Help talk:Recent changes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
the Wikipedia Help Project  
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of the Wikipedia Help Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's help documentation for readers and contributors. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. To browse help related resources see the Help Menu or Help Directory. Or ask for help on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you there.
 ???  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This page has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

What does this mean?[edit]

Resolved: No comment in 6 months. Libcub (talk) 06:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I've been noticing some positive and negative numbers in the related changes pages. For example, three edits of mine from yesterday:

  • (diff) (hist) . . m 35 (number)‎; 22:05 . . (-32) . . PrimeFan (Talk | contribs) (Removed "in pi at the tenth digit" (not particularly interesting, in my opinion))

This was my edit. Constint 21:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

  • (diff) (hist) . . m 83 (number)‎; 22:04 . . (-69) . . PrimeFan (Talk | contribs) (Restored Akanemoto's version)
  • (diff) (hist) . . m 290 (number)‎; 22:02 . . (-23) . . PrimeFan (Talk | contribs) (Restored Khatru2's version)

What do they mean? In my case, are those negative numbers a bad thing? And how come they change so quickly? PrimeFan 20:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I asked this a couple days ago. It's the number of bytes by which an edit changed the article. Negative means the article got shorter. -Amatulic 23:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Oh, that makes sense. Then negative numbers might not always be a bad thing here. Thanks! PrimeFan 22:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, a bold negative number means the article got a lot shorter (500 bytes appears to be the threshold for bold numbers). This might indicate blanking by vandals, especially if there's no edit summary. -Amatulic 22:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Seems somewhat useful, although I usually just do a quick look-see to find out what was changed. VD64992 07:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Same here. Alex43223 Talk | Contribs | E-mail | C 07:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
The first guess I had when I saw these was that it was a user ranking, so that large negative numbers would warn of trolls/vandals, not sure how many others would jump to the same erroneous conclusion, or whether there is anything that can be done to avoid it sensibly. -- 13:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Past recent changes log?[edit]

Stale: No comments in 1 year. Libcub (talk) 06:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Is there an easily parse-able log of all recent changes of Wikipedia? The database defeinitly has it, I'm just if there are files somewhere. I can watch the IRC channels but I've missed so many years already :-) --Djihed 19:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Chinese help for the English Wikipedia?[edit]

Resolved: Apparently by commenter. Libcub (talk) 06:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

This page is currently not normal, is it?

nvm, un-did this myself now -- 12:40, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

New articles?[edit]

Resolved: Answered question. Libcub (talk) 06:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Is there a place to see the new articles as they are started? Thanks. Steve Dufour 16:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, at Special:Newpages. Libcub (talk) 06:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


What are those green and red numbers for?-KojiDude (Contributions) 01:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I think I figured it out on my own.-KojiDude (Contributions) 01:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I think they should be explained in the Article Rasadam (talk) 12:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Green numbers represent that the overall character (letter) count in the article increased, and red numbers represent a decrease. Admiral Norton (talk) 11:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Moves not bold[edit]

Recent changes to Watchlist items are shown in bold, but if they are moved they are not. Moving of a page is rather an important change and would be good if it was bold if it was being watched. SunCreator (talk) 12:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


The explosive energy of TNT is chemical as in breaking of chemical bonds and therefore a poor example for the mass defect discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:14, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

This post is misplaced - you've somehow found your way to the talk page of one of the help pages. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:33, 30 December 2014 (UTC)