Help desk
< June 16	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 18 >

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.

June 17[edit]

Tep Zepi[edit]

What is Tep Zepi? What link does it have with the ancient Egyptians? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.137.142.146 (talk) 01:03, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. GB fan (talk) 01:08, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You could also try a Google web search. This tries to avoid pages about the band: "Tep Zepi" "First Time" Egypt. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:15, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology of Taiwan, please check for syntax[edit]

I'm new to wikipedia. I've done 5-10 somewhat minor edits and am working on my first major contribution. Please check it for syntax etc. (It's in my sandbox). Keep the following in mind as you do: 1. It is intended to replace this subsection in its entirety. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan#Etymology 2. It is intended to serve as the basis for the (yet unwritten) main entry "Names of Taiwan." 3. In the second part, there is a lot of "stuff in parantheses" that is my "shorthand" for a citation I am about to add. 4. I use the same 4-5 sources again and again but have not learned how to "ibid" a repeatedly-used source. (but I'd love to learn) 19:55, 17 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Long island bob (talk • contribs) Long island bob (talk) 19:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Subscription/Daily Article[edit]

I am not receiving the Daily Article. I am subscribed to it but do not receive it.

Dhanima (talk) 01:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.5 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. GB fan (talk) 01:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know what "Daily Article" referred to but I made a search and found https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/daily-article-l. I'm not familiar with the feature but maybe something there is of help. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:20, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Accidentally creating a duplicate article[edit]

Over the past two hours, I created the article on Ron Bruder. However, apparently the Wikipedia search engine conked out on me, because after a bit more digging, I found that he already had an article at Ronald B. Bruder. Looking through them, I kinda believe that mine is probably better, COI issue on the other one notwithstanding. So, would it be wrong of me to initiate a merge with my information in the forefront and pieces just taken from the other? And which name is more proper to be used as the article title, his full name (Ronald B. Bruder) or the name that most of the reliable sources call him (Ron Bruder)? It's fairly exasperating doing all that work on it and realizing another one already existed. :/ Silver seren^C 03:15, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added a merge from tag to Ron Bruder and a merge to tag to Ronald B. Bruder. You know more about the topic than me so do you want to start the discussion here? Ryan Vesey (talk) 03:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to work on that. Thanks for all the help. Silver seren^C 03:39, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c x2) Yes, you can do a merge; follow the instructions at Help:Merging#Performing the merger. It is crucial for copyright attribution that you note the merge and provide a link to the other article in both article's edit summaries—the one upon the merge, and the other upon the redirection. Though there's not a very large disparity, it does appear from Google Books and New Archive searches that Ron Bruder is the the more common name, and I see the merge has been suggested by a third party into the more recent title. I always favor the article with the older and more extensive page history as the merge target, but the older article here is not very old and not very extensive. In any event, were the merge done the other direction, it can still be moved to the other name via a history swap. Although in practice it is suggested that merges be discussed, the process is very, very broken and really is only needed when the merge is not clear cut; not two articles separately started about the same topic. You can be bold.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:40, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think i'll first make sure any different information and references in the Ronald B. Bruder article is transferred over to the Ron Bruder article. And then i'll get someone else to do the actual merge so I can see how to do it properly. Would you mind if I came and asked you to do it once i'm done moving content? Silver seren^C 04:09, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure I'll do the merge, no problem, but not until tomorrow night. I'm about off the bed and this will have to be a selective paste merger so it won't be a two second thing. There's a conflict in your statement. The merge itself is the moving (and harmonizing) of the content. It is that process that requires the copyright attribution, so if you "first make sure any different information and references in the Ronald B. Bruder article is transferred over to the Ron Bruder article", you've done the merging; if that's not contemporanously accompanied by the attribution requirements, then you've violated copyright.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, at the moment, i'm just going through the references. Using those and formulating my own sentences from them isn't violating anything right? Most of the info in the Ronald B. Bruder article, if any, won't be actually copied over word for word or anything, since almost all of it is unreferenced. I think i'm just going to take the references and that's it. Silver seren^C 04:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't copy any content—if there's no content that's worth transferring over—then you're not doing a merge and you don't need to follow merge procedures at all. If no merge is done, you can simply redirect the better article to the other.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I mean, the information that is different in Ronald B. Bruder is either unsourced or its sourced to a primary source, such as the EFE and Lighthouse.org. Funny enough, as i'm looking through the sources like CNN and TIME, i'm finding lots of information about him that isn't in that article. It really points to a COI issue when instead of adding the information in the refs, unsourced info is added that just makes it read like a resume. Silver seren^C 05:18, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation[edit]

Admins, what is the most elegant way to resolve the Gangway disambiguation: DAB, and move the original article, or DABLINK on this page? Please see my comments in the source code. Thanks for your help --GoneWalkabout (talk) 05:32, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-admin) Considering that there are three subjects on the DAB page and none of them seem more significant, notable, or more likely to be viewed than the other, I would say that the band info should be moved to Gangway (band) and the page itself should stay a DAB. Silver seren^C 05:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts exactly. I have performed the move, and created the disambiguation page. Alpha Quadrant ^talk 05:42, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought so :) Very impressed by your speed, Alpha Quadrant. Thanks. --GoneWalkabout (talk) 05:56, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the incoming links for you. DuncanHill (talk) 07:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help restoring a deleted category[edit]

Recently someone emptied a really useful category without discussion of any kind. Category:Lists of dukes which has its counter parts in Category:Lists of princes, Category:Lists of counts, and Category:Lists of monarchs. Can it be restored robotically or something because I don't want to track down every single article it use to be on?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 07:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can request a bot at WP:BOTREQ. Alternatively you can use WP:HOTCAT or WP:AWB. Regards.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫_{Share–a–Power}^{[citation needed]} 07:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found a cached version of the page in Google (link, screenshot). It does indeed seem to be empty, was that all it contained back then? As it is a list of lists (it's not a list of dukes but a list of lists of dukes), manually restoring would probably be the best way. I doubt there are many lists of dukes in Wikipedia.-- Obsidi♠n^Soul 08:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'tis restored. And it has a significant number of entries. Need to investigate those sub-categories. Said user seems to have decided to single-handedly re-organise the nobility cats, see the appropriate WikiProject talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 09:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]

I stand corrected. That's a lot of dukes. o_O - Obsidi♠n^Soul 09:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And a lot of them need Sort Criteria. There are a lot under D (from Duke or Duchy as the first word and L for List as the first word. I'm going to try to add sort criteria equal to the Dukedom or the area that it is under. Looks like I've got my next project. :)Naraht (talk) 16:02, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done.

Little help here[edit]

Could someone fix the template I've added onto Talk:Dubset.com please? Island Monkey ^{talk the talk} 08:18, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The words "FirstProjectBanner" etc in Template:WikiProjectBannerShell/doc are only placeholders, and should not have been included in your edit. I've partly fixed your edit; you need to decide which music project is most relevant. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial link for an international only product[edit]

User talk:Doug Coldwell#Removed commercial link
Can you explain further to my reply on my Talk Page why a commercial link for an international only product is still NOT allowed. Thanks for replying to Bob.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied.-- Obsidi♠n^Soul 12:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find out how to request an article.[edit]

I have searched for over an hour on how to request an article. You have lots of information but there are no directions such as "submit your request here!" Just a lot a verbage. I want an article about Richard Trout, American Author of 7 YA adventure novels. Here are legitimate references.

http://www.oklahomachildrensauthorsandillustrators.com/
http://blogs.oc.edu/vision
http://www.richardtrout.com for national reviews and educator references

His books are required reading in dozens of school systems nationwide. Two of his books were selected by National Geographic for the Jason Project Science Curriculum. His first novel, Cayman Gold, was selected by Accelerated Reader for their summer reading project out of hundreds of contenders. His fourth novel was finalist for book of the year at the Oklahoma Center for the Book and the Writer's League of Texas Trout is author in residence at Oklahoma Christian University. He had 7 novels published by Pelican Publishing Company. RTrout99 (talk) 11:59, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like to write the article yourself, you can go to WP:AFC, if you want to suggest an article be created, but don't want to write it yourself, go to WP:Requested articles. Quasi human | Talk 12:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Centenial Place Calgary Inaccurate height info[edit]

Please review building height with building stats.info page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.144.90.59 (talk) 14:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed to match the references used. See here. If you were thinking of another more reliable source, please provide the link here. Thanks.-- Obsidi♠n^Soul 15:09, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Ross consultant entry[edit]

Once again the entry within Wikipedia about me is being used as a means for personal and professional attacks.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Ross_%28consultant%29

I am a well-known cult expert. Members and/or supporters of groups called "cults" periodically use Wikipedia as a vehicle to attack me personally and/or discredit my work.

This has been ongoing for years.

Various "edit wars" and controversy has surrounded this entry for some time. One editor linked to a cult group "Jayen466" was ultimately banned from making further edits concerning this entry.

Periodically new editors appear attempting to slant the entry as negatively as possible. They will focus on whatever negative aspects of my life and work they think will skew the entry the way they want.

This is now being done by new participants "Porfiry Petrovich deux" and "FWest2" who appear to be working together to make the entry read as critical and negatively as possible.

Please look into this matter.

It is wrong for Wikipedia to be used this way.

Rick Ross www.rickross.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.97.155 (talk) 14:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First, it would be better to report problems of this sort at WP:BLPN rather than here. Second, I've looked at the article and have done some rewording of one section. I need to look at it some more, but it would be helpful, rather than making generalized comments about negativism, if you would highlight assertions in the article you believe are either unsourced, inaccurate based on the sources, or are WP:UNDUE.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Linking custom search URLs from our company website[edit]

So I'm using custom URLs to link to specific breeds of dogs and cats on Wikipedia.

Currently I am using a url that looks like this:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search/<<Breed Name>>

It works great when the name of the Breed is the exact name of the Wiki Page, for example the breed 'Cocker Spaniel' works perfectly. (Cocker Spaniel Wiki)

But some breeds are more ambiguous, like 'Pomeranian'. In that case it doesn't bring you to the right page. (Pomeranian Wiki) If you change it to 'Pomeranian Dog' then it works (Pomeranian Dog Wiki), but when I add 'dog' to Cocker Spaniel (ie 'Cocker Spaniel Dog') then the search for that one doesn't work and I no longer go directly to the Cocker Spaniel page (Cocker Spaniel Dog Wiki).

So my question is how can I make a URL to search within the context of another search? For example, I would search for 'Dog' and then of those results, search for the breed. This would greatly increase the quality and usefulness of my custom URLs.

Any help with this would be greatly appreciated!

thanks! -Brian — Preceding unsigned comment added by DownstairsB (talk • contribs) 15:45, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that this is possible (there are others who would know better than I), but would one possibility to do the search with Dog and then without and report back the result that is actually in the Mainspace? Also, I think, the reason that Pomeranian Dog works is that Pomeranian dog is a redirect to Pomeranian (dog). You may want to go through Category:Dog breeds to see which ones have disambiguation suffixes like Pomeranian does and perhaps handle those separately.Naraht (talk) 18:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problem on the Mein Kampf Page Discussion; " Editor" Saddhiyami[edit]

This "Editor" is not qualified to make determinations of relevant info on the discussion page concerning Mein Kampf, This Editor has made comments threatening to block access after a post to the discussion board pointed out the incompetence of this Editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.108.164.2 (talk) 17:42, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on the Mein Kampf pages were not appropriate for the talk page there. They were not about improvements of the page. Please read WP:FORUM for the appropriate use of the talk pages. The removal of your comments were appropriate and I have also deleted your most recent as a personal attack. And before you start commenting about me being Nazi-loving, you might want to know that I lost family in the Holocaust.Naraht (talk) 17:59, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Viewing another user's watchlist[edit]

According to a line in the "Watchlist" part of Special:Preferences, if someone else knows your watchlist token, they can view your watchlist. I only use my main account on my own computer, to avoid password theft; as I'm on a public computer right now, I'd like to view my main account's watchlist, but I'm not sure how that works. How can I use the watchlist token to view the other account's watchlist? Nyttend backup (talk) 19:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to do what you are asking, but if you go to your raw watchlist on your main account, you can copy the information then log in to your public account and paste it in the same page. Ryan Vesey (talk) 20:07, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can use a watchlist token, see Special:Preferences#preftab-5, but I have no idea how to do it. – ukexpat (talk) 20:15, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the watchlist token thing is what I was asking about. Since I change the contents of my watchlist frequently, the raw watchlist copy/pasting wouldn't really help much. Nyttend backup (talk) 20:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I figured out exactly how to do it. You will not be able to view your watchlist on your other wikipedia account, but rather through an RSS feed I am using Google Reader. Go to your preferences and to the watchlist section (the link provided by ukexpat). Use the default value or add a value. For now, I am using 1179. Then, go to your watchlist. Click on the button with that says Atom and has the RSS feed picture. (On the left side of the screen in the toolbox at least on the vector skin) Use the link provided at the top of the page, mine is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=feedwatchlist&allrev=allrev&wlowner=Ryan+Vesey&wltoken=1179&feedformat=atom. Paste that link in the section of site you intend to use. For google reader it says "Add a subscription." You can use my link to check out how it works. Please inform me once you have checked the link and figured out how to make it work so I can change my watchlist token. I hope this helps. Ryan Vesey (talk) 20:30, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the feed will not appear as it does in the link I provided once you paste the link at the top of the page into a reader. Ryan Vesey (talk) 20:32, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help! Your words didn't take very long to understand; when I followed your instructions, I got a page similar to the one to which you linked, except obviously that it was my watchlist rather than yours. Nyttend (talk) 21:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology of Taiwan please check for syntax[edit]

(sorry, I meant to post this at the bottom) I'm new to wikipedia. I've done 5-10 somewhat minor edits and am working on my first major contribution. please check it for syntax etc. (It's in my sandbox). Keep the following in mind as you do: 1. It is intended to replace this subsection in its enteirety. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan#Etymology 2. It is intended to serve as the basis for the (yet unwritten) main entry "Names of Taiwan." 3. In the second part there is a lot of "stuff" in parantheses" that is my "shorthand" for a citation I am about to add. 4. I use the same 4-5 sources again and again but have not learned how to "ibid" a repeatedly-used source. (but I'd love to learn) 19:56, 17 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Long island bob (talk • contribs)

Please don't use "ibid" itself; we have other features that allow you to work in a similar fashion. For an example of how these are used, see John L. Nichols House, in which I made nine citations to one source and eleven to another. Simply choose a name for your citation and then type it as follows; I'm going to use the first citation from your sandbox as an example. <ref name=wiktionary>{{cite web|title=Taiwan Etymology|url=http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Taiwan#Etymology|work=n.wiktionary.org/wiki/Taiwan#Etymology|accessdate=June 16, 2011}}</ref> When you want to use that citation another time, simply type <ref name=wiktionary /> and it will produce the same citation. If you're using a print source with multiple pages, and you want to cite different pages, the ref name feature that I just explained doesn't exactly support that. However, you can simply leave out the page number in the citation and instead use the {{rp}} template immediately after the citation; if you want to cite page 35, you'd type {{rp|35}}. For an example of how that works, see the Nichols House article, where I've used this template several times. Nyttend backup (talk) 20:07, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, please note that the name for the citation is meaningless, and readers will not see it unless they view the code: for the example citation that I gave above, calling your citation "wiktionary" would work just as well as calling it "fgbrisbgriosdbuygiodtbgiodbgiob". Please be aware (1) Ref names must be one word, unless you enclose it in quotes; <ref name=wiktionary page> does not work, but <ref name=wiktionary> and <ref name="wiktionary page"> are valid. (2) Ref names cannot simply be numbers, although if I remember rightly, a number in quotes is workable. (3) Ref names are case-sensitive. Nyttend backup (talk) 20:15, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thank you Nyttend backup. I will try to digest that and apply as appropriate. I'm new here and I appreciate the kind of help you are providing. Overall, are the structure of my proposed edits okay? Long island bob (talk) 20:15, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitionary, being a dictionary that anyone can edit, is not a reliable source, especially for something potentially contentious. – ukexpat (talk) 20:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TY Ukexpat. Understood. I will cite the source cited by Wiktionary, instead of citing Wiktionary itself. Eitherway, the original author I'm citing is a reliable (but not bulletproof) source. (1971 was a weird time in Taiwan, and not all articles dating from then can be trusted.) Anyway, please check my sandbox for form (syntax). Long island bob (talk) 20:38, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation within disambiguation[edit]

Tutu is a disambiguation. There was formerly an article called Tutu (god), about a Mesopotamian deity; however, there is also an article on Tutu (Egyptian god). Neither is clearly more or less important than the other, so I moved the Mesopotamian article to Tutu (Mesopotamian god). However, Tutu (god) is still a redirect to the Mesopotamian article, which is pointless. Should that page be deleted (because Tutu already covers the two gods named Tutu), or should it be turned into a sort of sub-disambiguation listing the two gods? A. Parrot (talk) 21:10, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree, bring Tutu (god) to WP:RFD. Ryan Vesey (talk) 21:22, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Log[edit]

How do I find the deletion log for Lore (anatomy)? It's a newly recreated article that I've tagged for CSD. The talk page says that the talk page was deleted last month per WP:CSD#G8. I'd like to know if, and why, the main article was deleted. Thanks — Fly by Night (talk) 21:53, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article was never deleted. The confusion is causes by the G8 deletion rationale. The talk page was created as a random series of nonsense characters and was then tagged with {{db-nonsense}} at a time when the article did not exist. The deletion rationale did not follow suit by pointing to G1, but G8 did apply—the page it was the talk page of was nonexistent.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, now could you please tell me how to find the deletion log of an article? — Fly by Night (talk) 22:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion log--SPhilbrick T 23:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But is there a way to search for a specific article?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, enter the name where it says "title"--SPhilbrick T 23:30, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm embarrassed I didn't see it. What about a wildcard search and making the search case insensitive? When trying it, it seems that I have to know the precise, full name of the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:00, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An easy way to get all logs (including deletion) for a page is to click on the “View history” tab and then click on the “View logs for this page” link under the page title. So the log for the article is empty, and the log for the talk page shows its prior deletion. —teb728 t c 23:33, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's great; thanks TEB! — Fly by Night (talk) 23:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Using the content from Wikipedia on my website[edit]

I have added an article on my site and would just like to confirm that I have added the correct info to do this. You can see the article at http://www.albertaindustrialheartland.biz/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heckchuck (talk • contribs) 22:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As nearly as I can tell, you do not credit the authors of Alberta's Industrial Heartland. The easiest way to do that would be to link to the article (or to a past version of it). —teb728 t c 23:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thank you. I have added a link back to the article now and all should be good. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heckchuck (talk • contribs) 00:01, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Text View[edit]

Hi, Sorry to bug you with this mundane issue. But Wikipedia, only Wikipedia, appears on my browser as handwritten text. Can you please tell me how to change the font to a more readable style??

Thanks,

Lou ^{[details removed]}

Wikipedia tells your browser to use its default sans-serif font, as opposed to specifying one font in particular. I'm not sure that that's the issue, but I'd start there. If you use Firefox, go to the menu and choose Firefox → Preferences → Content tab → Default font → see if you have the "handwritten text" type font selected. I have mine set to Times. Hope this helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this doesn't work then you can also try to clear your entire cache and tell us what browser you have. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:39, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The OP said he experienced the problem only on Wikipedia, making it unlikely to be a browser issue. That said, the way to get to the Content tab is different on Firefox 4 than the sequence Fuhghettaboutit described. You click on Firefox/Options/Options and then Content. Finally, on my FF 4, I don't even see the possibility of a handwritten text font, at least not by that name.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]