Help desk
< November 12	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 14 >

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.

November 13

(Edit conflict) You can force a table of contents to appear before the first heading by adding the text __FORCETOC__ (FORCETOC with two underscores to either side) anywhere on the page. You can also place the table of contents any where on the page you like by adding __TOC__ where you can it. If you check my talk page, for example, you'll see that I'm forcing the TOC to appear in the table I use as a page header. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You added __NOTOC__ in [1]. And you made it a "featured article" in [2]. I suggest you remove that. PrimeHunter 01:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When an article is in need of a complete rewrite

I just ran across Samuel Guze. Not only has this article been tagged for a lack of sources for over a year, but it's a POV mess. What are my options? AfD doesn't seem appropriate, but it needs to be completely rewritten. Are there any noticeboards for such a situation? Corvus cornix 00:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we have {{rewrite}} which will put it in a category. Sadly there are many such articles. --Sopoforic 00:51, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(what's this?) too close to edit summary bar

Hi. The link I just mentioned is too close to the edit summary bar. Multiple times, I've tried to click on the edit summary bar but accidentally clicked on the link instead, as the page changed in size from finishing loading. This can cause one to lose an edit summary, and at times, a whole edit, if the user tries to click on the back button. Can we please either have the link open in a new window like the editting help bar, or move it just far enough away from the edit summary bar so that there is little chance of clicking on it when you want to click on the edit summary bar? This may even cause some people to discourage themselves from using edit summaries, but that is just speculation. I'm not sure where such a comment is supposed to go, so I'll put it here. I'm also not sure if it's the admins, crats, or devs who take care of this. Please reply, and do someting about it if possible. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 01:02, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Usually, your edit summary and edit should stay as long as you click back in your browser. -- Jack 01:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to propose a software change, you might do it at WP:VP/T. I've had trouble like this (i.e. the page shifting as it finishes loading) too, and I solved it by turning off the javascript editing toolbar in my preferences. If you don't use the editing toolbar, you might try that. --Sopoforic 01:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto the above - I've lost at least one edit that way, and I'm a relatively new editor. I'm a clutz, I just know one of these days I'm going to hit it and lose an important edit. 春Harukaze風 12:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unpublished contribution

How do I cite an unpublished academic paper which substantially challenges and revises the conventional wisdom of published authors cited in an existing Wikipedia article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RHS61 (talk • contribs) 01:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can't. Unpublished papers are not considered reliable sources for Wikipedia, which is a collection of previously published and criticized information. They are deemed original research, which is explicitly excluded from our pages. --Orange Mike 01:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until it's published. If we were able to cite non-published papers, people would claim to have papers and cite non-existing material. There is a reason academic journals have review processes. That paper needs to be put under scrutiny before it can be used as a source. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my contribution

I contributed an article to Wikipedia entitled "Inter-ictal spiking". I am not very computer literate; why are there so many tags attached to my article and what can I do to make it acceptable to Wikipedia editors?

Thank you for your help. --Carriesmom 01:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's only got two tags on it. The most relevant one is the "Wikify" tag. Follow the link right there on the tag, and it will advise you: Wikify! Make links to other articles, format the lead (first sentence), and arrange section headers as described at Wikipedia:Guide to layout. It's also tagged as a stub, which implies that the article needs to be lengthened, probably by putting it into context within the field of which it is a part. --Orange Mike 01:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slight change to article title I just created

Hello. I just created the article, "Barvaux s/o, Belgium" and now realize it might be better searchable as "Barvaux-sur-Ourthe, Belgium". Is there a way to edit the title of an article I created today?

Thank you.

NBuron —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nburon (talk • contribs) 01:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to move the article using the 'move' tab at the top of the page. Note that you may not be able to do this if you have registered your account very recently (within the last 3 days or so). --Sopoforic 01:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moved and fixed up the article. --TeaDrinker 02:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of User Talk pages

If a user is banned and doesn't file for a request for an unblock for over four months, should their user talk page be deleted? I don't see a reason to have one if it is not needed and not used anymore. Thanks! Marlith ^T/C 02:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether you're referring to banned users or blocked users, but either way, the user talk pages are usually retained in case anyone wants to see the history of the page, which would include disputes and/or incidences of vandalism that may have led to their block/ban. The page will often be replaced with an indef blocked or banned notice, but the history should remain generally visible. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 03:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I speak of banned users. Thanks. Marlith ^T/C 05:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For people who weren't around when the ban happened, it is good to be able to read the talk page, so they know what happened. Also, bans are reversible and you don't want to lose that discussion in that case. It is precedent should they get in trouble again. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can others find my page?

I just created a page called "Reading Span and Lexical Ambiguity Resolution." When I type in relevant search terms into the search box, my page does not come up. How will others be able to find my page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashkap813 (talk • contribs) 03:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to try again. I found it at Reading_Span_and_Lexical_Ambiguity_Resolution. It appears that the article has currently been flagged for deletion though, with the reason that "it appears to constitute original research", which, if true, isn't permissible. To discuss this, go to the article's talk page. Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 04:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It shows up in searches now. Wikipedia search had probably not indexed the new article yet when you searched. PrimeHunter 14:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forgotten Break Inserted

I have a question about the search area. I canot see what I am typing in the search box or the subject/headline box of this message it is a thin line. What is wrong? I want to know if it is the site or my computer. If it is my computer how can I fix it?--75.206.84.185 04:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC) Please email me at redacted for privacy Jennifer L.[reply]

I think this is a computer problem on your end. Have you tried a different web browser? --Bfigura ^(talk) 06:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rasmussen Search

I created a page for Jack Rasmussen but when I search under the surname Rasmussen his page does not pop up. How do I fix that?

Ks9887a 05:52, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page exists, but the issue is that there is a disambiguation page at Rasmussen. I've added his name to that page, which should help people find the article. (Also, if you type in the name and click search, it does come up eventually). Best, --Bfigura ^(talk) 05:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it comes up third on the search results here--F3rn4nd0 ^{(Roger - Out)} 06:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How to split an article after someone placed a second article into it.

Sohi was originally created about a graffiti artist, then someone dumped an Indian family name into it. Need to figure out how to split it apart whilst maintaining continuity. I figure it will require keeping Sohi as the disambiguation for both new pages Sohi (surname) and Sohi (designer). Thank you. Oh Snap 06:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds about right. There's details on how to go about doing that here. How to move a page also might be useful. --Bfigura ^(talk) 06:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

about ultrasound eqipment

59.96.200.112 07:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)what is a sono ct in ultrasound eqipmet can you guide me to test and repair an ultrasound[reply]

The Help Desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. You might try at the Reference Desk. GlassCobra 07:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyvio

The plot of the film Slattery's Hurricane appears to be identical with that at TCM, but how can you tell if they copied us or vice versa? And is there a copyvio issue? Clarityfiend 08:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A website that has the same text as Wikipedia articles could probably be a mirror site of Wikipedia, and can generally be found listed at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. As for this case, possibly a copyvio, I'm not sure, will look into this now ...PeaceNT 14:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turner Classic Movies doesn't appear to be a mirror website; that material's been removed, I'll leave a note on the creator's talk page to see if they have the free license. PeaceNT 14:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help training

Hi there,

I'm brand new on wikipedia, putting together a website for a work project. Ridiculous deadline but it's been decided that this is the best software to use for the job. So my question is - what is the best and most time-efficient way to train up in this. I have been reading the masses of information available here but I can potter in the sandbox forever and get nowhere methinks.

Can anyone suggest a categorital, structured way to train? I am not a techie. Fluent in HTML and such and have been able to work in php etc over the years because there are similarities to work from.

Any help appreciated. Have been to the tutorial sections... no joy in organised training. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teetotaler3 (talk • contribs) 10:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I left you a welcome message on your talk page which contains many useful pages for newcomers. I hope this helps. -- Jack 11:56, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are interested in the MediaWiki software itself, you might want to take a look at the MediaWiki site rather than Wikipedia. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 15:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist bugged

My many of the articles on my watchlist have recently been replaced with spam (eg: HAGGER?????????????). How can i get my old watched articles back? I dont think its as simple as reverting the page

Jesus On Wheels 11:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It happens when a page you watchlist is moved by a vandal, for example, see here (that's a returning page move vandal, btw) In that case, the new page is automatically added to your watchlist, but your original page isn't lost, so no worries. :) You just need to cleanup the watchlist and remove those unwanted titles. Best, PeaceNT 14:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign citations

What do I do if the citation I need is in another language? There was a BLP dispute over whether a Japanese musical artist wished to keep his date of birth and age private. The user who raised the initial question provided a citation for it, but it's in Japanese. I can read just barely enough to see the part which does state that the artist's information is private. I'd like to make the change, but how would I cite it? 春Harukaze風 12:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might use Template:Cite web normally as you cite sources written in English. Just add Template:Ja icon before that reference, like this {{jp icon}}. :) I hope this helps. PeaceNT 14:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is the English Wikipedia, English references are preferred, but when those are not available, one in another language will do just fine. I'm not familiar with Japanese law, but if this personal is actually a famous musical artist, I don't see how they can consider their birthdate and age private (one would know the second if you know the first anyway). Can you expand on the part you understand from the source? - Mgm|^(talk) 22:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The BLP policy states that we should follow an individual's preference not to have the exact date of birth listed, but not (as I understand it) to hide the age or the year~~/month~~ if that can be cited to a reliable source. so, if this is someone trying to hide the fact that they turn 40 soon or something, they're out of luck; the policy is for preventing identity theft, not concealing age. —Random832 20:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: The article is Yoshiki (musician). —Random832 20:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pensioner

what is a bona fida pensioner —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.191.89.80 (talk) 12:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See bona fide and pensioner. I think it is somebody who is collecting a pension they are rightfully entitled to. Have you tried the Humanities section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps.. PrimeHunter 14:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External Link / Dieticians Continuing Education

Dear Wikipedia Staff, Please allow me to introduce you to premier continuing education provider on-line for healthcare professionals nationwide. We work and provide top healthcare sectors with continuing education based on scientific research and accredited by nationwide accreditations. CEU4U can be found through external link for Social Workers called The New Social Worker however not directly. My question to Wikipedia how to appear directly as an external link for Nursing, Psychology, Social Work, Dietitians, EMS/Firefighters, Dialysis Technicians and Counselors? I look forward to your reply. Sincerely, Leonard Shamis, COO <email removed> <phone number removed> www.ceu4u.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.72.207.211 (talk) 14:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure what your question is, but I'll try to cover several possibilities. If you're looking to create an article for your company or add information on your company to existing articles, be aware of Wikipedia's policy on conflict of interest and neutrality; creating an article about something you're so closely associated with is generally discouraged. Also make sure any article you create is sufficiently notable and well-cited. Otherwise, the article could be considered spam or advertising and might be deleted.

If you're asking how to create a link, either external or internal, or how to place a page in a category, see the instructions on how to edit a page.

Also, a quick note on Wikipedia's editors. Wikipedia is run almost entirely by volunteers. There are very few people who could actually be considered staff of Wikipedia, and it's rarely necessary to contact them. Anyway, I hope this answers your question. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 15:13, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, external links sections are not a place to promote your educational facility. Wikipedia is an international project and if everyone did that, those sections wouldn't be maintainable. Only add links to articles where the link is directly related. I recommend discussing things on the article talk page of the relevant articles with the people who edit them regularly. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've removed your email and phone number because, as stated on the top of the page, this page is very visible throught the internet and we cannot reply to you by email or phone. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 01:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox problems

Could someone fix {{Template:Infobox Algerian Province}}, I tried to make the capital show up onto the template and it worked, but now every page that it is transcluded in is stuck with "{{#if:|" at the top. Any help appreciated, thanks. Rudget _zŋ 16:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P:S - Even though I've loads of edits, I still don't understand infoxboxes :S

I changed it and I think it works now. Arthena^(talk) 17:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There still seem to be some problems, for instance at Batna Province, but I think that is unrelated to the capital... Arthena^(talk) 18:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On a closer look, that seems to be caused by the article not using the proper syntax to call the template. Arthena^(talk) 18:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, on behalf of me and Escondites. Rudget _zŋ 19:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling Blunder !!!

I would just like commend you on taking the task of localizing the power of wikipedia to so many languages ...however i would strongly suggest taking the help of at least one native speaker . I can say this definitely for my mother tongue "Hindi" (National Language of India). I was shocked and extremely appalled to find such a grave error. The spelling of Hindi (in traditional script-devnagari) is spelled " Hien-di" (the real spelling is Hindi -there is one extra alphabet introduced in the spelling ) I am not sure whether it is generated by a software or by an ignorant translator, nonetheless it is just wrong and disrespectful !!!

R.Singh

Where is this? - I wish to correct it! :) Rudget _zŋ 17:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This might be about the Jimbo fundraiser video. I heard there was a spelling error in it. Arthena^(talk) 17:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not then... Rudget _zŋ 19:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, this seems to be about the spelling of "Hindi" overall. Well, either a software limitation or otherwise, it seems that the general population spells it "Hindi". Therefore, we cannot change, say, Nanking Massacre to Nanjing Massacre simply because the English-speakers called it that, and since Wikipedia is in English, and the sources are in English, we cannot change it that easily. It is possible to include special characters such as accented letters, etc, in a wikipedia page title, but if the general population (and thus most of our sources call it "Hindi", we can only call the page link "Hindi". However, if there is a reliable source, we can include the traditional spelling and any other correct spellings in the article. Also, your point seems unclear, do you want to see it spelt "Hindi" or "Hien-di"? Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 01:27, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What does the earth consist of

15.181.15.254 17:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Help Desk is for questions about using Wikipedia only. Please ask your question at the Reference Desk. GlassCobra 17:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or go even further to, Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science. Rudget _zŋ 17:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wiki warning on copyright violation for uploaded portion of USGS map

I recently uploaded an image showing a portion of a USGS map:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Topo_Eldorado_Mtn.jpg

The wiki site (automatically I assume) posted a warning that sufficient information was not provided for copyright and that the image would be removed in seven days.

I tried uploading several times, and I uploaded under the path for works by the U.S. Government. In fact, the pull-down menu included a specific reference for USGS works. I also tried to fill in all the fields, but the warning kept coming up. In fact, if you visit the page, the warning is still in place.

Any suggestions on how to fix? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Netoe (talk • contribs) 18:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you selected USGS in the pull-down menu it should have included the copyright info automatically, but it seems something went wrong. You can manually add the usgs license info by putting {{PD-USGov-USGS}} on the page. This will not cause the deletion notice to go away immediately, but it should prevent deletion, and the notice will go away in time. Arthena^(talk) 18:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question of legality

If a citation is source of questionable legality, should the information be removed until such time as a legal source can be obtained?

A specific example for this: recently, episodes of a certain television show have been leaked online, and many fans have seen the episodes. Various pages related to the show have been updated with information from these episodes. Most or all of these edits have been reverted. Is this the correct thing to do? The episodes will air in approximately two weeks, at which time the information can be legally cited. Should we wait on posting this information?

I believe a precedent was set regarding the leak of the seventh Harry Potter book, where the information was withheld until official release. However, the situations are not identical, and I would like to hear the verdict of more experienced Wikipedians. Thank you. 春Harukaze風 19:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I, personally, am confused about your question. I am thinking it might have something to do with WP:SPOILER? - Rjd0060 19:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the question is whether a content addition is acceptable if the only way to verify it is by engaging in an illegal act (in this case: downloading the episode). Arthena^(talk) 19:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issue before release of Harry Potter 7 was that there was no way to be sure the leaked version was the real book and not fan-fiction. I would think that with television shows, it would be pretty difficult to fake the real actors, so there's not much doubt that leaked copies are identical to what will air later. That said, plot information is still theoretically subject to the verifiability policy as much as anything else in Wikipedia: if something is challenged, the eventual choices are to source it or remove it. ~~Sourcing to the episode itself is often considered original research~~ Actually, I think that's for assertions beyond basic plot information. Besides that, in this specific instance, linking to copyright violations is not OK. On the other hand, there's a lot of plot information in Wikipedia that is uncited, even in featured articles (see V for Vendetta (film)#Plot for example); I might even say it enjoys an exception to the verifiability policy, although I don't edit enough fiction to be sure. Although, the Wikimedia foundation might not condone illegal file-sharing, I think the major concern of site policy there is preventing the foundation from getting sued. As long as editors aren't linking to copyright violations of the episodes, I conclude that adding plot information now would be OK.--chaser - t 20:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC) 20:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The information itself is not illegal. The downloadings may well be; but there is no such thing as "illegal information"; even divulgence of trade secrets is a civil tort, not a criminal action, at least in U.S. law. --Orange Mike 20:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC) (Not A Lawyer)[reply]

You're right. Information in itself is not illegal. But linking to leaked episodes online to make it verifiable means you commit a copyright violation in the process. That's certainly not okay. Just wait until it's officially reported in the news by actors or producers or until the episodes are actually aired. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help I misspelled my Username

I misspelled my username when signing up I realized it after I created our userpage. How can I correct my usernameMotehrscenter 19:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can either just make a new username, or follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Changing username, - Rjd0060 19:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest a new user name. I assume you wanted to create User:Motherscenter, but you've uploaded an image that is affiliated with the National Assoc. of Mothers' Centers. This seems to be a violation of our unsername policy, which does not allow names identifying particular organizations. Please choose a different username. In addition, I notice you said "our user page" above; obviously we're happy to have someone (or many people) affiliated with your group edit Wikipedia, but please read our policies on conflict of interest and role accounts before you start editing, to avoid a rocky beginning. Your association can't have an account; but you (or each of you) as individuals are more than welcome. --barneca (talk) 19:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who are the Authors of the Articles??? I need to Cite a HUMAN Author!!

Who writes each article should be shown somewhere. Where is it? I need to cite an article for a class and I have to have a human author. Where can I find this information?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.194.71.143 (talk) 20:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is usually not acceptable for academic work. You can check the 'history" button to see what editors (by user name not necessarily legal name) have worked on an article. RJFJR 20:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The correct author is "Wikipedia contributors." Also, to cite an article, Wikipedia can provide exact citation syntax. Just look in the lefthand toolbox (under the "search" box), and there is a "Cite this article" option which will show you the exact information you need, in a variety of citation formats, that will take a reviewer to the exact form of the article that you were looking at, at the time that you clicked "Cite this article." However, RJFJR is also correct, that many academic institutions do not allow Wikipedia to be used as a source. That may explain the "human author" requirement, meaning that you're supposed to use actual books and articles. For more info on those, you may wish to try something like http://scholar.google.com --El on ka 20:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested in Duesentrieb's contributor listing as well. That said, again, you may want to double-check whether Wikipedia is an acceptable source for your assignment. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 20:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The location of your IP address indicates that you are either a university student or at least have access to university resources. I recommend you take advantage of such sources before turning to Wikipedia, which is nearly universally regarded as unreliable in academia. Leebo ^T/C 21:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the article you're trying to cite? I would usually be weary about trusting an article that doesn't list any sources, and usually it's the sources we used to make the article that are citable in situations like yours. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The cited sources of the article are what you should use for your work. Read the Wikipedia article for background, then select from the article's references the original sources for the article's information. Read those sources and cite those sources, not the Wikipedia article, for your class assignment. Sbowers3 23:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

President Benjamin Harrison

Can somebody fix the vandalism on this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.180.144.9 (talk) 20:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done In the future, you can fix it yourself by going to "edit this page" at the top. Be sure to fill in the edit summary box! NF24^{(radio me!}_{Editor review)} 20:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

copyright issue and warnings

Dear Wikipedia

I recently posted similar articles about the following subjects

Brotherhood of the Spirit Renaissance Community Michael Metelica

I was alerted that this article had already appeared under www.acornproductions.com and that it violated copyrighted material.

However the article that appears on www.acornproductions.com WAS WRITTEN BY MYSELF AND IS COPYRIGHTED UNDER MY NAME. This website is for the documentary film "Free Spirits" about the Brotherhood of the Spirit/Renaissance Community and its leader, Michael Metelica. There is a HISTORY page with the article that I wrote.

When I edited the three articles with this information, I got a message warning me that I would be banned from posting from Wikipedia if I continued.

I am unfamiliar with all the instructions (which are quite confusing!)

Essentially, I want to post material copyrighted under my name that was first posted in Wikipedia in another article.

Thanks for your time. Please let me know how we can rectify this matter.

Daniel A. Brown/dbrown1793Dbrown1793 20:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are several intertangled issues involved here. One is notability: whether the subject(s) you wish to add articles about are notable enough to have a place in Wikipedia. Another is copyright: whether the copyright owner is willing to license the copyrighted portions of the contents for Wikipedia and others to use, under one of our licenses. The third is conflict of interest: whether you have an interest in the film, the organization or its leader which would make any information you provided suspect as having questionable motives of advocacy or personal gain. Please read the three policies to which I have provided links above, for further information. --Orange Mike 20:51, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The best way to deal with that would be to email info-en@wikimedia.org with the details of the problem. and to follow the instructions on this page. That way, we can mark the page to avoid that problem from happening again. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 20:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rainforest (I'm in a rush )

how many percentage does the rainforest have in the world???????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.224.119 (talk) 21:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Rainforest, or look for the specific rainforest article as there are many in the world. Alternatively, ask your question at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science because this page is for help with using Wikipeda, not knowledge questions. Leebo ^T/C 21:27, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I looked it up... it went from about 14% to 6%... first bullet in http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.39.184 (talk) 04:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ford contour

it started smoking a lot and it shuts off —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.115.222 (talk) 21:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no mechanic, but I'd advise against driving any car which appears to be on fire. So it may be best that it shuts off. On a more serious note, there's precious little we can do to help you here. I'd recommend seeing a mechanic. Friday (talk) 21:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia help desk not a garage. On the other hand while here you may wish to read Ford Contour, or alternatively print it out and take it to the garage to read it, while the real car gets repaired. Good luck. Dr.K. 21:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Argh, I tried to edit this but it said "no such section" because it had been archived, so I had to reload. Can't we edit sections by name instead of number, or would that mess everything up? I'd suggest the Reference Desk, but we cannot give you any regulated professional advice. Can we add to the help desk banner a note that says very clearly that this is not for factual questions, and prevent people from easily skipping the banner altogether? I think that if you ask some people will suggest you take it to an auto mechanic, repair shop, etc. Hope this helps. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 01:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how do I e-mail and article to a friend?

Rosie45 23:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)How do I email and article to a friend?[reply]

Thanks,

Rosie45

Have you tried the Computing section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. NF24^{(radio me!}_{Editor review)} 23:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I think this is simply a matter of including the link of the article in the email to your friend, given you know his/her email adress. If this friend is a wikipedia user, just link to the article [[like this]]. No there is no "email this article" link, and if you want a version that doesn't change then use the "permanent link" as your link. Hope this helps. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 01:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CURIOUS!!!

CAN YOU EXPLAIN TOO ME HOW WIKIPEDIA WORKS? HOW DOES IS WORK?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.101.231 (talk) 23:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could start by reading the Wikipedia article. If you need more info, please ask a more specific question. Are you asking how the hardware and software work? Are you asking how editors work together to build the encyclopedia? Are you asking how you can search it or how you can help contribute to it? Sbowers3 23:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is also Wikipedia:About. Arthena^(talk) 23:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I tell how graqphics were changed on a Wikipedia page?

Under WEIBULL DISTRIBUTION, suddenly when I print the distribution characteristics, they all come out garbled. I change printers and reboot, but this page will not print correctly any more, but to the naked eye, it appears basically as it always has.

Thanks!

198.40.0.9 23:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. This appears to be a question better for this page. If this is an article you're printing, have you tried the "printable version" link at the side bar? Hope this helps. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 01:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the link to the Reference desk. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 04:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2007 November 13