something else for 2 days.  It's still extremely slow, but (just barely) tolerable.  --  JackofOz 01:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I've been having a lot of trouble too.. the header pages take a bit of power to process the first time (before they're cached, after which there's no delay) and with all the slowdowns my browser is likely to time out before wikipedia actually returns the page :/ Lets hope things pick up soon. Donations seem to be progressing sloooooowly, I doubt that's it. Let's get bought out already so we can afford some decent hardware :/ I wouldn't mind ads all over the place since I'd just adblock them.. --⁪ffroth 03:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snail Pace 

message: How about someone putting a couple of links here to facilitate side-by-side comparison (Froth?). - hydnjo talk 15:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Frothed Unfrothed. I like it with the icons, though I think they could use being redrawn in a slightly less cheesy way. --140.247.43.151 16:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I forget, do either of those come with a double shot? - hydnjo talk 18:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh, and I definitely disagree that the links there should be enthusiastically burned. - hydnjo talk 19:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed header change discussion

message: From the amount of debate that the color changes have generated, it seems only fair that we revive the color collaboration so that all those who expressed oppose votes, and even those who didn't can participate in a discussion to help select the new colors for the different desks!--VectorPotentialTalk 19:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't that what we just decided with no concencus for change? - hydnjo talk 19:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If anything there was no consensus period, I don't see why we can't just start over with different, perhaps more subtle colors.--VectorPotentialTalk 19:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

text: There were always colors, the header was never white to begin with.--VectorPotentialTalk 19:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No no, the discussion was about desk specific color differentiation, not about the other colorations which may be part of the boilerplate. - hydnjo talk 19:47, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In which case people are free to discuss anything color related, whether it's the color of all the desks, one of the desks, whatever. I've restored all the defaults for now, after a week I'll recolor all the headers based on whatever consensus exists on the color collaboration page, whether it's for one solid color, or a dozen different ones.  If no one chooses to express their opinion on that page, then it makes my job easier as I'll just impose whatever colors I feel look best, then we can have another frenzied vote here on this talk page to decide whether it stays or goes.--VectorPotentialTalk 19:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hehe awesome. Meanwhile I'll work on those colored tabs (see below) and give you something to work with on that front --⁪ffroth 20:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Colo(u)r Collaboration - Please Help Out!]] part 2 

message: from  Wikipedia:Reference desk/Colo(u)r Collaboration - Please Help Out! part 2
Is this the way to go - quote from above section If no one chooses to express their opinion on that page, then it makes my job easier as I'll just impose whatever colors I feel look best, then we can have another frenzied vote here on this talk page to decide whether it stays or goes.--VectorPotential
How about a request for comment here. I have lost my sense of humour.87.102.94.16 13:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about, instead, you read our policies about contributing, specifically WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. There is no need for the phrasing in this section title, and there is certainly no need for comments such as this. I'm leaving a notice for you here because you appear to have a non-static IP and may not get a message on a talk page. We welcome all contributors, those with accounts or not, but please be aware if you continue to use such aggressive language on the Desks then your contributions will begin to be reverted. Thanks. Rockpocket 19:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stop f------g people about

message: User:Gurch took it upon himself to (badly) transform all header code to (broken) flat code and transclude it on all desks, replacing the working already-flat code that I implemented last night, then blanked the entire header and nominated it for speedy deletion on the grounds that it was bloated, so that somehow fills an imaginary WP:CSD of his. So that's why for most of today every desk has shown up as Miscellaneous and random spaces were all around the header.. Let me repeat: while sever performance problems continue, the header has already been replaced with fast, flat (unmaintainable) code hosted from my userspace to keep things running smoothly. Leave it alone! This is ridiculous. -froth
:I think you're trying to own the header a bit too much.  Friday (talk) 20:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly.. ó_ò --⁪ffroth 21:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: header woes

message: Ents Desk finally gets off the mark --Dweller 11:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference Desk award, week 10 

message: When the header code had a bug, several questions ended up posted on the article C instead of their intended destination(s).  I have moved them all to WP:RD/Misc, that seemed better than trying to assume which desks they had been intended for.  I imagine they might get my name on them from SineBot, I'll try to deal with that if/when it happens.  --LarryMac | Talk 20:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah everything's fixed with the flat headers now, sorry. Sinebot shouldn't sign them as long as they're actually located on WP:RD/Misc, since it's not a subpage of Wikipedia:Reference_desk.  --21:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misdirected questions 

message: :== WTF just happened to this article? ==
:Has someone linked it prominently from a help page as a joke or something? Posts from newbies asking how to do stuff keep showing up at the bottom – Gurch 13:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, turned out to be a mind-boggling display of incompetence over at the Reference Desk – Gurch 14:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: So you'll be a Reference Desk Regular, commissioning new sections in C. (which defies all template conventions!) -Wooty [Woot?] [Spam! Spam! Wonderful spam!] 01:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL! A.Z. 01:50, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

text: It's a conspiracy. --⁪ffroth 16:54, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Read this, and laughed with tears rolling down my cheeks. Poor, poor Gurch! SaundersW 22:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ambiguous indenting = flattery for all! --⁪ffroth 03:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: From [[Talk:C]]

message: What's up with this thread on the Science Desk? The questioner doesn't know the difference between a turbofan and a ducted fan and catches a bunch of grief over it.—eric 04:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Grief"!  My goodness, it seems to me that 64.236... got more than his money's worth. Some back and forth amongst the responders but hey, no disrespect to 64.236... If anyone was abrubt (or short tempered) it was the OP and not those doing research in an effort to provide answers. 04:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After reading that fascinating thread twice (Dweller, are you listening?), I have to agree : There were plenty of excellent and focused replies and a little bit of annoyance by volunteers. The annoyance was caused by a little bit of petulance by the OP. Nothing troubling, no bells went off in my head. I thought the question was handled very well. ---Sluzzelin talk 05:30, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe i'm way off base here, but i thought it pretty clear that the questions he was asking were about an aircraft with twin ducted fans vs. a conventional helicopter: would it be called a 'helicopter' and why hasn't such an aircraft been built? Nobody bothered to answer these questions and instead he gets informed that the reason we don't see two small enclosed props providing lift instead of a typical main rotor is -- they're too small and the rotors for some arcane reason have been enclosed in some kind of gigantic and heavy-looking donut-shaped fairing...ugly, heavy, radar-reflecting and ultimately pointless fairings. The 'OP' had a lot of trouble expressing his question, but i don't think we can say that it was handled well until someone actually answers it.—eric 16:02, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It may be lost in the noise, but Steve and I both went back to that initial question somewhere in all that (and really, the initial responses addressed it quite well, too).  Yes, it would probably be called a helicopter, and it has been built (more or less) but it's a lousy design.  The thread then moves into the hows and whys.  In fairness, I suppose the actual sequence was "it's a lousy design" followed by "here's an example where somebody tried this, but it wasn't worth repeating".  I suspect my annoyance is that referenced by Sluzzelin, and it comes mostly from my perception that the OP wanted to hear that it was a great forward-thinking design, and why won't those idiots at the Air Force get on it?  But yes, most of the thread moves into details (and I find the whys and why nots of those details far more interesting than the basic is/is not posed originally). — Lomn 14:19, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I also thought the responders got a bit sidetracked by talking about incidental details in the pic, instead of staying focused on the core issue, although the Q was eventually answered properly.  I've noticed a tendency of many to focus on incidentals and ignore the real issue.  For example, if someone asks "what's the best way to remove a nail from the wheel of my car", the OP deserves a response on how to remove a nail from a "tire", not just insults for confusing the "wheel" and "tire" and a prolonged discussion of whether the term "wheel" also includes the "tire".  I may join is such a discussion myself, on occasion, but we should try to limit this, as it doesn't relate the OP's Q. StuRat 17:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with that.  We should remember that the primary purpose of answers is to be useful to the person who asked the question.  It might be good in that example to explicitly say "I assume you mean there is a nail in the tire rather than in the actual wheel, here's what you can do.." just to be clear.  But, we shouldn't nitpick the question in ways that don't help answer it. Friday (talk) 17:17, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course addressing the question has priority. Sometimes the question is vague or contains false premises. Context may be helpful, so might untangling common misconceptions. I guess it depends on one's definition of "nitpicking", but I only saw one (admittedly harmless) nitpicker in that thread, and it was none of the volunteers. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the name for this kind of aircraft, and why don't we make them? 

message: Eddymania7 20:14, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't really get very many video game related questions, occasionally we'll get a "HELP HOW DO INSTALL MY XYZ VIDEO GAME MY VVINDOWZ IS BROKEN IT WONT INSTA11!!1!!" type question, but those are pretty easily handled by the computing desk.--VectorPotentialTalk 20:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Besides, the last thing we need right now is more desks, we're already over specified, the last new desk created was Entertainment (which also covers video game questions quite well) and hardly has any traffic as it is.--VectorPotentialTalk 20:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The top level header for Entertainment lists: Popular culture, movies, video games, and TV shows (emphasis added). hydnjo talk 20:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

text: ????--VectorPotentialTalk 20:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

text: HOLD ON WILL IT TELL ME HOW TO MINE FOR FISH --⁪ffroth 18:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video Games 

message: I am blown away by the farsighted responses of Wikipedians on the issue of Baby computer OS. even though I am not the OP, I would award a barnstar for the answer about wooden blocks. Congratulations, Sean and SteveBaker! Regards, --Kushalt 03:14, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I too think the answers were great, and I'll collaborate by adding this link to the thread so talk page visitors can read it. A.Z. 03:22, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But are blocks Turing-complete...and can they run Linux? -Wooty [Woot?] [Spam! Spam! Wonderful spam!] 09:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These  and a wooden spoon compute! hydnjo talk 21:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baby computer OS 

message: I think this is the farthest back (23 November 2001) I've ever found an incarnation of the Reference Desk- I have no idea (and no way to tell) where it was before this (the talk page was very helpfully deleted last month by an enterprising sysop), but apparently the help desk was moved to wikipedia:Help desk in 2002 by the original creator of the mediawiki software (so says the Wikipedia help desk page history, but Wikipedia:Help desk has no intact history before 2004), but a few days later Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous showed up on the scene full of the same questions we saw in 2001. We have no history for Wikipedia:Reference desk prior to 2005 (when apparently it was split into Miscellaneous, though that seems to conflict with the fact that we have history for Miscellaneous 3 years earlier) but it DID exist before our oldest copy- the page log at least shows protection activity 3 months before our first diff. Also if anyone cares I tracked down for User:Ruud Koot the origin of the "ask a new question by clicking here" that was causing problems with the flat headers- it dates back to January 2004! He found the exact point where the code was added that ended up breaking things though: August 2005- a few days (I think) after the rd header was separated into "How to ask and answer" --⁪ffroth 23:52, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Goodness, with no headers how could our prehistoric Wikipedian ancestors understand the questions being asked? --S.dedalus 19:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There were giants in the earth in those days Algebraist 22:11, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or more appropriately, In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes. Dark, daaark times. --⁪ffroth 02:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Of Historical Interest 

message: What's the problem with the rat question? Granted it isn't very "scientific" and perhaps a bit naive, even maybe worded in a way which is a bit impolite, but invalid or rude? I'm not seeing it, are you suggesting the question is too stupid to ask? You know what they say about stupid questions.. Vespine 23:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was posted by a perma-banned troll. When he gets up to his old tricks everything he contributes gets deleted. Rockpocket 00:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This should give you a clue where he was going with this. We ask that WP:RBI be the standard response forthwith. Rockpocket 00:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah right, I got the stu rat reference, I thought it was a pretty harmless quip, didn't know the user had a "history". That's fine.. Vespine 00:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's obvious who it is *rolls eyes* --⁪ffroth 00:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: From WP:BAN "Any edits made in defiance of a ban may be reverted to enforce the ban, regardless of the merits of the edits themselves. As the banned user is not authorized to make those edits, there is no need to discuss them prior to reversion." --⁪ffroth 00:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rat question unsavoury? 

message: We get these boy loves girl questions all the time. We could practically have a dating desk! I wonder why we almost never get girl loves boy questions. I guess women just innately know how to handle these things. --S.dedalus 19:34, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or fewer women think that an online encyclopedia is the right way to solve all their problems? Algebraist 22:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't remember seeing any girl-loves-girl or boy-loves-boy questions either.  -- JackofOz 22:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember a boy-loves-boy question.. it turned out rather badly IIRC- the recipient of the love was less than flattered --⁪ffroth 02:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Women innately don't have to deal with these things. They are the sexual gatekeepers, they can just sit back and accept or reject courtship offers made to them... The onus is on the males, hence we get more boy-wants-girl questions, its simple evolutionary biology. -- Diletante 22:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hence the spiders in the bath; poor things.  The wandering males make a very nice meal for the girls, though!  Clio the Muse 23:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Boccaccio's Decameron, Fourth Day, Ninth Story: Sir Guglielmo Rossiglione makes his wife eat the heart of her lover, Sir Guglielmo Guardastagno... Xn4 00:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I said much the same thing at WP:IRC a few days ago and the women disagreed with me :/ --⁪ffroth 03:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Girls do have to deal with these things, but why would they think an encyclopedia is the place for advice on the matter? If you look at magazines aimed at teenage girls or women, or some chatrooms, you find a lot of discussion on these topics. I find it baffling that anyone would think 'I need to get a girl. I know, I'll ask at the reference desk of an online encyclopedia.'. The only time I've been tempted to do anything close is to ask how to get rid of a guy who wouldn't leave me alone :) Skittle 09:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: As a bloke I'd disagree with you, you're assuming woman just want sex and don't mind where it comes from. I'd think that most woman have specific interests, and may have courtship offers, but not from people they'd like. And from the ones I know at least less inclined to give to the urge to just do it because they haven't in a while, or whatever. ΦΙΛ Κ 14:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a psychology class or 3. You can believe that we see more boy-wants-girl question because men are stupid, as Skittle and S.dedalus are saying. Or that they simply face more competition and therefore more pressure when finding a mate. Let me crack open my animal behavior textbook to the evolution of human behavior chapter, "Male-biased operational sex ratios mean that males inevitably face stiff competition for females with fertilizable eggs. In turn the abundance of sexually active males should enable females to choose sexual partners" (Alcock, John. Animal Behavior: Seventh edition) Males face more competition, its a biological fact, therefore we see more questions from males. Sure women face competition, but it is not nearly as great, so we are less likely to see questions from them. We see alot of general self-help and life-advice questions, why is it suprisign that there are relationship-oriented questions? -- Diletante 17:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Did I say guys are stupid? That would be rather self-abasing of me. :) I have trouble understanding why anybody would ask total strangers for advice on their relationships however. (No offence to users who patiently answer these questions.) --S.dedalus 23:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Has anyone considered that fact that it might simply be because the overwhelming majority OPs asking any type of question are male? I bet less than 1 in 10 of the questions on the desks at the moment were asked by a female (probably nearer 1 in 20). Thus, irrespective of any sex bias for dating questions specifically, one would expect many more from a male perspective than from a female. Rockpocket 17:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Did I say men are stupid? No, because I don't think that. What an odd thing to think. I do think that asking for romantic advice on the reference desks is a bafflingly odd thing to do. But whatever reason there is for the gender disparity, it is not because girls don't have to deal with these things, which was the bizarre assertion being made. And I don't know of any evidence that the majority of question-askers are male, certainly not the extreme shift that Rockpocket is proposing. But then, some of the women I know adopt male personas online (to avoid the negative attention they can get), and I've noticed people tend to assume neutral personas are male, so I don't find it surprising that someone would think most people they met online are male. Skittle 18:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The (admittedly limited) evidence that is available suggests those who contribute to Wikipedia are largely male (88% male; 10% female according to the largest study). Whether there is reason to think the sub-culture of the Desks significantly differs from this is open for discussion, of course. Rockpocket 19:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. What's the link (as in URL)? Skittle 13:23, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Somebody has to ask, and it might as well be me . . . what are the other 2%?  --LarryMac | Talk 19:34, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I was waiting for that.... the other 2% declined to disclose their sex. Rockpocket 19:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The point is that women can have sex with pretty much whoever they want but men have to work for it, not that women don't mind where it comes from --⁪ffroth 18:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Only in the most general terms. Otherwise this guy would be rather busy. Rockpocket 20:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dating advice on the desks

message: <noinclude>
Good idea / bad idea? To be used to replace the text deleted from a medical enquiry. Comments please. Lanfear's Bane | t 14:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks great as a template.  Won't resolve the underlying tension over removing medical questions, unfortunately. — Lomn 14:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good template, but not much use until people realise the difference between asking for an explanation of something (which should be acceptable) and asking for medical advice (which is of course unacceptable). DuncanHill 15:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is room for honest disagreement about which is which, of course. — Lomn 15:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've opened a discussion on the specific point to which (I think) DuncanHill is referring; see the next section. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The template looks fine. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to jump ship and agree with Sluzzelin; we don't need to loudly draw attention to a question that isn't there anymore.  We just need to indicate – politely and quietly – to whomever posted the question why it was removed. We're not trying to punish or chastise, merely to correct.  Perhaps it would be a good idea to incorporate a bit of this text into the  template, though. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Gotta agree with that myself, I just wasn't aware there was a nice little template already available. Lanfear's Bane | t 21:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Medical Advice - Template Strawpoll 

message: :Regarding
:*Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science#Anomalous hair and
:*Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2007 October 23#Anomalous hair
To respond to DuncanHill's concern raised above, I agree that there's nothing wrong with asking for an explanation of a biological phenomenon.  Indeed, I doubt that there's any disagreement around here on that point.  However, asking for an explanation of a specific individual's symptom (as in, "I have noticed strange thing foo happening with my body, what could cause that?") crosses the line into medical advice.  The poster at that point is looking for diagnoses to explain his particular condition.  One can call them 'explanations' if one prefers, but it doesn't change the fact that the individual may choose to make medical decisions on the basis of our advice and response.  In this case, we ought to tread particularly carefully, since it's obvious that we're not even dealing with an adult.
In a section further up this talk page, I gave some examples of questions that sought medical advice and compared them to questions that simply were on a medical topic.  I hope that that discussion will help to clarify the boundary.
On a meta-discussion note, I would strongly urge all the participants here to confine their discussion of appropriate versus inappropriate questions to this talk page.  There's no reason to slug things out on the Ref Desk itself—it just confuses our readers and seems to encourage edit warring and incivility.  This is why we have a talk page in the first place. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:51, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding your apparent desire to ban all "I have noticed strange thing foo happening with my body, what could cause that?" questions, there are many such questions which are not medical advice, like "why did my hair change from straight to curly at puberty", "why isn't my body as flexible now as when I was a child", "why am I taller in the morning than in the afternoon", etc.  These are basic biology questions, and don't relate to any abnormal medical condition, just like hairs that keep on growing. StuRat 16:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mr. Rat has a point. All I can think of is that his examples were generated by his common sense, which tells him which questions are general and which are not. And we can tell by reading his examples that they are innocuous, again according to common sense. No list of rules or guidelines will ever cover all cases, and even if it could nobody would read it. The present guidelines are sufficient if we apply the same common sense we're applying here. --Milkbreath 17:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: StuRat's comment got me thinking, that and my smart-ass comment below. If a person asks "Why did my voice get deeper when I hit puberty?", that is a general biological question. If they ask "Why has my voice gotten deeper over the past year?", that has to be seen request for medical advice. I think that a good rule of thumb might be that if we would have to ask for more details about a personal biological issue in order to give a good answer, then we shouldn't answer at all. Counter-examples, anyone? --Milkbreath 18:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Hidden comments also confuse readers! But a good and fair point about trying to confine this debate to the talk page. One of my concerns is that editors unfamiliar with refdesk rules and etiquette may be discouraged by the removal of their question with no attempt being made by the deleter to explain a better way of casting a question. As many refdesk questions come from new or unregistered users I feel that sometimes this verges on bitey behaviour. Many people, especially those from a less academic background, will feel more confident in phrasing questions in a personal way, eg "I have noticed such and such, what causes it?" instead of asking "What is the reason for the occurance of the such and such phenomenon?" The question that has got me so worked up is about variations in body hair. I find this a fascinating question to which I would love to know the answer. I find it hard to believe that anyone would regard this as a medical question - most people do have such hairs, and I would certainly never dream of wasting my doctor's time by asking him about it. DuncanHill 16:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's all very well and good, however when you break it down to it's simplest form, it constitutes medical advice when they ask for a diagnosis of symptoms. We are not permitted to provide a diagnosis and therefore it is better to remove the offending question rather than leave people the option to answer regardless of the rules. You never know what it might turn out to be, even a minor symptom of something simple could be shared with something life threatening, we just don't know. And therein lies the rub. Lanfear's Bane | t 16:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The Amercian Cancer Society list "excessive hair growth" as a sign of cancer. Sure, that seems not to apply to a single hair. But, then again, maybe it does. And maybe such a hair is diagnostic of an inherited metabolic deficiency. Maybe the hair in question is sprouting from scar tissue. Hey, there's an idea, why don't we go back and ask for more particulars? What is your pulse rate and rectal temperature? Have you been exposed to any chemicals indentified by the State of California as Really Bad Stuff? Did any of your grandparents exhibit abnormal hair growth or the astonishingly poor judgement it takes to ask a bunch of strangers you can't even see for medical advice? --Milkbreath 17:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: For what it's worth, there was actually sound reasoning for the hidden comment (now unhidden, it seems).  I was hoping to discourage further comment on the thread without a) seeming to claim the last word for myself and prompting someone to start a silly pissing match, and b) starting a metadiscussion on the Desk about matters that belonged here on this talk page.  Oh well. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mystery hair advice 

message: Anyone know why the science desk is apparently in :Category:Wikipedians with BA degrees?  I can't seem to find the link that's causing that.  Someguy1221 19:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because of this Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2007_October_24#Honey. DuncanHill 19:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Lambiam for killing that. Algebraist 21:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not medical advice, finally 

message: I have such a strong desire to say "Meh" that I'll probably sound like a sheep. There's such a need for so many people to recover some perspective, you're way past WP:TEA... You've inspired a new essay WP:BOSTON TEA PARTY. --Dweller 14:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent - thank you! As someone who enjoys something of a mystical communion with Camellia sinensis, properly fermented and infused, I have often wondered how much happier the world might be had our colonial cousins had a proper tea pot. DuncanHill 15:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Brilliant! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll have a cup and give DH two sugars in his, sweeten him up. I'm still not quite ready to hug him. :) Lanfear's Bane | t 16:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How did you know I like 2 sugars? Well brewed too, and full cream milk. Proper job! DuncanHill 16:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

text: You guys are jerks!! I suggest we dress up like Indians and throw this thread into the harbor.  Friday (talk) 16:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Outstanding! We're overrun with brits—'bout time we reminded 'em where they are and let 'em know what they can do with their damn tea!—eric 18:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  We all know exactly who likes to drink sweet tea. I'll stick to the colonial type thankyouverymuch. Rockpocket 01:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

text: This is america, we're far more likely to be overrun with grits :) --⁪ffroth 04:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Hey, guys, Dweller is right-this is NOT America!  So, you Rebels will just have to get used to the idea that the 'Hessians'-and their tea-are here to stay.  So, back to Valley Forge with you all!  God bless King George and give strength to the Tories.  Clio the Muse 23:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Negativity and argument on this page