This is an archive of the help desk. Please do not edit this page. To ask a new question, go to this page.

Can someone take a look at this and this and this, please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.131.118.135 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 21 October 2005

On first glance, it looks as though the user in question made a couple of errors. If they are indeed errors, you should fix them, and (if you anticipate further discussion) explain them on the user's talk page. -- SCZenz 01:57, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

looks like standard reverting of a banned user (skyring).Geni 01:59, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See the history at WP:AN/I for more about this. Titoxd^(?!?) 02:02, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, ok that makes sense. I guess this is done on sight, without regard to the edit content, yes? It does look a bit silly in this case, because the edits were incorrect. -- SCZenz 02:05, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the thing is that banned editors are not allowed to contribute to Wikipedia in any way, and should be reverted on sight by any user. See Wikipedia:Ban for more about our banning policy. Titoxd^(?!?) 02:08, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I attempted to figure out how the request for comment process works, but no luck-can someone describe it in a nutshell?

Actually, here's the issue that made me look into an RFC: I applied the PotentialVanity tag to an article that already had the Cleanup tag, since it seemed borderline notable; it appears to me that PotentialVanity is more specific than just Cleanup, and therefore a better tag under the circumstance. The article in question is Annie Easley. The PotentialVanity tag has since been reverted to Cleanup by a somewhat unhappy user, apparently the article's creator. Basically,did I use the tag properly?

Thanks for any info you can give about either the PotentialVanity tag or about RFC. Paul 04:35, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the subject is noteworthy and at least one of the editors is well-respected on Wikipedea. If you really want to pursue it, you can nominate it under the Articles for Deletion process which doesn't permit the removal of the tag until the process runs its course. But, my wisdom is that it is a good addition to Wikipedea; I doubt if we have very many articles about African-American computer scientists, male or female, born in the 1930's. -Walter Siegmund 05:07, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Borderline, in my opinion. I'd allow it to stay; it has verifiable references, and it's not disruptive to the rest of Wikipedia. --Ashenai (talk) (Galatea!) 11:16, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The story of this article is as follows. I had NEVER heard of this Annie Easley in my life, until one day my daughter came home with an assignment from school. It was during the African American day or African American week or something like that. She had to make an article about an important African American personality. One of the names in the list was Annie Easley. I am not sure if she chose to do that one or if it was assigned to her. My daughter asked for my help because she tried to locate references on the Internet and she couldn't find many. I told her to check in Wikipedia and there was no article, or if there was there was not much info on it. So, I helped her find some references on the Internet, and then also decided to start (or improve) the article about Annie Easley in Wikipedia and did some work on it gathering information from different sources I could find (very few at the time). I guess that if she was on a list of "important African American people" given to my daughter at school, then the people there are notable enough for a good portion of the population (African American people), which in turn means that those people are notable enough to be in Wikipedia. I would also recommend to User:PaulHanson and others like him not to be so "trigger happy" and avoid converting "clean-ups" into "destroy-ups" if they don't know enough about the subject. It is not nice to see our work of hours destroyed because somebody "thought" it was vanity or whatever. Regarding the question about the "potential vanity" tag, it is my opinion that it should be use when there are strong signs that the author of the article is writing about himself, when there are no other references to that person on the internet(not the case of Annie Easley...you can find several school essays posted on the Internet about her) and when the editor has no ID or has not written about any other article that that one--AAAAA 06:01, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cscr-featured.png as well as some other images used in talk page templates (such as FA, warnings, etc.) have a transparent background. However, when they're shrunk down, a white background forms where there shouldn't be any background at all. Is it just with my browser (IE) or is this a universal thing? If it's universal, should we change them back to the organde-background images? It seems like the transparent background sometimes works and sometimes doesn't.

-Nameneko 04:54, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The issue of IE support for transparent PNGs is somewhat complex (see our png ariticle]]. I'm using firefox and I don't see any problems.Geni 05:05, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Two pictures, Image:Hebban.jpg and Image:Vogala.png, both depict the same thing, the Hebban Olla Vogala. The JPG (78KB) is linked from one article (Dutch language) and the PNG (41KB) is linked from two (Dutch literature and Probatio pennae). Both are Public domain. I plan to relink the article(s) from one to the other and delete the to be orphaned image. The thing is, I'm no expert when it comes to Black and White/Sepia photographs of 900 year old Dutch literature. Despite their file types and sizes, which picture is better suited for Wikipedia? — Kjammer ⌂ 07:54, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no expert either, but it looks to me like Image:Hebban.jpg has an extra line (well most of one) and that while Image:Vogala.png doesn't have the extra line it is clearer. So we should keep both. --Commander Keane 08:13, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have made my first real contribution to Wikipedia an article - Ossian the Scottish Traditional Music group of 1976 onwards.

I find that unwittingly I have made an error, by compounding an error on the disambiguation page.

There are two references to bands on the disambiguation page;

Ossian Scottish Celtic band Ossian Hungarian Band

I now realise they lead to the same end page. While editing the stub I assumed that the mistake had been that there were two identical linked to from the above links. Actually it is the same page with to links.

This was the mistake in the disambiguation page.

I edited out the only text on the page - a link to the hungarian band's website. I assume that can be recovered.

I need help with; editing the disambiguation page, making sure the links are to two pages, recovering the material that was on the page- link to hungarian band's site.

I hope someone can help!

--Paw42 10:47, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The article your expanded used to look like this, I have delinked the Hungarian band name on the disambiguation page as there is just as much information there as the old version article had. If someone wants to write an article on the Hungarian band, both pages can be moved to distinct names. Alf ^melmac 11:04, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to trace someone's IP from their user name? There are a few pages that are having serious problems with sockpuppets. Please leave response here instead of on my talk page. Thanks! Davidpdx 13:40, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A developer can do this. See m:Developers. Tempshill 16:50, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DNSSTUFF is THE spot to trace IP's

Use: IPWHOIS Lookup or City From IP It is not perfect but gives a good idea of those anonymous posters.--Kebron 17:55, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This morning when I tried to access Wikipedia, I got the dreaded IE 'This page does not exist'. Later, I managed to get to the main page but not everywhere else to ask what happened. I have only just been able to get back on. What happened? Thelb'⁴ 15:19, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Like many other websites that are growing in popularity, Wikipedia occasionally has problems with handling excess traffic. The most common problems lately have been slow loading of images, and errors given when trying to save an edit. See the Wikipedia Status page on BerliOS for a wiki that you and other Wikipedia users can use to describe the speed of what's going on. Tempshill 16:47, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ~ I really enjoy clicking on the "random article" feature of Wikipedia. Is there any sort of mailing list that I could join that sends out a daily random article to one's email address? If not, is there any way to create such a mailing list? Thanks, anon.

• There is indeed an Article of the Day mailing list, which mails you the day's featured article, plus anniversaries and the Wikiquote Quote of the Day. See here. An RSS feed would be good too. --Kwekubo 14:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

is this permitted?

i have found your information to be superb,and of the highest degree.

i wish to use this information,to give people a guide to regions within romania,and about romania also, so as to boost my own knowledge of the country.

is it also possible to put a link to wikipedia on my website?

many thanks.

zac m.

You can always put a link to wikipedia on your site. However, if you wish to copy content from wikipedia into some sort of guide, or onto your real estate site, the entire document/site must be released under the GFDL, which means that anyone else may copy and republishe your contnet, with or without changes, provided that they comply with the GFDL. You may well not want this result. DES ^(talk) 00:07, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have been told that between these two Volcanoes, Fuji-san is the dormant one and Mt Orizaba is the active one. I have always believed that Fuji-san is active.

I was just wondering what is actually the correct answer for this question?

Thanks

Please ask this question in the Wikipedia:Reference Desk, the help desk is for questions about Wikipedia itself. — Kjammer ⌂ 02:40, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When I see red links and I click on them to try to start a new page, it usually just goes to a "This page can not be found" page. It doesn't say "This article has not been written yet" like the help pages say they will. Why is this? --Alexseattle 02:23, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a bug in the system which causes this to happen when using certain versions of IE. I am hoping this is going to be fixed soon. User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:42, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure if boxes is the right term, but for example the red and blue boxes on the Community Portal of Wikipedia.... Is there a help file on how to create those (change the size, color, border, style, have one right next to the other etc...)? I have been looking for a couple of days for a page explaining this. Thanks, 66.61.53.2 10:41, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You might take a look at meta.wikimedia.org's page on tables and Wikipedia:How to use tables for more information. These pages seem pretty confusing to me, but you may be able to make some sense of them. Also, you might look at the source of the Wikipedia:Community Portal, found here [1] (click at the edit tab on the top of any page) to see how they did it over there. Best, Kewp (t) 11:00, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

how can i add some articales written by arabic ???

If you want to add content in Arabic, please add it to ar.wikipedia.org. If you want to translate articles from Arabic into English, check Wikipedia:Pages needing translation for pages in Arabic, or you can copy-paste and translate articles from ar.wikipedia into a new article on English Wikipedia, as long as you say where you got the content from. — Kjammer ⌂ 12:27, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia was blocked by Communist Party of China.

• If that's the case, then it isn't the first time. See [2], [3], [4] for past discussion, and for info on the current incident, see [5]. --Kwekubo 14:46, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

A few weeks ago, I posted a page that has been since deleted (marked for deletion after debate). see it here

My question: I only posted this page because there was a similar page about Invision and, I believe, one about phpBB. I am the author of NextBBS, which happen to be free and open-source. I felt that Wikipedia was the best place to document the existence of this software and unfortunately it seems that I was wrong.

I was just wondering what makes posting a page about it advertising? What criteria have to be met for it not be considered advertising anymore, in the same manner Invision is not advertising?

Thanks a lot, -Chris.

• Thanks for asking. I know nothing about NextBBS, so I'll give some general ideas regarding the issue.

1. If you don't have a strong userbase yet and you are trying to use Wikipedia to draw such users in, you are using Wikipedia to advertise it. In this case it's not a good idea to start an article. If you have many users, it's a good idea to cite a reliable 3rd party source who reports the numbers so people will know you're not just a small board.
2. A person in the deletion discussion suggested the text might be a copyright violation, meaning you took it from another source without crediting it. Note that all text in Wikipedia is freely available, so people might use it for purposes you didn't intend it. If the text you used was originally meant to promote the boards, it's probably not a suited text to start a Wikipedia article.
3. Most articles that are perceived have issues with their tone. (I for example consider Invision's article more neutral than the one on phpBB. While it give a lot of useful information it lists some of its "greatest advantages" which is needless praise for the software. Try to report the bare facts don't use any marketing type talk. Don't call the application "powerful", don't say it has an easy installation (it may not be for everyone).

In short: Try to adhere to neutral wording and report as much facts as you can that show the software had some inpact on internet message boards. I hope my comments have given you some useful insight. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:12, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mgm, Thanks a lot. These are very useful insights. I will keep these rules in mind whenever posting about my own software or anyone else's. Thanks again, -Chris.

I'd recommend that no-one should write about their own software, project, company, etc. It's just impossible to properly distance oneself from it enough to be able to write neutrally about it. Wikipedia:Autobiography has more information. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 23:12, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested in creating a new article about the Songhua Stalemate map of the very popular PC game Battlefield 2.

Would it be considered a relevant enough topic for me to make such an article and not have it immediately voted for deletion?

There is already an article on the Mashtuur City map, but it does not appear to be of desirable quality, and I doubt it has had much peer review because it is not directly linked from the Battlefield 2 article.

Remy B 13:36, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I think you should go ahead if you think you can make an interesting article about it. If you can, try to make it relevant to non-players (random article users) as well by providing context. Does it have anything to do with the real Songhua River? If you can't make a reasonably sized article, think about expanding the entry in List of Battlefield 2 maps first. Kappa 13:45, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have an image (Image:Auckland_Ferry_Terminal.jpg) listed for deletion here Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion#October_16 with two votes in favor of deletion and none against. My understanding from the instructions of the "Images for deletion" page is that images listed for deletion will be removed five days after being listed if a consensus has been reached for deletion or there is no opposition. Five days from October 16 is October 21, yet the image remains on October 22. I have a lot of similar deletions/substitutions in the pipeline and thought I had done all I needed to get them moving. What have I missed? JShook | Talk 14:18, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

an admins with the time and energy to carry out the deleteion. Most such pages do end up with a backlog of some form.Geni 14:31, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Thanks. Patience is a virtue. I'll have to try it sometime. JShook | Talk 15:20, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I like the free encyclopedia-idea and want to cooperate with Wikipedia . I'm offering myself as an occasional translator from/to English/Dutch and (Brazilian) Portuguese in any combination of these 3(I am native dutch speaker , lived 19 years in Brazil and workedmost of the time for an American company.) Preferentially technical articles. In the page were one is supposed to enlist , and indicate the chosen languages, I could not find the actual field "sign-up" or "log-in " or similar ? Can anyone help me with that , please

kind regards

Qeqeke.

• The link to sign up is at the top right of every page. You'll probably want an account on the Dutch and Brazilian Wikipedia as well. http://br.wikipedia.org and http://nl.wikipedia.org - Mgm|^(talk) 16:46, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• You are already logged in and I left a welcome message out your talk page. The procedure for signing up to be a translator is outlined at Wikipedia:Translators available#Instructions. Find the section(s) that you want to sign up for, edit them and add "*~~~ -" followed by your fluency as described at the instructions link. The three tildas will be traslated to your user name when you save your changes. (Edit conflicted with Mgm) --GraemeL ^(talk) 16:51, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• A minor correction—the Portuguese Wikipedia is at http://pt.wikipedia.org. I think br.wikipedia.org is the Breton version. Cheers! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:15, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I'm interested in translating the pages I read to bulgarian! So, my question is: How can I do that(is there any specific way to do it ot just copy&paste) and do you consider this to be useful?

Tnak you Ivo Yordanov

--Alanon 18:52, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, translations are considered very useful. English Wikipedia is much bigger than the Bulgarian one, so I'm sure they welcome any translation they can get their hands on. A few pointers:

1. Also register on the Bulgarian Wikipedia so you have a place to drop off your translations. http://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/
2. Never put Bulgarian text in the English Wikipedia or English text in the Bulgarian Wikipedia unless it's on a subpage of your user page (for example: User:LAlanon/Translation). Articles in the main article part of Wikipedia can be deleted when they are not in the correct language.
3. Make sure you know Wikicode and include sufficient wikification in your work.
4. Note the fact it's a translation on the new article discussion page and in the edit summary, so people know where it came from.
5. Make Wikipedia:Interwiki links so the articles in the different languages are interlinked.

Good luck! - Mgm|^(talk) 21:13, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I found a list that contains important information about an article. Since the list is large, linking to the list itself could potentially be confusing, so I was hoping to link directly to the List Section, in this case Governors of Ohio and Candidates in the List of Ohio Politicians (by state office) article.

I tried "List of Ohio Politicians (by state office)#Governors of Ohio and Candidates" but it seemed to link only to "List of Ohio Politicians (by state office)".

How can I link to a specific section of this list?

-- N okla 20:15, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• If you got the capitalization correct, such a link should work fine. However, redirects that point to a specific section within an article won't work as section titles can change which could cause such links to die easily. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:17, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was an officer in our local Sea Cadet Corps TS Penelope. England and I am about to have all our ships that have been named Penelope painted. I'm lost to ask that after six months tring to find the seventh Penelope 1918 to 1922 that is on your list - Wikipedia - HMS Penelope tendership Information From Answers.com. I am afriad that I can find no ship at this time except the sixth ship between 1914 to 1924. Could you please let me know where you have got your information so that I can try and get a picture of it. I have found numorous 'Penelopes' to have them painted but this 'Penelope' elodes me. Thanks again. Lt K. Huttley Rtd. Blackpool

[answered by email, address removed] Shimgray | talk | 22:13, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi pretty new so this is the only place I can find to raise this issue.

There are 2 pages, E-poetry and Digital poetry, and I believe the 2 topics are the same thing under different names. For what it's worth, I think E-poetry is the more common term.

Not sure I'm up to merging pages and anyay I didn't want to upset anyone...

• See Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages for instructions on how to go about flagging the articles. --GraemeL ^(talk) 22:01, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When I click a link to a yet uncreated article that I wish to edit it get this:

The page cannot be found The page you are looking for might have been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable.

---

Please try the following:

If you typed the page address in the Address bar, make sure that it is spelled correctly.

Open the en.wikipedia.org home page, and then look for links to the information you want. Click the Back button to try another link. Click Search to look for information on the Internet.

HTTP 404 - File not found Internet Explorer

Why is this? Shouldn't I get a blank editable article?

Further up the page it is reported that a bug is causing this behavior for soem but not all versions of Internet Explorer, but not other browsers. DES ^(talk) 02:06, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Are you aware that you have TWO pages on Swami Dayananda Saraswati? Shouldn't they be merged? The addresses are: Swami_Dayananda and Dayananda_Saraswati.

See Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages for instructions on how to go about flagging the articles or doign the merge. DES ^(talk) 03:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, i got a picture of myself, but i don't know what tage to put? i need a tag for non-commercial use, you know, like no one shouldn't use it and it's created be me:D thanks><ino 00:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

We don't allow non-commercial images.Geni 00:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

? so...you are trying to tell me, i take a digital camera snap a photo of my self and put it in my user page, that is not allowed?

i need it for my User Page

><ino 00:49, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what Geni said at all. Geni just said there's no option to restrict it to non-commercial uses. When you go the upload page to upload your file, you'll see a list of possible licenses in the dropdown. All you have to do is choose the one that you feel is most appropriate. If you need to know more about a specific license, ask a specific question about it. :) For what it's worth, I tagged my photo with the GFDL. —HorsePunchKid→龜 01:09, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I know, listen i know about the combo box/ drop box, i am just saying i don't know what one to use for MINE, not a picture of a cartooon or celebrity, just a picture of me! myself, so.. what tag should i use!? ><ino 01:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The photo I mentioned is a photo of me; that was my point. ;) —HorsePunchKid→龜 07:15, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You might consider the license statement at Image:David Siegel.jpg which is a picture of me, uploaded for my user page. I specifically allow use by wikipedia, and by all reusers of wikipedia content, commercial or non-commercial, but I restrict use to illustrating my contributions to the wiki (that is, my user or user talk page), or to an article about me or where I am mentioned. It can't be used to illutrate an articel about John Foo (though why anyone would want to do so i don't know) nor taken to illustrate a whisky ad (though again, who would want to). I may incorporate a version of this into a template. However, for an image of yourself, which you or a friend took, and which you don't mind anyone using, use {{GFDL-self}}. DES ^(talk) 01:55, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

But indeed, you cannot restrict commercial use. This is because Wikipedia might be sold at some time in the future, by anyone, without seeking permission. Notinasnaid 06:58, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Try {{Limited Use-person}} DES ^(talk) 07:58, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

We really cannot advise you here because that would constitute legal advice. Even lawyers won't give you that in this context. Firstly you need to determine what restrictions you want to impose, then you need to find out if they are compatible with use in Wikipedia at all - an absolute ban on commercial use will basically prevent your including the image. After that you need to read the terms of the various possible licence options and choose one that meets your own personal goals. We cannot tell from what you have written exactly what would be acceptable to you and would risk being sued by you if we got it wrong.

--David Woolley 11:59, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for help using wikipedia. for factual questions, use the reference desk. 01:58, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

How do you report an admistor that you feel is abusing his or her power or revering real edit for no reasn?

You can do so at WP:ANI. Note that many such accusations are made, and most are judged invalid, beign by users who were doign things properly inviting admin intervention, but who dot understand that, or don't want to acknowledge it. Therefore, such claims face a bit of an uphill struggle. It is advaisable to be calm, and to explain as clarly as you can what the admin did and why you think it was improper. Provide links, or better yet diffs. Good luck. Or you can leave a message for any individaul admin, who may look into the matter and intervene or bring it up for you at WP:ANI, if the situation seems to warrant that. If you haven't left a message of the dmin involved, on his or her talk page, explainign why you think the actions are improper, do that first. Also look at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. DES ^(talk) 03:43, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Since upgrading my brower (IE) a few days ago, the link colour (dark blue) for recently visited pages in Wikipedia is barely distinguishable from the other links (dull blue). Since recently visited pages are quite likely what I'm looking for it is useful if they can stand out. I don't see any way of setting this colour as a preference, and it looks to be the same in all the alternative skins. The way I set up colours for recently visited pages in my browser settings also seems to be ignored on Wikipedia pages. Any ideas (short of using a better browser, which I mean to do in due course)? Shantavira 12:13, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I just found the solution over on the WP:GC page. Shantavira 15:16, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to contribute to wikipedia about a week or so ago. I got banned for two days. I was just trying two help and I get penalized for it. I might not have known that much info about the topic but I knew enough to start the article. Why is this fair? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.3.11.252 (talk • contribs) 22:38, 23 October 2005

I don't think edits like this [6], [7], and [8] can be characterized as "trying to help." Now that you've been unbanned, use the Sandbox to experiment. --Kewp (t) 13:48, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a Wikipedia policy on using non standard fonts for an entire article? I would think this would be mentioned in the help files but haven't been able to find anything related to it. The article that made me wonder this is on Alexis Bledel specifically this edit [9]. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 14:21, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is the dodgiest edit I have ever seen. I think the Manual of Style sums it up in its opening sentence:

"This Manual of Style has the simple purpose of making things easy to read by following a consistent format"

Easy to read and consistent. It seems so obvious to use the defualt fonts I'm not surprised that an official policy is hard to find. --Commander Keane 15:18, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I thought I was missing something but I guess I just had to interpret the first sentence of the MoS. Dismas|^(talk) 15:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Font size should not be changed with HTML. That's something for a reader's css or js style sheet. - Mgm|^(talk) 16:04, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The page on Diving_cylinders lists DIN threads as M25x2, which is incorrect. M25x2 is the (metric) tank thread, and the DIN thread is clearly (and measurably, since I have examples sat in front of me) different. The problem is that I don't know the correct thread size since this is what I was trying to find out. Should the information be left as is until a definitive answer can be found, or removed on the basis that no data is better than wrong data?

It should be removed until the answer is found, then it should be put back in correctly. Thelb⁴ 07:12, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have been granted permission to use several pictures from a website that sells goldfish in order to help cleanup and expand upon the Goldfish article. The condition is simply that the owner of the website wants the pictures to have his URL placed on them. What would be the most appropriate way to do this? Should the URL be placed in the frame of the picture, or simply in the summary? Links to examples of this being done would be helpful, as I am sure I am not the first to do this.

Also, what would be the appropriate Licensing notation to use considering that they have a copyright, but permission has been given to use them for Wikipedia articles? Thanks in advance for the help. Phauge 15:25, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Please make sure you've also been granted use for outside Wikipedia. Images with only permission to use on Wikipedia are not allowed. The link and the fact they want it attributed to that with its use should be mentioned on the image description page. Commercial links in a frame are not appropriate, the description in teh frame should describe the image like for example "Japanese goldfish in bowl". - Mgm|^(talk) 16:08, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok, I'l add the URL in the image description, but I still don't know which Licensing notation I should use. Thanks again. Phauge 17:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I believe my Internet/gaming handle (Ihmhi) to be quite unique. Feel free to do a Google search for Ihmhi; the first page is almost entirely filled with instances of me posting on forums, as well as profile pages for services I have signed up for. Also, my home page should be in there somewhere, but it is not. In fact, one of the top searches (I just checked) is a mirror of my User Page!

I am 95% confident that my handle is unique, and thus I wanted to know if it would be acceptable for me to make a redirect from a search for "ihmhi" or "Ihmhi" to go to my User Page on Wikipedia. No other article could conceivably take the name as it is something I created entirely on my own. A search for it renders absolutely nothing on Wikipedia.

Please consider that I am asking to make a redirect to my user page, not create an article based on my name. I think this sufficiently passes the vanity test. Any assistance and relevant opinions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

--Ihmhi 15:25, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When accessed or searched in the "User" space, "Ihmhi" already goes to your user page. Unless you're sufficiently notable to have an article in the main space, I don't understand why there would be any need to have a redirect from there either. *Dan T.* 15:28, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I concede that point. I was just thinking in the context that since I am pretty much the only one, when someone types in a general search for "Ihmhi" they should be directed towards me.

--Ihmhi 15:44, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• No, pages in the article space are only for articles and should not redirect to a userspace. Sorry... - Mgm|^(talk) 16:11, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it wouldn't be appropriate. Don't worry though, anyone familiar with wikipedia will be able to find your user page.  :-) --Quasipalm 18:08, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everybody, bonjour à tout le monde, guten Tag allerseits,

I'd like to edit articles in different languages, but apparently my user account exists in English only, because this is where I've created it. What shall I do? Having a new account for each language doesn't make much sense, does it?

Yet, it is the only way to do it (people have long requested that all accounts be unified, though). The best thing to do is to create the same account (i.e. the same name) at each wikipedia. Broken S 15:56, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• All Wikipedias have their own databases and merging all user accounts may cause duplication problems with the more common names. Until those problems are sorted out, I'm afraid you'll have to sign up on each Wikipedia separately. - Mgm|^(talk) 16:14, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am cleaning-up an article on James Burke (the boxer) and I need an image. Since he was born in the 1800's there is not a photo of him. I googled him and found a GIF file of him, but I don't know its copyright status. I thought that if I drew it and photocopied it, it might be okay, but it might not. I can only find one picture of him. What should I do?

Cookerb 16:36, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a period-piece (e.g., drawn while he was still alive), then (given that he died in 1845) the picture is in the public domain. However, you obviously have to verify that it is in-fact a period piece before you upload it. →Raul654 16:41, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How do I view one section at a time so I can request it to be moved to a separate, more specific location if the section gets too long? HereToHelp 17:32, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

you can't view just one section at a time and there is not move button for sections. You can discuss the move on the talk page or be bold and move the section yourself. Broken S 18:55, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can, however, edit a single section with the section edit links, this will let you see the wiki-code for just that section, which might be useful if the section is to be split off into a separate article. DES ^(talk) 19:15, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You mean a cut and paste move? HereToHelp 20:09, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

cutting and pasting is the only way to move/rearrange sections of articles. Cutting and pasting should never be used to move whole articles. See Wikipedia:How to fix cut and paste moves. Broken S 20:56, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to clear the history of edits/changes/suggestions that Wikipedia has tied to your IP address. I don't want my friends knowing articles that I have edited if they know my IP address.

sorry this is not possible. Howver, if you register and log in, thereafter your edits will be displayed only under your user name, not yiour IP address. If your firends don't know what your user name is, and you don't put your real name on your user page, there is no easy way for them to find out what you have edited. DES ^(talk) 18:50, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Especially with the servers being up and down like they are today, it is very easy to miss the fact that you've got logged out, like has happened to me just now. I'd therefore say that logging in is not a safe way of hiding the IP address.

(I made my user name explicit here but not in the history).

-- David Woolley 19:31, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I looked up Wikipedia's defination of "frappe," and a lot of its useage/history is incorrect/incomplete. If I became a member and added to the content, who would correct/verify the material I added? Likewise, who corrects the grammar of the articles? (So far the articles/definitions have been well written). Thank you!

anyone, logged in or not, can add content, and anyone, logged in or not, can correct errors of grammer or spelling, as well as errors of fact. Click on the "edit this page" tab at the top, or the various section "edit" buttons at the top of each section. Click on the "discussion" button on an article to reach it's talk page, where ideas about what should and should not go into an aricel are discussed. Hoever if you do register and log in, you will get a user page and it will be easier for people to communicate with you. people can also see the record of what you did, and may well take your edits more seriously (although many good contributors never sign in). DES ^(talk) 18:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Be sure to provide sources for the info you change or add, so people can check your work and know you're right. A lot of incorrect information is not placed on purpose, but by people who think they're right. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:14, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Other than that. Just go ahead and get stuck in! - Mgm|^(talk) 19:27, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ma'am/Sir,

If the pages of this site are able to be edited by users, how can I be certain of the information presented? Other than to chase their sources if properly cited.

Thank you,

anon

Not only are they edited by users, but also not-logged-in anonomous users (like you). Although we can't be sure of the content (see Wikipedia: Disclaimers and Wikipedia: criticism), it often is correct in the main articles. Although it is not guaranteed, Wikipedia has a wide bredth and depth of knowledge. We hope you will use us for you're future needs of an encyclopedia. HereToHelp talk 20:36, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• See Wikipedia:Replies to common objections. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:45, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sirs,

I am trying to find a graphics tablet which can be connected to the computer wirelessly. A USB graphics tablet is needed to control the computer from a distance of 10 metres (wirelles connection to the computer).

I will appreciate your advise on that.

Best regards, Pantelis Makris

• Please direct such questions to the reference desk. This page is for questions regarding Wikipedia itself. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:45, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I have just edited the Blackwood entry to remove references to gold-mining in Alaska, which did not happen. I want to add a link to the Blackwood home-page, http://hem.fyristorg.com/bd/ab/, and make it look like the rest of the entries and add a description. How do I do that please? Thanks, Sue

• If you click "edit this page" at the top or "edit" in the section header of a page. You'll see the code for a page which will show exactly how other links have been formatted. Mgm|^(talk) 21:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded a file Image:Sulfureous Fumeroles n.jpg which is being used by Fumarole. Notice that the word "fumaroles" is misspelled in the file name. Is this a problem? I can replace the image by renaming it, uploading the new version, editing the article to point to the new version, and then list the old version for deletion. Is this worth the trouble?

JShook | Talk 22:19, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Image file names should be descriptive of their content, so it's probably a good idea to correct the error. It'll only take a few minutes. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:31, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK. JShook | Talk 22:45, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done. JShook | Talk 23:03, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have submitted a number of contributions to Wikipedia, but by the time I submit them, I'm no longer logged in and all it shows in the "history" area is my IP address. Is there a way to get those entries tied back to my username?

See Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit, though the page is marked as "Service suspended" at the moment. Tempshill 00:32, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever happened to the full "see all" function of my watchlist? It only seems to go back to September 25... -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 02:53, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the watchlist function relies on server logs wich we don't keep forever.Geni 02:58, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think, rather, that the watchlist is intentionally limited, since see all has the potential to really hammer the database servers. My guess is that it is based on the database, not the logs, but I don't know for sure. —HorsePunchKid→龜 03:08, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly used to "show all", back at least the better part of a year... perhaps ask on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)? Shimgray | talk | 21:59, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All namespaces doesn't work, is it a bug?

Hello. Sorry, but which page or wikipedia service are you referring to? — Sverdrup 14:00, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am in Shanghai, China. I cannot visit Wikipedia.org recently. When I PING, it shows:

""C:\Documents and Settings\guli>ping www.wikipedia.org

Pinging rr.yaseo.wikimedia.org [211.115.107.140] with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out. Request timed out. ""

And I have to use a proxy to visit your website. Please chekc the issue and contact me at <email removed>

• You may need to contact your government and ask them to remove the block which is rumoured to have been placed. http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20051020/1453211_F.shtml for example. Notinasnaid 07:34, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• If it was because Wikipedia was down (which sometimes happens) then there are also Wikipedia mirrors you can find with any search engine. This is of course only useful for reading; if any of the mirrors let you edit the articles then your edits won't find their way back to Wikipedia. If you want to see whether Wikipedia is down, see the OpenFacts Wikipedia status page, which is a wiki page that other Wikipedia users can edit to indicate whether Wikipedia is down, slow, fast, whether editing works, etc. Tempshill 17:34, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• See this Wikipedia article Great Firewall of China.

Your government recently started blocking Wikipedia. Here's a news article: [10]. This was pretty widely reported in the US and Europe, but I guess China doesn't announce these things inside their borders. Sorry.  :-( --Quasipalm 18:55, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Here's an idea: Get rid of the Commuist Party! SD6-Agent 09:23, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Can i know whether Wikipedia can be a valuable source of income making part time job. If so can i know can i make money with it.

Not with writing articles, coypediting etc - that kind of work is entirely done by volunteers, and although I've certainly sometimes dreamed about getting paid for all th ehours I've spent on here, it's not likely going to happen :P Apart from that, see m:Wikimedia staff and m:Official positions for an overview of the (very limited) paid positions the Wikimedia foundation offers. -- Ferkelparade π 09:24, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

What is the syntax for links that send not to the start of an article, but to a specific section of the article instead?

Like for example, how could I create a link to a particular question of this article. Just so you know I need the "Kuhn segment" link of the worm-like chain article to link to the "generality of the model" section of the polymer physics article.

Also, if someone could post a link to a page that sums up the whole syntax for editing articles, that would be just great. User:ThorinMuglindir

• Use a # like this: Polymer physics#Generality of the model making sure that you have the capitalization correct. Do remember, however, that such links should only be used when absolutely necessary. Sections can be renamed and there's no easy "whatlinkshere" tool to fix links to sections as there is with renamed articles. - 131.211.210.17 09:30, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm here, I have another question about links: for some reason, foreign language links within the articles do not appear when I read the articles, only when I edit them. It's weird because I see them perfectly when I'm reading the discussions. Can someone help me on that? user:ThorinMuglindir

• Such links are put in a bar on the left of the article when you need to link such an article in a discussion you put a : in front of it. like so [[:nl:Nederland]] which expands to nl:Nederland. - 131.211.210.17 09:36, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• You can also use piped links to get rid of the nl: bit and make it look like any other link. - 131.211.210.17 09:38, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for answering so quickly. Perfectly clear for both questions.user:ThorinMuglindir

I think you will find that my question on this is still in the current Help desk page. The syntax for a real link to a foreign Wiki is "[[" ":" <language code> ":" <article title> [ "|" [ <displayed text> ] "]]". Note the subtle extra ":" at the beginning"

--David Woolley 19:19, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Could I please have an explanation and a copy of the deleted article that I wrote: Steven Roddis If possible please email <email removed>

• For explanation see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page=Steven+Roddis . "nn" means "Not Notable". Notinasnaid 11:54, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• You can ask for a copy at Deletion Review. DES ^(talk) 15:06, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Newbie question: I would like to start/add a historical overview of, for example, software-products so as to show which 'suite' (or product) is formed from several older bits of software.

The same feature would apply to companies to show mergers and name-changes: a recent example would be to show Siebel, Peoplesoft, JDEdwards and other companies being 'incorporated' into Oracle. The historical timeline showing takeovers and mergers of companies like General Motors or Microsoft would be interesting too. It could also be used to show which brands belong to one holding etc.

The same feature would also greatly improve the display of family-tree information in Wikipedia.

What I would like to do is build (collaboratively of course) a tree-like 'history' for certain subjects..preferrably(!) with graphical representation along a timeline, very much like a traditional family-tree.

Now, my question: How do I go about this? (or, more specific: How to find out if this is useful, if this is wikipedia-stuff, if people would want to contribute, can it be done, can we generate images dynamically, how to do it, where to start, is this the right spot to ask this question, what forum to use etc.)

I have often wanted to see graphical family trees of corporate mergers. Yes, I think it would be a great type of analysis that would help every reader's understanding while looking at the article on, say, the inelegantly named ChevronTexaco. Pictures are worth a thousand words. I don't know of any graphical feature of Wikipedia that would make this easy. Probably the easiest way to do it would be to make your own PNG files and use them to illustrate the articles. For readability reasons you'd want these to span the page and not be thumbnails, which is unusual in a Wikipedia article. See Wikipedia:WikiProject if you decide you want to devote a lot of time to this, get other people inspired to assist you, etc.

The best family tree of this sort that I remember seeing was horizontally oriented to form a timeline. Each company was represented by a line whose thickness was based on its revenue, and then the lines merged to become really thick lines as time progressed.

By the way, please sign your posts with four tilde marks (~~~~) when typing on talk pages so we can look up histories and such more quickly. Thanks - Tempshill 17:50, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I made a cool program for people to configure a screen of clocks for only the time zones they want to see:

http://clock.waveright.homeip.net/

There are no ads on my program and it is a very useful tool. On the page for time zones at wikipedia there is about 10 links to web pages like mine.

So I added a link to my page right by the others:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Time_zone&oldid=25751999

but my link was removed by Joe Kress in the next revision with the message "rv spam":

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Time_zone&oldid=25751999

Other people can put links to thier pages on wikipedia and those pages have advertisements and so forth on them.

Why is my site considered spam and the others get to add thier site to the page?

• The person who knows best why it was removed, is Joe Kress himself. Try asking him by visiting his talk page (User talk:Joe Kress). Do your best to stay friendly as you did here and not to sound accusatory. Good luck! - Mgm|^(talk) 16:07, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I asked Joe on his discussion page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Joe_Kress#Time_Zone_program_link) a week ago and he hasn't responded. Can I put my link back up or do I have to go through the request process?

Hello, I've just created an account, but I'm not really sure how to edit articles. How do I use links to other articles and to other websites; how do I fix a mistake I made? I don't know anything. I also tried something on the article "The" and I can't take it of. Could someone please check it. Thank you.

• Hello Izehar! Welcome to Wikipedia. The best way to learn how to do a specific thing is to look at the coding of the page on which you saw something. You can also check Wikipedia:How to edit a page and Wikipedia:Tutorial for the basic things to get you started. Also, please use four tildes (like this: ~~~~) to sign post you make to discussion pages like this. I'll drop you a welcome on your discussion page with another few useful links. -- Mgm|^(talk) 17:46, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• No worries about your edit on The. User:Vilerage took care of that (probably before you had the chance to do so yourself. If you want to test something, you can use the Wikipedia:Sandbox. - Mgm|^(talk) 17:55, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know how to modify variables, such as the date. For example, today's date is Friday, December 20, 2024 and is displayed by the code:

[[{{CURRENTDAYNAME}}]], [[{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}}]]

However, I do not know how to modify this code to diplay yesterday's or tomorrow's date. Shashe 18:30, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• These variables are known as "magic words". There is only a limited number defined of them, and they cannot be modified. See meta:Help:Variable. --Kwekubo 19:57, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• You can create/use templates like m:Template:Tomorrow or m:Template:Add 1.--Patrick 00:07, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am the author of a book that I have put on Wikipedia several times and continually it gets deleted. How do you get a book listed on Wikipedia, there are plenty of books on book stubs that noone deletes but everytime I add my book someone deletes it. The books name is Car Accident Secrets my id is DSPublications.

• It's been deleted as copyvio, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Car accident secrets, and as "spam": see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Car accident secrets. Kappa 21:10, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• General guideline: Don't try to get your own work listed/mentioned in Wikipedia. — Sverdrup 21:39, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• It is not spam nor is it a copyright violation. If it is then all the other books listed under book stubs are copyright violations and spam
• Here's a simple tip: if you are ever in the position of adding references to your own work, own site, own biography, etc. then you shouldn't. It's impossible for you to be sufficiently neutral about it. Wikipedia requires things to be notable. If they are actually notable, someone else will add the information soon enough. Notinasnaid 07:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can an interview with an "expert" (e.g. a surgeon) be used as a source in an article, and how is this listed in the references? Donna Gramigna

If the interview is from a reputable source, sure. If you do it yourself, this would count as original research and is not allowed. Friday (talk) 21:04, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, you can't walk next door and ask your neighbor the surgeon about something and then cite him in a Wikipedia article. You could ask him about something and insert the information in an article as uncredited / uncited information, but this is bad practice; we are supposed to cite our sources because everything in our articles are supposed to be verifiable by other editors. (Wikipedia:Cite your sources.) Another alternative might be to get him interviewed on a site that other editors will find credible, and then cite that interview. Tempshill 21:25, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds as if you know the surgeon and plan to personally ask for information to put in an article. There are some ways to do it that to reduce likelihood of accusation of original research, and some types of information that would be less likely to be challenged. If my surmise above is correct, here are some tips:

1. Feel free to use an expert source for general information. General information about medical topics is often introduced into articles without specific attribution. Even if the surgeon was your source, this would not be likely challenged unless it was erroneous (for example, if you misunderstood what the surgeon said or wrote it in a way that was open to other interpretations). For example, if your surgeon tells you that most of the time a surgeon knows before an appendectomy whether the appendix is inflamed, or tells you what the preliminary information a surgeon needs to safely operate (like the patient's blood sugar or blood count) those are general statements that are pretty unlikely to be challenged.
2. Ask him to suggest a possible published source for anything that someone is likely to challenge.
3. Ask him whether significant disagreement exists about what he tells you. He will be able to tell you what is controversial or unsettled and what is universally accepted. For a statement that may be controversial, express it in an NPOV way by attributing it to those likely to hold such a position. alteripse 21:30, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Are the latest edits to this article legit or are is the Thomas the Tank Engine vandal back? - Mgm|^(talk) 21:07, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What a bizarre edit history. I didn't see any vandalism myself. Tempshill 21:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In checking the Wikipedia:Requested_articles page, I would like to suggest that "Medicine" be added as a new category. Subcategories might include physicians, specialties, medical discoveries, etc.

How can this be done? It is not apparent that editing the page is the correct answer.

To refer to a category without including the page where the reference is in the category, put a ":" before the "category:" part of the name (like Category:Medicine, which is already a category). Markup details are included at Wikipedia:How to edit a page, which you can find from the "Help" link on all pages. -- Rick Block (talk) 01:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The reason that there is no "requested category" page, or requested category section of Wikipedia:Requested_articles, is that unlike an article, it takes no skill or exprtise or time worth mentioning to create a category. To create Category:Foo simply put [[Category:Foo]] near the end of a relevant articel, adn save it. Then click on Foo in the categorty line, and type in a brief description of Foo, with a link to Foo or whatever seems a relevant article. Ta Da! You have created a category. DES ^(talk) 02:07, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• There already is such a category. See Wikipedia:Requested_articles/Applied_arts_and_sciences#Medicine - Mgm|^(talk) 04:46, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MacGyver. Just what I was looking for. It didn't occur to me to look in "Applied arts and sciences." ERcheck 05:10, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, THAT kind of category. Sorry, I misunderstood. And I'm very glad Mgm noticed. -- Rick Block (talk) 01:13, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CAN SOME ONE HELP ME? MY NAME IS C.J. AND I'M A NEW MEMBER WHO DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO INSERT A PHOTO TO A FILE AND PLACE CAPTIONS UNDER IT. CAN SOME ONE TELL ME STEP BY STEP (1. 2. 3. ETC.), I WOULD APPRECIATE IT.

See the tutorial at Wikipedia:Picture tutorial AND PLEASE STOP YELLING, IT'S RUDE!! Dismas|^(talk) 04:04, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

--------

There is a lot of help available. In the left-hand navigation bar, you will see "Help". Lots of information can be found by exploring there.

Specifically, for instructions on how to insert an image, see How to Edit a Page - Images; for general editing, see How to edit a page

In order to upload images you want to insert, see Special:Upload Files upload instructions

BTW. Please try to avoid the use of all capital letters; it is considered SHOUTING. Thanks. ERcheck 04:09, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

--------

Fantastic! I've been a journalist for 20 years in radio and have dreamed of such a project...thank you!

Kittywaymo

• We all love wiki, kittywaymo, but this is not the place. Ask questions here. - William
• I'm glad you like the project, Kittywaymo. I'd be even happier if you decided to register an account and help out with improving Wikipedia. - 131.211.210.17 07:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone read 99% of English Wikipedia, after it gained a substaintial amount of articles (say: 500,000)? I want to. --William sharkey 07:49, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

doubtful as that would involve digging through a load of bot created articles which are not exactly the worlds mosting interesting read. (it wouls also involve reading articles at a rate of more than 1 per minute).Geni 12:12, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Of course if you have a burning desire to read the whole thing, these should put you off: List of places in Arkansas, Microeconomics. smurrayinaHauntedHouse...Boo!^{(User), (Talk)} 22:01, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I'm looking for information on something called the Pade' approximation, a method of estimating a matrix exponential. The actual name Pade should have an accent above the e, but I do not know how to insert this. Is there a way to do this, or does anyone know where I can find the info?

Thanks Colin Phillips

• When you are at an edit window, scroll down a bit. There should be a list of accented and otherwise odd characters there. Click to insert a character at the cursor. é is Alt+130 on an English keyboard. It doesn't appear as if we've got anything on the Padé approximation, so if you need to know something about that, please visit the science reference desk. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:03, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• See also Wikipedia:Special characters. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:04, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, why has the page on Westminster School been given a new title of "the royal college of st. peter at westminster" ? That may be the original name as mentioned in the article, but is known to virtually no-one in this way, including most ex-pupils who would not even recognise the name at all.

• Probably because that's the official name. I reverted to the most common use as per the Naming Conventions. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:45, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thanks.

As the image.

I hate the edit links in content area. Why not move the links to the right corner of the box header? I tried but my solution only works in Safari and Firefox, it failed in Microsoft Internet Explorer. Anyone who familiar with HTML/CSS and help me to do so? Yaohua2000 11:24, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You will have to suggest that to the developers and maybe it will be in the next update. -- Thorpe ^talk 17:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What template do I use for an article that is lacking important information on the subject matter? I can't seem to find one that says that...

Template:Expansion or stub?

I am trying to get the wikipedia page for yoism back. There used to be a lot of good info in the yosim page, but it has been deleted, apparently by administrators! for reasons that don't make sense. As the yoism homepage also got hacked recently, I assume that this is part of an anti-yoism vandalism campaign.

I haven't been able to figure out how to revert the document, and requests for undelete seem to be...incomplete. Please help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qkslvrwolf (talk • contribs) 08:46, 25 October 2005

You say that the reasons don't make sense. What are the reasons quoted? Sometimes a little too much jargon is used. Notinasnaid 15:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The article was deleted after going through the official deletion process. You can see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yoism. Recreating the article with substantially the same content will result in the article being deleted again. If you want to have the deleteion reviewed, you should post a request at WP:DRV. --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:11, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed today there is a new option on the Special:Upload page. It has a check box next to it and says "Ignore any warnings". What exactly does this mean? -- Thorpe ^talk 15:41, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing here but it may ignore the "Filename is missing underscores" and "Already picture with that filename" warnings that appear. Evil Monkey∴Hello 00:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information. -- Thorpe ^talk 17:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot understand why this was deleted:

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

I saw no reason posted. It isn't foul language or abusive or anything of that nature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.162.193.33 (talk • contribs) 12:18 EDT, 25 October 2005

I can guess at reasons why it was deleted. The main one is that Wikipedia is not a dictionary or slang guide. As a short article that did not attempt to go beyond a dictionary definition, it's not really in line with what Wikipedia is about. Friday (talk) 17:28, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict) In general, articles that are simply dictionary defs are not welcome on wikipedsia. See What wikipedia is not. And then an articel writtne in the dirst person "I'm not sure" is even less like an encyclopedic arilce. Strictly speaking this may not have conformed to the [[WP:CSDspeedy deletion criteria, and so arguably should hve had an WP:AFD debate, but in the current form, it would I think have been deleted without question, unless drastically rewritten. if you really want, you can ask for the deletion to be undone at deletion review, but you may not have much luck. You might do better, if you want such an article, to do enough research to write an actual article about this word and the concept behind it. That would probably not be deleted. If you have any qestions about this, feel free to drop me a note on my talk page. And please sign comments on discussion pages like this oen with four tildas (like this ~~~~). Thank you. DES ^(talk) 17:33, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To find why an article was deleted, the most direct route is to search for it in the deletion log ("Special pages", then "Logs", then "Deletion log" - here for Twitterpated) and ask on the talk page of the admin who deleted it (user talk:Finlay McWalter and user talk:Postdlf in this case). If you ask politely, you'll increase your chances of getting a polite reply. If you ask rudely you should still get a polite reply, but admins are only human. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:56, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the article about the cold war as I believe there may be a typying error within the first line. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War)

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs changing, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit any article by simply following the Edit this page link. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to...) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use out the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. DES ^(talk) 18:25, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What is the biggest wiki article? As in, what article on wiki has the most information. Maybe i should be asking what is the Longest article... im not sure.

• Please don't use "Wiki" as shorthand for Wikipedia; Wikipedia is a wiki, but that's not true the other way around (for more on this, see meta:Wikipedia is not Wiki. Special:Longpages says that List of places in Arkansas is the largest article in terms of number of bytes. --Kwekubo 21:00, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(Touchy! --Quasipalm 02:01, 26 October 2005 (UTC))[reply]

I'm not sure this has the most useful information, though. The longest useful article (ie. not a list) is probably microeconomics, although Prophets of Islam and Companies listed on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange don't sound too boring. smurrayinaHauntedHouse...Boo!^{(User), (Talk)} 22:07, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How would one find spelling mistakes very quickly? Such as purplefeltangel does? Please answer on my talk page Prodego ^talk 19:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Heading over to answer unless someone else has already done so. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:37, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason, hitting 'Save Page' comes up with the 'Preview' page, as does pressing it again and again until it eventually goes through. Why is this (I have checked. I am definitely pressing Save Page). smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 20:10, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just you, and it's been asked before. It's some sort of bug and as far as I recall the best answer that was posted so far was "They're working on it." Dismas|^(talk) 20:47, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Annoyingly, it keeps happening when I try to thank you for the message! smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 21:40, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Funny how life works like that sometimes.  :-) Dismas|^(talk) 22:16, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to encourage some people I know to join and use Wikipedia. One specific query they have is the frequency of vandalism. I am attempting to find the actual frequency of all acts of vandalism on Wikipedia. I don't need the statistic processed in any way; a raw, hourly, or general figure would do. Can anybody point me in the direction of such a piece of information? --Davril2020 22:29, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No your best bet would be to go over to Recent changes and load up a minutes' worth of changes in a tabbed browser and sift through them. repeat a couple of times to get a rough average.Geni 22:53, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The article I'm referring to is TV IV. Doing a wikipedia google search with TV IV returns the article as the first hit. With the wikipedia search, it doesn't return it at all. How can I make it so when a person searches in the wikipedia search field for 'tv iv', the article appears as one of the results. I'm sure this is in a faq somewhere...

First of all, be sure to sign your comments with --~~~~ so we know who is speaking. To answer your question, add the redirect code to the tv iv article for it to redirect to TV IV:

#REDIRECT [[TV IV]]

I've taken the liberty of adding the code, so now anyone who searches for tv iv will be redirected to TV IV. --tomf688^{talk} 02:37, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this redirect only affects "searches" in the sense of wikilinks, so tv iv will now link to the article. Entering "tv iv" in the "search" box and hitting "go" found the article without the redirect. And, the redirect has no effect on entering "tv iv" in the "search" box and hitting "search" (which still doesn't seem to find it). This last form of searching used to be based on an index of all wikipedia articles built somewhat infrequently (so changes and new articles didn't show up until the next time it was rebuilt), but I thought the software was recently changed to "re-index" continuously. In any event, full text searching is a distinctly secondary function of the software - it's even turned off at times (without notice) to help performance of more primary functions (retrieving and editing articles). For more on searching see Wikipedia:Searching (from the "Help" link on every page, click "How to search for an article"). -- Rick Block (talk) 13:49, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The article on incineration has a big NPOV tag on it. I've reorganised it, tried to remove the bias and organised it so that anyone wishing to add more information could do so easily. Can I just remove the NPOV? Do I need to delete it from a few different places or will deleting it from the article work. Since I did the reworking I feel uncomfortable just removing the NPOV myself without getting someone to check it over and improve it some more. Bandraoi 23:47, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removing the tag from the article is all that's necessary to make it not marked that way anymore -- but you might want to post a new comment to the talk page asking for any objections, to avoid the possibility of someone turning around and adding it again right after you remove it. If no-one objects after a few days remove the tag. — mendel ☎ 02:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't suppose anybody knows what's wrong with my infobox? Here's the original article Qui-Gon Jinn and this is the one I've started: io:Qui-Gon Jinn. See, Qui-Gon's just standing there on the left completely devoid of a border. I always have a problem with the border even though I just copy and paste the exact code and after a number of occurrences it looks like I just have no idea how to work these things. Mithridates 02:39, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is because the io wikipedia does not have a CSS class of "infobox" like the English Wikipedia (that class does all the formatting). I've modified to io template to get rid of the class and just use the straight formatting. Evil Monkey∴Hello 03:20, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That's exactly what I was hoping for. Good to see that there is also a reason why the infoboxes don't work as I didn't have a clue. Mithridates 03:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've recently replaced Image:Flag of Scotland Pantone300.png with Image:Flag of Scotland.svg - the same image but in vector format for better scaling. I'm going through the list of articles that use the image and updating them to use the new one. Now most actually use it via various templates and I think I've updated most of these and the list of articles using the image should now be quite small, however the list has not updated - the articles making use of the image via a template are still listed even though the template is now using the new image. Is there anything that can be done to purge the cache and update the list of backlinks?

Thanks/Wangi 09:07, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What you can do is dummy save the articles that are occurring as "false postives". To do this you just open up the edit window for the article and save it, without changing anything. The edit won't appear in the edit summary, but it will clear it from "What links here". Of course, this process is tedious, and there is a bot that will do this for a particular template that you nominate. Unfortunately my bot is having a rest at the moment, but I (or someone else hopefully) should be able to clear a template of your chosing later tonight - which template is causing the bother?--Commander Keane 10:24, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd appreciate that. The following templates used the image, and need seeing to:

• Template:Country flag alias Scotland
• Template:Football in the United Kingdom
• Template:Hebrides-geo-stub
• Template:PoliticsScotland
• Template:ReligionScotland
• Template:SCO
• Template:Scotland subdivisions
• Template:Scotland-bio-stub
• Template:Scotland-geo-stub
• Template:Scotland-stub
• Template:UKFlags
• Template:UKFormation
• Template:United Kingdom
• Template:United Kingdom regions

A nice short list! Thanks/wangi 10:58, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's probably more work than I was expecting. I'll spend the next couple of days working through.--Commander Keane 14:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

whatisthepurposeofwikipediaortheadventageofwikipedia

--anon

• See WP:FAQ. It helps people learn about spacing and punctuation for starters. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:10, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

i am doing a project and i need to know the original creator of the site

Jimbo Wales is the founder and leader of Wikipedia. Alf ^melmac 12:25, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you need to know this for giving a source, see Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia Shimgray | talk | 14:34, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've just added a brand new article on the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA).

I've linked to it from the article on the Bologna declaration and now that takes you through to the new article.

It also appears in the Education category where it should do.

So why when I search for it does it not appear in the search results list? Is it just me or does it take a while for the search to pick up new articles?

--Madmedea 14:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. The search isn't done against the live database, but rather against an index which is generated from time to time. The resources needed to recreate the index each time an article was created are immense - even Google doesn't update its index on the fly - so the index always lags. (That said, our search function isn't the best anyway, but you get what you pay for...) 83.151.239.214 15:20, 26 October 2005 (UTC) (Shimgray, not logged in)[reply]

Correct. The search is also not our strongest point anyway. Try this link to use google to search wikipedia. DES ^(talk) 15:32, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a message at the top of the page. Something like: "If a newly created article does not appear in the search, please wait 3-4 hours before posting. The search database can be slow to update." smurrayinaHauntedHouse...Boo!^{(User), (Talk)} 19:58, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The interwiki link to ja:昭和電工 on Showa Denko is showing up as a redlink to an article in enwiki! I can't see what's wrong with it, could someone else take a look? Cheers, Physchim62 15:04, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Fixed it now: Japanese is ja: not jp:!! Physchim62 15:10, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've been banging my head against the arcane Help:template files, so I thought I'd come here. Caveat: this is for a Wikicities project, not Wikipedia proper, but it will help me understand templates on both sites. Also, I believe they are still on MediaWiki 1.4 for a few more days/weeks over there.

In any case: What I'd like to do is create a template that can be used to reference a particular chapter in a particular book. I've stared at the convoluted help on variables, and played in the Sandbox, to no avail. What we've got now is:

{{tgh|9}} == ''[[The Great Hunt]]'', [[The Great Hunt/Chapter 9|Chapter 9]] == The Great Hunt, Chapter 9.

We're going to use these with subst: to reduce server load. What I'd like to be able to do is twofold:

1. Use a template for the book title, i.e. {{tgh}} expands to The Great Hunt, so we can use that as {{{1}}}. But if we can't, we can't; a dozen templates is not that bad.
2. More importantly, some books have both Prologues and Epilogues; these obviously don't fit under the above subpage schema, and if there was a way for the template to recognize {{wh|p}} and expand it correctly to Winter's Heart, Prologue, that would be perfect.

I know the piping of the chapter link may be a problem, as well; if that's what's holding us back, we'll see if we can rework the templates. Thanks in advance. -- Nae'blis _{(I'm not signed in here at work)}

Hello everyone, question...an article I nominated for deletion (which was subsequently deleted) somehow became undeleted - the article is Flaming Milka. The history log doesn't give any insight as to how it came back, and I added subst:afd to the article again. What should I do seeing as how the article already has a deletion talk page? Does anyone know how the page was undeleted? Thank you... Paul 18:13, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This article came up at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#verifiable_sources. According to the deletion log (which includes restores) the article was restored by user:Grue, who I suspect would be happy to discuss this with you. The usual practice when a page is relisted on WP:AFD is to add a number after the AFD page (changing references as appropriate). So, in this example, the AFD page would be Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flaming Milka 2. -- Rick Block (talk) 19:04, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

First off, with only 2 votes, both delete, the article was a borderline case anyway. User:Grue undeleted it on October 22, 2005, 14:27 (UTC) and, IMO, was right in doing so. The article is written reasonably well, seems plausible, and is verifiable, even if that might involve a trip to the library. See Slaughter in Serene. Interestingly, the article was created by one User:Richard Myers, and one Richard Myers is one of the co-authors of that book mentioned at the above extlink. Even if that is a Union-sponsored book, that doesn't mean they'd invent things. Maybe the book has the sources needed, and if not, archives of Denver newspapers should have something on her. If you asked them nicely, they might even tell you for free whether or not that woman really existed. BTW, your AFD notice refers to the old vote page. Lupo 19:21, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If Richard Myers = User:Richard Myers, doesn't that make this a form of original research? I'm not being facetious, I truly want to know if it matters that the book was only 'co-authored'. The newspaper sources, of course, would be fine, provided they get cited. 64.126.24.10 20:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An expert on a subject, who cites his own published works, is not writing an article on "original research." See WP:NOR#The role of expert editors. -- SCZenz 20:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am certainly surprised to see that the article was undeleted, but i am also pleased. The book is an anthology with many hundreds of footnotes, and two authors refer to Milka. Also, this is the second book to describe Milka (with both including phtographs.) So i feel the research is verifiable.

I have resolved to come back with a more carefully documented version of the article for Wikipedia, and having the article restored will make that effort easier. I note that someone has added a couple of references, and i will add more at a later time.

In my research for the book, i found references to Milka in dozens of newspapers, found her in the 1910 and 1920 census reports, and an associate found her in a city directory. I have also exchanged email with relatives.

Wikipedia does work in a mysterious manner. Just when someone did something that i felt was unjustified, someone else corrected it. Thanks, everyone, my appreciation of this wonderful website grows with each new experience. User:Richard Myers

My subject line makes this sound worse than it is, honest.

I work in the publishing arm of a huge international media company. Lately I've been looking at what information exists in Wikipedia about this publisher. There is some, but much of it incorrect. I would fix it myself, but I'm not sure I've got all the details right, either.

For this reason, I've been considering contacting my PR department and suggesting that *they* update and correct this information, since they know much more about the company's organizational structure, etc. This would not entail any significant expansion of the article, and they would of course be careful to maintain a neutral point of view. It would simply be a matter of correcting the facts on which imprints are which, and etc.

I assume that this is kosher, but I wanted to check since I know it gets murky in questions of advertisement/vanity/self-promotion. In my opinion, this would be none of the above, but I did want to solicit opinion before I approach the PR dept.

My second question is even murkier. For existing Wikipedia articles about the books that my company has published, I am assuming it would be OK for us (meaning, probably, the editorial and PR departments) to edit the articles in cases where there are factual inacuracies, provided that we are careful to maintain a neutral point of view.

However, I'm not sure how appropriate it would be for us to create *new* articles about books that we judge are important enough. I would like very much to recommend that our PR department create articles on a few books that are not currently in Wikipedia. We would probably employ some objective criteria to determine which titles are appropriate--number of weeks on the New York Times bestseller list, author prominence, number of reviews, etc--but I do worry that creating entirely new articles for a product we are selling might be crossing that nebulous line of self-promotion, even if the tone of the articles was (as it certainly would be) rigidly neutral.

So, thoughts?

--Babyhedgehog 19:19, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:195.93.21.36

Not sure what this is all about but I seem to be getting abuse when I ahven't done anything. I found it because there was a note "you have messages" when I came to look at something.

<email removed>

I'm not sure why this comment was made here, but I myself got the same mysterious message last week (before I created this account). I haven't been vandalizing anything, and my IP address is, as I understand it, usually randomly assigned by the firewall I'm behind, so my guess was that someone else at my company was screwing with Wikipedia. But now that this guy--who is *not* at my company (I confirmed this before the email address was removed) has had the same problem with what seems to be the same IP address... well, it's very strange. --Babyhedgehog 22:01, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Strictly speaking, it is "okay". Afterall, anyone can edit wikipedia. Ideally though, people at your company would do this individually, not on company time and pay. Also, by not setting this standard, you help to ensure that wikipedia does not turn into a giant billboard for companies. You should use your best judgement. --William sharkey 20:59, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the interest of propriety, you could discuss the changes first on the talk page, although that would only work if the pages are being actively watched. As for the books - it all depends on whether the books are notable enough to get past AfD. If they are notable enough, then I doubt anyone would object to a neutrally written article. If you want to be fully aboveboard you could always write the articles in your user space, and then ask other editors to have a look at what you have written. It all comes down to quality - if you can write something that is NPOV, and the topic is unambiguously notable, then you are fine. You could also raise the issue at the author's article (since authors are likely to be more notable than are individual books, most of the time). Basically, be honest, be aboveboard about it, and I doubt anyone will get too upset (and if they get upset, take it in stride and with good humour). Guettarda 21:17, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to read WP:SPAM#How not to be a spammer for tips on avoidign the impression that you are using wikipedia as an advertising vehicle, which is generlaly objected to. DES ^(talk) 21:43, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a stub. My article is still pretty short and I would like to know how I can add that small line saying "This article is a stub. Please help Wikipedia by expanding it." I feel that would be a good addition for others to read. Also, I would like to know if there are other demands to be placed at the bottom of an article like "Please help cite references in the text" or "Please add external links" and so on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Screwball23 (talk • contribs) 16:47 EDT, 26 October 2005

You can add the phrase {{stub}} to the bottom of the article. This adds the sentence automatically. That will put the general stub notice up, which is fine. Even better would be one of these more specific stub tags. Johntex\^talk 21:54, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As for other demmands on the reader: oh, yes - we have many more such templates covering things like the need to cite sources, make more neutral in tone, translate, etc. Please see this list Johntex\^talk 21:57, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict) Most of these are done by templates. There is a useful but long list, organized by categories at Wikipedia:Template messages. For stubs, rather than using the generic stub tempalte, please find the correct stub category for the particular article you are using. The list is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types. Please use a proper stub tag from that list, and do not use the generic {{stub}}. You can read more about stubs in general at WP:STUB. Also please sign messages on discussion pages with four tildas (like this ~~~~). Thank you. DES ^(talk) 22:00, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For anyone reading this who, like me, wanted to read the stub in question it looks like it's Christopher X. Brodeur. That the one you were referring to? Also, you can sign your posts here and on talk pages with four tildes (e.g. ~~~~). Dismas|^(talk) 22:02, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

{{US-politician-stub}} seems like it might be appropriate for that article. It is a little long for a stub though, some sort of cleanup tag might be better. Johntex\^talk 22:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If I use some of wikipedia's content in a website, can I place the required copyleft info in the source code rather than a visible link on the webpage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.113.100.60 (talk • contribs) 17:20 EDT, 26 October 2005

While I am not a lawyer, nor an official of the Foundation, I think that if the information is visible to users, and you are claiming to use it under the GFDL then at the least you must have a visible acknowledgement of your source, wikipedia, with a link -- preferably a link to the specific article of which you are using text; and you must have a visible acknowledgment that the text is used under the GFDL, and a link to the text of the GFDL. See WP:FORK for more on this. DES ^(talk) 22:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• No you can't put the info in the source. The whole point of it is that visitors can find it easily. - Mgm|^(talk) 04:43, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(GFDL section 2)

You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially, provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License. You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies you make or distribute

(GFDL section 3)

If you publish printed copies (or copies in media that commonly have printed covers) of the Document, numbering more than 100, and the Document's license notice requires Cover Texts, you must enclose the copies in covers that carry, clearly and legibly, all these Cover Texts: Front-Cover Texts on the front cover, and Back-Cover Texts on the back cover... The "Cover Texts" are certain short passages of text that are listed, as Front-Cover Texts or Back-Cover Texts, in the notice that says that the Document is released under this License. A Front-Cover Text may be at most 5 words, and a Back-Cover Text may be at most 25 words.

So in my non-lawyerly opinion, no -- if you create a webpage which verbatim-copies Wikipedia content, you have to have the equivalent of a front and back cover text. Traditionally, where webpages are concerned, we have been OK with some sort of acknowledgement at the foot of the page saying that you got it from page XXX Wikipedia (where XXX is a hyperlink back to the souce page), and that it is licensed under the GFDL. →Raul654 05:06, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright notices aren't part of the title page, they follow it!. In my view, as expressed above, Wikipedia doesn't comply with the GFDL either in this respect, although making it comply would probably make the web interface and printouts unusable. As others have noted, there is no way that hiding the licence notices in the transparent version would be acceptable. Judging by what both the GPL and GFDL say, I believe the the FSF considers it important that all recipients be made aware of the licensing status of the material.

Note that the link back in the GFDL is for unmodified opaque versions (which would properly contain the full History and set of copyright notices). What is being proposed here is a modified version, which needs to have its own transparent version and own updated History. The linked URL is also supposed to be to the transparent version, and there is no exact transparent version in Wikipedia.

Wikipedia does, effectively, contain the licence notice in opaque copies, so even being pragmatic about the real licence terms won't excuse you from including that. IANAL

--David Woolley 18:03, 27 October 2005 (UTC) (yet again had to put this in manually because of the system losing logged in status)[reply]

Several of the Javascript keyboard shortcuts Wikipedia uses on OS X, such as Ctrl-W and Ctrl-E, conflict with my system-wide keyboard shortcuts. How can I disable keyboard shortcuts on Wikipedia? I have looked at the preferences but I cannot find any such option there. If this cannot be done, is there some option for me to disable Javascript altogether on Wikipedia without disabling it in my browser? --HunterX 05:02, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked this same question here multiple times and never received a response. All I have been able to do is try to hack out something with Greasemonkey (a Firefox extension) to forceably remove the access keys with Javascript. And even that seems to have broken now. This is really a serious accessibility problem, though I applaud the MediaWiki folks for the attempt to make it more accessible via these shortcuts. If all else fails, you might want to look into Access Key Companion. —HorsePunchKid→龜 07:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

HorsePunchKid, have you tried asking at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)?--Commander Keane 08:02, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea if this works, but it might:

The keys are defined at the javascript include file MediaWiki:Monobook.js. Look at that page to see the syntax and try to use it to override it with custom "nonsense" keys in a user javascript file (like User:Sverdrup/monobook.js). HTH — Sverdrup 18:02, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've just found a simpler solution that probably was introduced in the new 1.6 alpha. Go to your preferences, hit the Misc tab, and uncheck the Enable "jump to" irritating accessibility links box. —HorsePunchKid→龜 20:09, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How do I position a user box so that it is like the babel boxes, all aligned neatly along the right of the page? On the below example, can someone move it to the right so that i can view the source code? thanks! --Ballchef 05:54, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There you go. Titoxd^(?!?) 06:03, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

oh thank you so very much. I had tried that thing but I never noticed the <-/div-> at the end. thanks thanks again. --Ballchef 01:34, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so how do i list these userboxes along the right of the page, like babel boxes? same procedure as last time would be good, thanks. Here's three boxes to play with:

--Ballchef 01:56, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated the above file for discussion of its purpose and/or potential deletion. You are welcome to participate in the discussion and help reach a consensus. Jimmy Wales has a big bad beard.

File:Internet Explorer logo.jpg This user contributes on Internet Explorer, and is proud of it.

Mj This user is high as a kite. :m

• That's how I'd do it, in a table. Didn't know what the ":m" was though. --Commander Keane 04:52, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That was to show you how good I am at this stuff. Thanks. --Ballchef 08:27, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the process of building consensus on a proposed guideline for inclusion of webcomics (WP:COMIC). What is the generally established procedure for turning such a proposal into a real guideline? Presumably WP:MUSIC would be a logical precedent. -- SCZenz 06:14, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• There's no real process to turn such a thing into a guideline. Generally, when a page has been reviewed by numerous Wikipedians and used in an AFD debate, it's considered widely acknowledged as useful and becomes a guideline automatically. The real problem lies in getting something to become policy. - 131.211.210.17 07:10, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • So after there's been discussion and a rough consensus among interested users, I can just change Template:Proposed to Template:Guideline? -- SCZenz 07:34, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Comics seem to be a heavily discussed topic, so it may be a good idea to announce your plans on the Village Pump and the mailing list so it gets adequate attention before you do so. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:24, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • The village pump I can handle, the mailing list I know nothing about. Where's the info on it? -- SCZenz 11:35, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Wikipedia:Mailing lists. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:16, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Although there is quite a bit of information on the Afrikaans language and some articles written in Afrikaans, there isn't an Afrikaans Wikipedia (under 'in other languages'). How can this be organised or set up, or what is the requirements for Wikipedia to list a language specifically?

Thanks David

• There is a Wikipedia in Afrikaans (click here) It was under the header for Wikipedias with less than 1000 articles. Proposals for new languages on existing projects belong on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages - 131.211.210.17 07:14, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• If you take a look at here, you will find a link to the Afrikaans Wikipedia towards the bottom: you will (should!) find similar links in all articles on languages for which there is a Wikipedia. HTH HAND Phil | Talk 10:41, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! I noticed that some userpages have 'fancy-looking' styles like tables and the like. Do they do that with HTML, C++ etc. or there's a page about this. Thanks! --Uncke Herb 09:52, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

can you give an example. As for as I know all user pages are put together with the normal mix of html and wiki markup.

• Most userpages are a combination of HTML and wiki markup. There's no real templates, but feel free to copy the bare bones of a userpage and replace things with relevant info about yourself. I copied my layout from someone who themselves copied it from Blankfaze. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• See Wikipedia:How to use tables and (especially) m:Help:Table for information on wiki table syntax and usage. (Most of the HTML table formatting commands also work). TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:17, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What does putting "Subst:" in front of a template wikicode do? --Commander Keane 12:13, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When you use a template without subst, the server reads the template and includes it every time the page you added it to is loaded.

When you use subst, the server adds the content of the template to the page when you save it. This reduces the amount of work that the server needs to do every time the page is loaded as it doesn't need to go and find the template contents every time.

See Wikipedia:Transclusion costs and benefits for more information. --GraemeL ^(talk) 12:48, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've read I should be able to edit my Cologne Blue skin by visiting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bodnotbod/cologneblue.js - but when I visit that page it says:

<p>The database did not find the text of a page that it should have found, named "User:Bodnotbod/cologneblue.js".</p> <p>If it is a recently changed page, trying again in a minute or two will usually work. Alternatively, you may have followed an outdated diff or history link to a page that has been deleted.</p> <p>If this is not the case, you may have found a bug in the software. Please report this using the procedure given at [[Wikipedia:Bug_reports]], making note of the URL.</p>

(It displays with those <p> tags unrendered and appearing as I have made them do. I haven't previously tried to edit a skin before, so whatever I'm doing wrong is probably simple. --bodnotbod 14:02, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps this page may help. Look at the CSS and Javascript sections. Link --Gflores 21:13, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• • Thanks, but I stumbled on that page and couldn't find anything mentioning the error message I'm getting was getting. Ah, perhaps that's just what it returns if you've never made an edit to the page before? In any case I haven't received my God Light mode as hoped. Anyone see what I've done wrong (or failed to do)? --bodnotbod 05:17, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am putting together product images for a commercial site. What are the copyright issues surrounding using images from wikipedia?

Each image tends to be used under different copyrights. For example, some are public domain, so you could use them without fear. However, some are used under fair use which would mean that if you were to wish to use them for a commercial site you would not necessarily be able to do so. Yet other images are donated by users only if they are not for commercial projects. The best thing would be to visit the page of each image you wish to use, which you can do by clicking on it. See also Wikipedia:Copyrights#Image_guidelines. --bodnotbod 14:10, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On the site [11] there are historial census population figures for states and counties. Could a bot be used to add this data to the appropriate articles, as I have done by hand to Warren County, Ohio? PedanticallySpeaking 16:29, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As I recall there is a bot running (or it has run in the past at some point) that is adding articles about cities and towns. I don't recall the bot's name but you might want to ask over at Wikipedia:Bots for more info. They would know all the details. I know this doesn't specifically answer your question but I believe it would be a step in the right direction. Hope this helps. Dismas|^(talk) 19:39, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is Rambot. I don't know what info it adds or what sources it uses. DES ^(talk) 19:44, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Data exists from the Census on Ohio's townships here and here. Would it be possible to creat a bot to create articles on Ohio townships as was done to create basic county and municipality articles? I've created a number of these township articles by hand, as have SwissCelt and Beirne, and created Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ohio_townships to provide guidance. But there are many townships to go—over a thousand—and I'd appreciate some help. I'd appreciate replies to my talk page. PedanticallySpeaking 16:29, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My question is why was this put on the web, and who maintains the site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.222.53.225 (talk • contribs) 2005-10-27 19:24:06

Welcome to Wikipedia. Why was it put on the web? Well because it is of encyclopedic value I guess. This site is maintained by you, me... everybody! If you see an inaccuracy in the article then please be bold and correct it, likewise if it does not maintain a neutral point of view. To learn more about Wikipedia please start at WP:WELCOME and Wikipedia:About. Thanks/wangi 18:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

how did Sigmund Freud die

Sigmund Freud: After contracting cancer of the mouth, he underwent over 30 operations to treat the disease; his death was by a physician-assisted morphine overdose. wangi 21:02, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the edits of an anon user twice now for the Val Kilmer article. I've left a message on the IP's talk page about this. I don't want to violate the 3RR but I'm not sure how to proceed. There's a little bit of good info in the edits but quite a bit of what I see as "Hollywood hype" type editing. So where do I go from here? Can I revert an anon's edits a third time if I've already left a note for them on their talk page (or the closest thing they have to a talk page)? Should I post my reasoning on the Val Kilmer talk page? Where do I go from here? Dismas|^(talk) 21:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:3RR "Do not revert any single page in whole or in part more than three times in 24 hours." (my emphasis). So you have one revert in hand, if needed. Although the anon's edits are indeed unacceptably POV, I don't think they really qualify as "simple vandalism", so you shouldn't go beyond that. I've added that page to my watchlist, and it looks as if someone else is helping too. Someone should inform the Kilmer-fan of 3RR, as it only fair he know about it before we threaten to block him on it. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:11, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Should that someone be me or an admin since they'd be the ones doing the blocking?Ah! I see you've already left them a message, thanks for the info! Dismas|^(talk) 21:30, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, anyone can leave the message. For newbies, it's only reasonable to be gentle. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:42, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Great! You hit my pet peeve. The anon made repeated POV edits. If they were NPOV, there wouldn't have been a problem. Please take care and don't mixup NPOV and POV. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:31, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can i get a physical map of Virginia?

In a map shop, yes. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:11, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Finlay, you wanting a drum roll for that one? ;) Anyway, the Virginia article includes a topographical and an atlas map which both show physical features. Probably not exactly what you're after, but you've got to do some leg work yourself! (it's not hard) wangi 21:17, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I seem to have forgotten my password, and the e-mail recovery feature doesn't seem to be working either. Is there any other way I can recover my account?

• No, not really, unless you can convince a developer with time on their hands the account belongs to you. Are you sure you've checked the correct email account? Perhaps you should try again later. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:34, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I've check all my e-mail accounts (and spam folders) and I don't see anything. This is the third time I've tried, so I guess that leaves talking to an admin. Who should I contact?
• Admins can't do anything about it. You should try contacting a developer. Developers have direct database access. (see the link) - Mgm|^(talk) 04:43, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How do I make a suggestion?

Try going to the Village pump, and going to the appropriate subpage, and follow the instructions there. Titoxd^(?!?) 22:45, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone take a look at the picture of a greenland paddle I added to Kayak? Is it a record for the thinnest photo?! I'm really not happy with the formatting... Trollderella 01:30, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thought about rotating it? -guety is talking english bad 02:18, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno—the vertical format is visually appealing; it makes a nice accent down the side of the article. Unfortunately, the image is too narrow for the caption to work properly. You could rotate it as Guety suggests, but I'd be afraid it would lose its visual punch. Perhaps you could pad the image with a bit more whitespace on the left and right. The current version is about 10:1 height:width; maybe pad it out to 6:1 or so? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:42, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Another user has been tracking my IP address from what I've posted on this site, and has been trying to locate me. What should I do?

For starters, get a user name so that your IP is no longer displayed in the history etc, see Wikipedia:Why create an account?. --Commander Keane 04:56, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is this by any chance a reference to the message you were sent "Please stop vandalizing the article Metroid: Zero Mission, or this IP address may end up being blocked. --Poiuyt Man talk 06:41, 28 October 2005 (UTC)"? Notinasnaid 06:55, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I really can't upload an SVG file at all; every time I try I get a big red message saying "This file contains HTML or script code that may be erroneously interpreted by a web browser.", even though the SVG file contains no Javascript or weird stuff whatsoever (in fact, it's rather conspicuously plain-jane). The so-called "warning" in fact actually seems to be an error, since it gives me no way to proceed, and then I have to press the back-arrow button about three times to escape the big red message, and at the end of it all I don't end up returning to the file upload form (so any information I typed into the file description box etc. is lost).

None of this helps me understand the what the problem is. AnonMoos 06:14, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's possible to upload SVG files here (sadly). It seems that the software mistakes XML for HTML here. — Sverdrup 23:46, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I know it can be done on the Commons but they come out as PNG. -- Thorpe ^talk 23:48, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to do it on Wikimedia Commons first, but it doesn't work for me here or there. Here's the file I was trying to upload: User:AnonMoos/SVGuploadtest . Thanks for any help. AnonMoos 02:03, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wangi has successfully uploaded Image:Flag of Scotland.svg to the commons, maybe you could ask them about it.

I am trying to obtain any information concerning a collision in the Video channel 1972 between the S.S. Royston Grange and the TIen Chee. The name and address of an English language newspaper in Montevideo would be helpful. Thank you

This page is for questions about Wikipedia. For factual questions, please go to Wikipedia:Reference desk. Thanks. --Kewp (t) 12:26, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friends, I'm from Argentina and I would like to know if you could possibly tell me what was the position of Argentina in the world rank in terms of GDP (nominal) in 1970 and 1950. If you can´t give me the information, I'll be glad if you tell me where to find it. Thank you very much. Kindly,

F.R.

• This is a page for questions regarding Wikipedia itself. Please post your question on the reference desk. - Mgm|^(talk) 17:59, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

About seventeen hours ago I got a message while I was editing, announcing that WP was being vandalized and was in the process of restoring/recovering data. The message seemed to be at the top of all the pages I looked at. I finished up, saved my edits, and logged out. Now I don't see the message, and I can't find any notice that indicates it happened, was fixed, or was stopped.

Was the message itself a form of vandalism, or an actual notice of what was going on? Was it a message to everyone, or just some subset, or just me? Is there a log of such announcements where I can check what the outcome was? I notice I got a similar announcement when I received an incoming welcome message on my talk page (announcing an incoming message, not vandalism) and I don't know what triggers such messages. --Dan Hoey 17:00, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Odd I don't think it was a legit message sitenotice hasn't been edited for days. what page was it on?Geni 17:09, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was editing Map-coloring games, a page I started a while earlier to cover some redlinks and some undisambiguated usages. But I recall the notice was appearing on other pages, too. I could be wrong, I suppose.--Dan Hoey 18:02, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How do you make a user page/regular page? Such as User:Essjay/WikiPhilosophy.--Anti-Anonymex2^{Come to my page! I've gone caliente loco!} 17:46, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can just make a page: For example User:Anti-Anonymex2/stuff. It appears as a red link at first since you haven't made it yet. But after you've made it, it will be just like a regular page. It's easiest to just put User:Anti-Anonymex2/stuff (like this [[User:Anti-Anonymex2/stuff]]) on your user page, and click on it there, so you will be able to find it again.--Kewp (t) 18:01, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Just enter the name of the page you want to create, and then press go. It will show you a "Create this article" redlink, which you click on, and then, you edit it as if it were a normal page. The same goes for subpages. Titoxd^(?!?) 18:03, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On the article about Guy Fawkes, there is a section called "Gunpower Plot." Under that section, in the first paragraph, there is a line that read "[...] English Islamic extremists [...]". It should read "English Catholic extremists," but when I go into "edit this page" it already reads "Catholic" but will not change to reflect so.

Why not?!?!

This means that vandalism had been committed on this artilce but has already been fixed. You may need to refresh your view of the article, or clear your browser cache, before the display version shows correctly. DES ^(talk) 18:17, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

how do you get the genus,family,order,class,phylum,and kingdom of a lion.

see Lion where all that info is provided. If you were asking how the taxobox is used to display that info, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Tree of Life/taxobox usage new. DES ^(talk) 19:24, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure exactly how to merge, but these two articles are about the same thing, Tulip_Time_Festival and Tulip Festival. I'm not sure which is the source, since the festival takes place in different places. I know in one place, the name is tulip time festival, other cities may use the same name, they may not. I'm kind of new, so I'm not sure what to do. Gflores 19:17, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Generally one simply suggests such a merge, and then, if people agree (or at least don't object) after a while, copies infor from one articel to the othe, leaving one as a redirect to the other. In this case Tulip Festival has much more content, and seems a more likely search term, so i would think that a proper destination for the merge. I have used the {tl|mergeto} and {{mergefrom}} tags to suggest such a merge. Anotehr tiem you can do the same yourself. DES ^(talk) 19:30, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking for the following SMS solution and wanted to know if I can use your service.

A user calls into a predefined phone number. The user is asked to enter option 1-5 Based on the selection user receives a predetermined SMS message to their phone.

How is billing handled? Do u support ALL carrier in the US? TY.

Please tell us who you think we are? There may be some confusing stuff on our web site. Notinasnaid 21:09, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted a few photos I took but after re-reading the licencing specs, I must admit I am now more confused then anything. Basically, which one is it that could be sumed up as:

"I made it, people can do with it what they want but if someone starts making money off it, I'd like to see some of it too."

There is no approved wikipedia license that says that, or anything at all near it. Nor is preventing commercial reuse allowed. I created {{Limited Use}} to restrict uses to an encyclopedic context, but that has been proposed for deletion. (It is been disccused now at WP:TFD#Limited Use, and in any case that does not suggest that anyoen should pay the copyright holder anything for any use. I'm afrains if you upload an image (or a text) to which you hold copyright, you will have to live with the possibility that soemone will make money off it, and you may not get any of that money. DES ^(talk) 19:48, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Out of curiousity, what was the reason it was decided not to have any such limited use ? was it a fear of copyright holder removing some of their items further down the road or something else ?--Marc pasquin 20:13, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I think it's related to the whole open source ideal of Wikipedia. Wikipedia can freely be copied, cloned or sold, in whole or in part (subject to acknowledgements). If each of hundreds of thousands picture licenses had to be separately examined, relicensed, etc. the whole ideal could fail. Notinasnaid 21:08, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Strictly speaking it hasn't "been decided" the deletion of that template is being debated. (and one must now examine each image separately in any case, due to the huge number used via "Fair use") The "limited use" tag would not require any reexamination for a direct copy or copy with modifications, it would only require examiantion when using an image in a completely different context -- which is somethign that ought to be done anyway. I think some people are persuing the "open source theory" here farther than is sensible or wise, and farther than is needed by wikipedia's basic purposes and principles. That said, at the moment those views seem to be in the majority here. But anyone is free to enter the debate and express a view. I gave a link to the discussion on this particualr template above. DES ^(talk) 21:44, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a hospital in Cheboksary that is called Polyclinics or something like that? I am trying to locate someone there but unable to find it on the internet. Any help is appreciated.

First of all, this page is for questions about Wikipedia and how to use it, the place for factual questions is Wikipedia:Reference desk. Secondly, we would need to know what country/state/province/etc. Cheboksary is in to be able to help you. Dismas|^(talk) 21:03, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was doing a search on google and I noticed that this site: [12] appears to have copied the contents of this article without any mention of wikipedia in an attempt to get people to click on the ads that surround the page. I'm not sure what to do about this, so I'm posting it here and hoping a more experienced user can inform the right people. Oh and there seems to be a claim in the bottom left corner that this is their content: “2000-2005 guideofcasinos.com” --Canageek 22:00, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

see the forks & mirrors page for a list of many such sites, and recommended actions, including letters that can be sent to the operators requesting that they comply with the GFDL. DES ^(talk) 22:06, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think the Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages article could use a bit of clarification. It includes info on how to propose a merge, and how to perform a merge, but doesn't really explain when each action is appropriate.

• Do all merges need to be proposed first?
• How long should a proposed merge wait for objections to be lodged before the merge is performed?
• Can anybody perform the merge? Is it appropriate for the person who proposed the merge to perform it?

Thanks! --Red Robot 22:38, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who feels competent (and willing) can perform a merge. A merge usually requires some kmowledge abouth the subject in order that information is merged smoothly, rahter than simply plumping done redudnant chuncks of text in an article. It also often requires soem judgement on wht to include in the merged version. Sources (and their citations) to specific facts should be preserved. Soem skill at wiki editing and markup is also desirable, but a merge is no (or not much) trickier than any edit of comperable size -- some are larger than others.

No one is ever required to propose a merge you can be bold in editing and a merge is an edit. However whenr you suspect a merge might be contrversial, it is usually better to propose and discuss it first. otherwise edit wars adn revert wars may occur, or at the least bad feelign, and this is not good.

One may also propsoe a merge if one hopes to persuade someone else to do the actual merging.

Once there seems to be pretty celar consensus on performign a merge, ther is no neeed to wait longer. Anyone, includign the original proposer, may do a merge that seems to have consensus. There is no formal standard fo how long to wait or how many people must support a merge. It is usually a poor idea to just do the merge while active discussuion is still in progress.

I hope that helps. I think merges are often a good idea. DES ^(talk) 00:11, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that does help. Red Robot 00:44, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the light of this exchange, I moved Court citation to Case citation. I'm now wondering whether that was too glib an idea, though, as I've subsequently discovered there are nearly 500 links to Court citation which are (or might be) double redirects - far more than I can fix manually.

Apart from "that'll teach you", are there any suggestions you can offer to help with this problem? AndyJones 22:40, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don't fret mate, there were only about a dozen double redirects, which I have fixed (assuming that no one else was helping out, which I'm not sure about). Anyway, there will soon be a bot to fix double redirects (see here), so even if there were 500 it wouldn't be a problem.--Commander Keane 07:11, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant, weight off my mind! Thank you. AndyJones 17:50, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When Im looking at an article, to the far left i see a list of different languages i can get the article in, but some have orange stars near them. What does that mean?

• The star means that the version of that article in that language has been made a featured article on that Wikipedia version, which means that they represent some of the best articles in that language available at Wikipedia. --Kwekubo 23:49, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The photo used for the entry on Little Wolf (Cheyenne Leader)is not correct. Little Wolf was born in 1820 and died in 1904. The caption on this picture reads he was born in 1868. This is a picture of a man called Laban Little Wolf who was born on the Red Cloud Agency which was in Nebraska at that time. Little Wolf is a name that is used a lot. I would like to have the picture deleted. Though I have a bit of knowledge on my ancestry, I have very little on computers. How do I accomplish my goal?

I'll do it. -- 23:40, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Isn't Laban Little Wolf famous enough for their own article, so we can preserve the image in the right context? - Mgm|^(talk) 08:19, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, he has the name but not the fame

What font was the english wikipedia logo text written in? (I don't care about the puzzle symbols, just the "WIKIPEDIA The Free Encyclopedia" text) This is useful information that ought to be included in an article. If it wasn't one I probably have already, but still a free/creative commonsish font, where can I download it? --Nerd42 01:24, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• The "Wikipedia" is in Hoefler Text Regular, and the "The Free Encyclopedia" is in Hoefler Text Italic. I don't think it's free though - try Google. --Kwekubo 03:03, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• And if anyone's unsure as to what irony actually means, this is one of the better examples. — PhilHibbs | talk 14:47, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed. Shame on you all! --Nerd42 19:47, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I got the following question on my talk page. I don't know the answer, but I figure someone here would. Please post your answer to User talk:Kandar. Thanks, Isomorphic 03:27, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As a sysop in Sundanese Wikipedia (and some other sister projects, which is still "underdeveloped"), would you inform me, if any, how to copy the system messages automatically from one project to another?

FYI, in the Sundanese Wikipedia, I've never translate & sumbit the language.php file, but directly translating every message, one by one, listed in the "special:allmessage" page. kandar 05:17, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is constructing a visual representation of a concept considered original research?

• No. As long as the information on which the diagram is based is well sourced. We had diagrams on flight patterns of planes and nuclear bombs all of which require research to be accurate. Original research is looking for first hand information. Wikipedia only includes already described knowledge. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:24, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • An extension. Say you have a diagram of a train tunnel from a journal article. The diagram uses information freely available. Can you make your own version and give your version a public domain license? --Commander Keane 18:12, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • I would think so, as long as you don't try to replicate the exact style and visual presentation details of the original diagram (in cases where the nature of the diagram leaves such choices open). But I'm not a lawyer, so don't rely on anything I say. AnonMoos 21:15, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

something like Darren Daunt GangofOne 07:47, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• You label it {{db|put your reason here}}. In this case you'd write something like "attack page" as the reason. The creator removed the tag before, so if you want to make sure it ends up deleted you can contact an administrator at WP:AN. I took care of the deletion this time. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:15, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would like the person who wrote the article on the above general to contact me if possible about the above General who i have being researching since last Oct, the contributor appears to go under the name CLIODULE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.6 (talk • contribs) .

Cliodule may not look at this page, but you can contact him by posting a message on his talk page. By the way, the above page is at Henry Hugh Tudor. Thelb⁴ 08:36, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1. Who are User:Thorpe and User:EastEnders the great?
2. How do you change your signature?

Unsigned questions by User:4836.03. --hydnjo talk 14:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• You can change your signature in Special:Preferences (see Wikipedia:Signature). The people you mentioned are Wikipedians and you can read a bit more about them on the userpages you linked. - Mgm|^(talk) 14:51, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably a server-side problem, but I really can't seem to get < noscript> tags to work. Testing: <noscript>this shouldn't be bold</noscript>

Is this a problem with the software, or my browser not rendering things properly, or something?

• Did you really want <nowiki>'''this shouldn't be bold'''</nowiki>? Notinasnaid 14:41, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Damn, sorry, I thought it was <noscript>. Thanks! -82.7.125.142 14:46, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

<noscript> tags cause browsers that support and have enabled JavaScript to ignore everything until </noscript>. This tag is normally used for malicious purposes. The same goes for <noframes>. Andy Janata 16:37, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Nefertiti piercing for deletion, and I went through the steps, and it doesn't appear to be coming up properly on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2005 October 29 -- my text appears under "Stig Olai Kapskarmo" (but not at that article's entry). I've nominated an article before and it worked fine, and I can't for the life of me figure out what's wrong. Can anyone please see if they can find the problem? --Qirex 15:41, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it for you. Are you sure you followed the second step correctly? I re-entered the second part and it worked fine. Dismas|^(talk) 15:55, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm far from sure that I did it right, considering that it messed up, and that it's two in the morning where I am :) I did have the help page right infront of me with the steps but ahwell.

Anyway, thankyou heaps for fixing that Dismas, especially so quick! --Qirex 16:07, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While researching an article on the porn industry (yeah, I know), I came across a tantalising snippet about the gay porn star Logan Reed but the full article had been deleted. Is it possible for me to access the deleted article without being an administrator, or at least find out who contributed it?

• You can ask at WP:VFU or ask any admin personally to give you info on a deleted article. - Mgm|^(talk) 18:43, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• It's not worth much (which is why it was deleted, I guess) "Logan Reed, was born as Larry Hicks. He now lives in West Hollywood, California and quietly enjoys his friends and boyfriend of many years. Larry is well liked and healthy after giving up his career in adult film sometime before 2004." -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:52, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• It was basically deleted because it did not assert the importance or significance of Reed. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 18:55, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shrenik is a copy right violation from here. I gave the anon. creator a message and was going to list it as a speedy delete because of copy right. But then I read that only text from commercial websites can be speedy deleted. I can't find the page to list non-comericial copy rights. Please help! Banana04131 17:57, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• You can list it on WP:CP and replace the article content with {{copyvio|url=http://www.jainworld.com/literature/story16.htm}}. - Mgm|^(talk) 18:46, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whoops, I did not read your question closely and accidentally speedy deleted the article. I have now restored it and it is now listed on WP:CP. Not only is the content from a non-commercial site, but you identified it after the 48-hour creation time limit. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 19:10, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks so much! Banana04131 19:17, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed a discrepancy among various US goverment agency seals on wikipedia. There appears to be no template (that i can find) that specifically covers these, and there are certainly very many of them.

Several, such as Image:CIA_seal_reg.jpg and Image:NavySeal.png use the Template:Seal Template, but this template (at least in it's current wording) only applies to Local Government seals. Several others use the more generic Public Domain / Government templates, such as Image:FBISeal.png which uses Template:PD-USGov-FBI and Image:Us senate seal.png which uses Template:PD-USGov-Congress. This approach also seems somewhat incorrect, since the seals arent really works of the respective agencys persay, and although i am not entirely sure they are actually copyrighted, i dont think they are quite in the public domain, either, because their use is typically heavily restricted by federal laws.

I've tried to locate an equlivant of Template:Seal for federal seals, but i cannot find one. Is there one? Should there be? Should Template:Seal be modified to apply to federal, state, and local seals? Any help would be much appreciated. --Lanoitarus 20:09, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest bringing this up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fair use; they're usually good people to query about this sort of thing (the fair use tags are all being rewritten just now, so...). {{Coat of arms}} is probably what you want, or the more general {{Logo}}. {{seal}} does look excessively... precise just now; I don't know why it says local government, but we should probably Do Something About That. Shimgray | talk | 23:11, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Shimgray, ill this question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fair use instead. --Lanoitarus 23:15, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did a Google search on a page which I created (Michel Dorfman). Rather than finding a link to that page, however, I found a link to my user page! Since I recorded on my user page all the pages I'd created, using wikilinks, I removed the wikilinks and waited a few weeks to check Google again. The link to my user page is still there! Is there any way to take it off Google, other than to erase the list of all the pages on my user page? Yoninah 23:58, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Both the Wikipedia search engine and Google are updated at intervals. That's why you get served with old information. Unless you can find a way to make updating those search indexes not take all the server resources they take, it's impossible to update the indexes more often. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:49, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but this doesn't quite answer my question. I want to know how to make sure that my user page doesn't end up on Google Search. I would prefer that the article pages be included on Google instead. Yoninah 16:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can't prevent your user page from ending up on Google, because Google indexes both the article and the user space here. Of course it would be ideal if Google returned the article when you search for it, but that's something Google needs to fix -- it looks like their crawlers haven't indexed it yet. Keep in mind as well that you've licensed your user page under the GFDL by editing it in the first place. — mendel ☎ 17:26, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

I recently found some data regarding Religious Distrbution in England on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/England, that I sincerely believed to be erronous.

I left a note on the page, to ask if someone could improve this ( see history for that page ). I now realise this wasn't the best way to go about it, and I'm sorry. However it did result in the data being updated and better presented.

Although I still believe a lot of people indicate they belong to a certain reigion in a census because they were perhaps christened in a certain church, rather than because they actively belong to that particular religious organisation. My 45 years experience of being english and living in (and being widely travelled in ) England tells me this data is still not accurate.

My question is.......

When finding data you believe to be innaccurate, what's the correct procedure for a] reporting this, and just as importantly b] discussing the issue?

Thanks in advance , and sorry for the newbie question. :)

Paul

I think what you ought to have done is clicked on the discussion tab, which would take you to Talk:England, and left your note there. That way people could see it without it being in the article itself. Typically you'd leave the note at the bottom, with a new subject header that looked something like == Concern about XYZ == . At the end, you'd put your user name, using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ -- SCZenz 01:36, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. The talk page of the article in question is the normal place to disccus possible errors in or improvements of the article. If you mention something there and noe one seems to be taking note, you can try to draw added attention at requests for comment or the village pump. DES ^(talk) 01:41, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Folks! I'll try the Talk route next time. it also looks like there is a quite a bit of Wiki syntax to learn. Worth it though :)

The best way to learn is just to click on "edit" on a page that uses a trick you don't understand, and see what's there (then don't submit). For example, how did I put Wiki syntax straight into my answer above without it having any effect? You can find out. ;) -- SCZenz 01:49, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

About 1 hour ago, I asked a question here regarding the correct procedure when coming across data that I believe ot be erronous. It was a fairly detailed question, adn I posted it because I want to contribute to the Wikipedia, but wish to do it correctly.

My question was serious and contained nothing that anyone would find offensive.

Why would someone delete a question for no apparent reason?

Cheers

Paul

Deleted? It looks like it's right above this section. —HorsePunchKid→龜 01:35, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - yes It's back now. It re-appeared after i posted this question. the following is what I posted when the Wiki told me someone else - yuu - had changed the page.....

EDIT: Now that IS strange. After psoting this question, I noticed that my original question ( above ) is now showing. I honestly checked through this page about 4 times in case I'd missed it. I also noticed there were over 200 questions when I previoously viewed the page, and now there are aroudd 180 odd.

Anyway, please skip this one, as the question is back - cheers everyone - Paul

( normal service is now resumed  :) )

It might have been cache issue, with the version before your edit still being displayed. Clearign your browsaer cache, or if that fails purging the server cache may help when soemthing seems to disappear. Check then history first to see if soemone reverted or deleted for some reason. DES ^(talk) 01:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about Wikipedia and how to use it. Please place factual questions at Wikipedia:Reference desk. Dismas|^(talk) 03:25, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When I read an article and something is unclear, how can I ask the recent or any editor to add information or smooth things up? Detlev Schmidtke

This is a wiki so you can do it yourself. There are edit links at the top of every page and at the top right hand side of the major sections of the articles like the one to the far right of your question here. Or if you don't know enough about the subject to change the article, you may leave a message on the article's discussion page to suggest content that you feel should be added. The discussion pages (also known as talk pages) can be found via the link at the top of every page. Each article has its own talk page. Dismas|^(talk) 07:45, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• If you click on the "history" tab, you can see who edited it most recently. Clicking their name will bring you to their userpage. Click "discussion" here and leave a note at the bottom of the page to draw their attention to it. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I can't do it, can you tell me some methods?

Well, basically you just name it Template:Whatever, and then write in what you feel like. But there are pretty complex things to do--why don't you look at the code for a similar template to what you want to make? -- SCZenz 08:31, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A template is just a table that's saved in the Template: namespace. They usually have fancy borders and other styling and the best way to make one is to find a similar one (as SCZEnz suggested) and modfiy it. You can always ask here for more help, templates are rather tricky in my opinion. --Commander Keane 07:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Templates don't have to contain tables—it's just that most of them do. — PhilHibbs | talk 14:50, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just came across a user creating stub after stub about specific instances (i.e. individual appearances of a certain type of dungeon) in the World of Warcraft computer game. This seems to be clearly contrary to WP:FICT, but it is quite widespread, with a bunch of categories under Category:World of Warcraft instances (or heck, even Category:Warcraft locations. Putting merge notes, or even grouping and redirecting these articles per WP:BOLD and WP:FICT myself would take forever. Is there a good way to deal with this? -- SCZenz 10:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Mentioning all the pages so someone else can deal with them, will probably take just as long. I guess the best thing you can do is either do it yourself or request help at the assistance village pump. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:57, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm sure there's enough to say about a whole dungeon to make an interesting article, why don't you just leave them alone? Kappa 11:09, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Um, they're not real? Wikipedia isn't a detailed computer game guide? From what I've seen of how this game works, writing a real article on every dungeon would involve summarizing the entire course of the game. There are a lot of things I've learned to leave alone, lately, but each of these articles is a small part of one computer game, and there are relevant guidelines about article structure for works of fiction. This is not a borderline case. -- SCZenz 11:21, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • And, it's worth noting, I am not suggesting removing one jot of information. WP:FICT is explicit about that too. -- SCZenz 11:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not being a game guide means not telling people how to play the games, it doesn't mean "don't describe the fictional worlds". Dungeons seem to be similar to episodes of a television series. Kappa 11:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • I do see your point. However, if these articles remain stubs, it seems perfectly appropriate to merge them based simply on how articles are usually organized. In some cases, the info actually already does appear in a larger article and in the stub. I honestly doubt (from what I've seen of this game) that there really is enough information about each dungeon to bring them out of stub status without creating a game guide, but I suppose we'll wait and see. -- SCZenz 11:39, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • If they remain stubs, i agree with your point. However, you may be underestimating how large these "small parts" of the game are. Some of these instance dungeons take hours and are extremely detailed both in storyline and strategy... i could see a potential for some interesting and informative articles, assuming the creator actually expands them. --Lanoitarus 15:15, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that on some images (e.g. Image:New Orleans Fire 2005-09-02.jpg), there is no file history, and the link at the top to file history doesn't work. However, it appears on some other images (e.g. Image:SakuraHealed.png). Why is this? Is it to do with JPGs and PNGs? Thelb⁴ 16:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The original upload of Image:New Orleans Fire 2005-09-02.jpg was on the Wikimedia Commons; this wiki imports the picture automatically from there when it is used, so the file history remains on Commons. While Image:SakuraHealed.png has been uploaded to Commons, the original upload was here, so the file history is visible here. — mendel ☎ 17:21, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If someone repeatedly vandalised an article, and starts being rude (and flames you) when you tell them to stop, doesn't that warrant a ban?

Where can I report these kinds of problems?

WP:AIV if it is serious and needs immediate attention, or WP:VIP for not so serious vandals. -Greg Asche (talk) 20:21, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

...why do their names (or something after their names) come up in green instead of blue or red?

They have created a custom signature. See Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages#Customizing your signature. -Greg Asche (talk) 20:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. gtdp 21:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to get statistics on how many visitors go to a particular Wikipedia page per day, week or other period of time?

                                           -- Ben Best 21:08, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NoGeni 22:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There used to be hit counters (way back in the olden days) but it put too much strain on the servers. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 23:27, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Memory Alpha, which uses the same wiki software as Wikipedia, has this hit counter on. For example, see MemoryAlpha:Star Trek. --Perfecto  00:44, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's total number of visits here (right at the bottom)--Commander Keane 06:51, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If capitalized the word Sun, is it necessary to add "the" in front of the word "Sun"? And what if Moon and Earth? -- Yaohua2000 21:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The is required in most cases. Please see Sun, Moon and Earth for examples of how these words are used. -Walter Siegmund 23:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a bookmarklet, widget or one-click-tool that reverts vandalism with a note in the form of "rv edits by 219.148.86.36 to last version by David Shear" -- perhaps one that pulls out the usernames from the history? Thanks! --Perfecto  23:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Only for admins I'm afraid. Non admins can simply type "revert vandalism" no need for all the other stuff. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 23:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think there may be a way to do it through monobook.css but I don't know the details.Geni 07:33, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It can be done with monobook.js. Check out the excellent godmode-light.js by User:Sam_Hocevar. Add the following to your own monobook.js:

 document.write('<SCRIPT SRC="http://sam.zoy.org/wikipedia/godmode-light.js"><\/SCRIPT>');

It is very easy to use, and adds a one click rollback link that checks the history adds the summary you detail above. Much faster for fighting vandalism than editing the last good version and filling in summary boxes by hand. --Cactus.man ✍ 07:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hi, could you please give very spesific instructions to somebody quite clueless; to start with: what is & where do I find monobook.js? (btw, I have Mac; I don´t know if that is relevant) Regards, Huldra 14:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the script works with the safrai browser.Geni 14:24, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! For the last couple of days I have been working on the article Battle of Pichincha, which I first went on to create, as all there was about it was a red link.

I think the article is more or less ok as it stands now, so I'll be leaving it alone for a couple of days until doing any more edits.

Anyway, I wonder why is it that the article does not appear when a try a Wikipedia search using the word "Pichincha". I've done all the redirects I can think of.

Also, the article is not mentioned when I try a search on Yahoo or Google.

What does it take for a Wikipedia article to appear on a Yahoo or Google search?

Thanks for your help!

--Andres C. 00:52, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

both wikipedia's internal search and yahoo and google's search only get updated from time to time. The exact amount varies.Geni 01:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok. Thanks a lot. Andres C. 02:18, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

what does nn mean in wikipedia terms —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdhunt (talk • contribs) 02:51, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It usually means "Non-notable" in Articles for deletion entries. See the Glossary for more abbreviations. Titoxd^(?!?) 02:45, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Should someone add nn to the WP:G? (I mean Glossary) --hydnjo talk 03:02, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's there, you just need to follow the link to the WP:GD (er, Guide to deletion). Titoxd^(?!?) 03:44, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It also means Nynorsk, nn.wikipedia.org is the nynorsk wikipedia. — Sverdrup 11:18, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Have you tried the 1995 article and sub-articles (e.g. 1995 in rail transport)? Thryduulf 11:26, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have also posted this at village pump (technical) but haven't had a response so I thought I would try here. Hi, I am trying to upload a new version of an image over the top of the earlier one, which I have done many times before. The specific file I am trying to upload over is Image:Yarralumla_IBMap-TEST-MJC.png. I am getting a page that tells me "A file with this name exists already; please go back and upload this file under a new name." and doesn't give me the option to overwrite like I used to get. Is this a problem with the code? --Martyman-(talk) 04:16, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image refresh privileges for all users were disabled temporarily on all Wikis to fix a problem with our image-rendering server. Maybe this is causing the problem? I'm not sure. Titoxd^(?!?) 04:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is still happening and another user has mentioned he has the same problem (over at village pump). I guess I should fill out a bug report or something.. --Martyman-(talk) 04:42, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've talked with Tim Starling and Brion Vibber, and they told me that it is indeed because of that. That'll be lifted as soon as they finish the transition to a new server. Titoxd^(?!?) 05:10, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

how do you dispute an article/ page for bias or other criteria —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdhunt (talk • contribs) 14:14, 31 October 2005

Check out Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. The best way to approach was you perceive to be bias in an article is to not approach the matter as a dispute, but as a discussion. List your concerns on the article's talk page and wait for other people interested in the article to get back to you. If no one else seems to be responding, be bold and change the article yourself. You can also use

• {{NPOV}} - message used to warn of problems
• {{NPOV-section}} - tags only a single section as disputed
• {{POV check}} - message used to mark articles that may be biased. ({{bias}} may be used for short)

but I would try the talk page first. Best, --Kewp (t) 05:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

the template "test6" says this:

---

Blocked

You have been blocked from Wikipedia for repeated vandalism. Please consider providing useful contributions that will help make Wikipedia better. Otherwise, this account could face longer blocks, and action could be taken against the individual who uses this account.

What does it mean by "action could be taken against the individual"? --Ballchef 05:48, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

We could contact their ISP to report their behaviour. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 06:23, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would an ISP shut down an account for vandalising a wiki? It's not hacking, and it's not illegal right? --Ballchef 11:09, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In my view (IANAL) it would fall under the UK Hacking legislation (looks like this article needs tagging for not NPOV!) because it is unauthorised modification. I'd be surprised if that were not true in other countries.

--David Woolley 14:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An ISP might shut down an account, or at least warn the user that his online actions have real-world consequences. Often an ISPs terms of service are significantly more restrictive than the basic 'don't do anything illegal' minimum standard. Depending on the ISP and the type of naughtiness, there may be restrictions regarding defacement of web sites or online harassment that can come into play. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is as severe as others make it sound. We block vandal accounts, but we ban individuals. A banned individual will get all his/her accounts blocked immediately. As long as we don't take these actions against individuals, you can just start a new (and better ;) wikipedia career with a new account. — Sverdrup 16:01, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to add a new CSS class on a page? I would like to add a class so that I may mark my responses on my talk pages in italics, or in blue, or whatever I feel like, something like <div class="self">...</div>. However, if I try placing <style> tags at the top of the page, they just get placed at the top of the output of the page. Is it possible to add my own class, or is this not allowed? (I know how to edit my own monobook.css file, but I want this to appear for everyone who views my talk page.) Thanks! — Knowledge Seeker দ 05:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is what has been done at User talk:Vcxlor of any help?--Commander Keane 06:36, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can add classes in your personal CSS, but noone else will see it. If you want others to see it to, you have to use inline styles. — Sverdrup 11:17, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Check out my comments here. Basically, I suggested wrapping your signature in a span with your username as its class. When I see my signature below, it'll have a bright, green background that I can easily spot when skimming discussions, but I don't annoy everyone else with my color preferences. :) It's not quite what you're looking for, but it may help nonetheless. —HorsePunchKid→龜 23:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and wrote some instructions, if you're interested. —HorsePunchKid→龜 23:46, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

i don't write spanish, but i know that 'ganchillo' is spanish for 'crochet'. the only link on wikipedia for ganchillo is for 'troll'. is there some way for you to add an alternate definition so that spanish crocheters will have a starting point? thanks! (preceding unsigned message by 69.154.33.81 2005-10-31 07:30:30 (UTC) - please sign talk articles by appending --~~~~)

Unless ganchillo has that alternative meaning in English, the correct place for such an article is on the Spanish Wikipedia, as es:Ganchillo (doesn't exist at the time of writing). Anyone with sufficient grasp of Spanish can add that article, after checking that the material isn't already covered under another heading. Once the article is created, it can be linked to the crochet article by adding [[es:Ganchillo]] to crochet and [[en:Crochet]] to es:Ganchillo.

If and only if ganchillo does mean crochet in English, then you will need to create a Ganchillo (disambiguation) article and link the Ganchillo article back to that using the appropriate template.

Generally, if you are competent to fix an article, you should fix it yourself, although you should not create foreign language entries in the English Wikipedia.

--David Woolley 12:21, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the existing English Ganchillo entry has been deleted, which probably means it was bogus (vandalism, or not appropriate).

--User:David Woolley 14:56, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to create a template based on this image, to designate the cities that have been recognized with the 100 Best Communities for Young People award, but I'm not quite skillful enough with Wikiscript to do it. Can someone help me out?

Stellertony the Bookcrosser 08:14, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the content for this template?--Commander Keane 10:52, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Do you mean making a template to add to the articles about each community on this list? I can't see how using the image like that would be permitted by fair use. --Kwekubo 15:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, please note i have posted some news in wikipedia regarding Ryan Eckert,Veedhi natakam.It was later seen to be deleted owing to copyright problem.I have made the posting from content of my own web site.I also linked it to the corresponding page of my website to the news.I still does not know what was wrong with it.Please let me know the details and about how it can be rectified Dr:Sibi (email address removed).

• Mention the fact you're the owner on the talk page and refer people to that note in the edit summary. - 131.211.51.34 14:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Also, make sure the web site mentions that it is released under a suitable license, so anyone can reuse the text. Notinasnaid 14:21, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst including such a notice on the original page would certainly help avoid this sort of problem, it is not necessary to do so as it is quite possible to licence the external web page with a licence that doesn't permit copying and to licence the Wikipedia one with one that does, as long as you own all the copyrights. It's even possible that the original site contains material which cannot be released.

--David Woolley 14:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What should an article on the "Burlington" nuclear bunker be called? — PhilHibbs | talk 14:10, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Duncan Campbell's War Plan UK (pp270 on) refers to it either as "the Central Government War HQ" or "HQ Special Sites". "Burlington" seems to have been an internal codename not known outside the MoD until after declassification. Shimgray | talk | 14:44, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On further examination, it seems there were two major government bunkers at Corsham - one known to be codenamed "Hawthorn" and probably the CGWHQ - plus a number of ancillary military locations round about, and the general term "HQ Special Sites" may have been an administrative name for the entire complex. I can't determine which one this is offhand, though - an article on Corsham complex might be a good compromise. Shimgray | talk | 14:49, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! We already have an article at Hawthorn, Wiltshire and references at Corsham and Box Tunnel. I really should reread War Plan UK and make those make sense... Shimgray | talk | 14:54, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to set up my watchlist to email me when anything changes? Charlie Richmond 15:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not currently, no. Shimgray | talk | 15:36, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the best place to request this feature? Charlie Richmond 16:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From the defunct Wikipedia:Feature request it seems you could try Wikipedia:MediaZilla. The thing is that most (I'd guess) users have lots of pages on their watchlists so it isn't practical generally. How many articles have you got on there?--Commander Keane 19:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

53 right now. Mediazilla doesn't seem to have any vehicle to submit feature requests Charlie Richmond 19:10, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Feature requests are bugs with priority set to "Enhancement". You'll be happy to know that someone (I can't remember who) recently created a bug report, with priority set to "Enhancement", requesting that there be a "new feature request" feature in MediaZilla. — mendel ☎ 21:51, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So I reported the 'enhanced' bug and got this response:

http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3851

brion@pobox.com changed:

          What    |Removed                     |Added

---

            Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
        Resolution|                            |INVALID

---

Additional Comments From brion@pobox.com 2005-10-31 22:34 UTC -------

There is one. (Currently not enabled on Wikipedia.)

-- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email

---

You are receiving this mail because: -------

You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.

So I guess this means it has already been done but isn't enabled here Charlie Richmond 22:40, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much. A lot of fiddly things that MediaWiki can do aren't enabled on here; the sheer size means that otherwise minimal features would be a large drag on the systems. (Another one, popularly requested, is article page-hit counters - we have the software, but enabling it would not be nice to the database) Shimgray | talk | 00:24, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

With reference to Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense/The Blue Coat School, Oldham, Could someone please tell me why a lot of this info isn't in the main article (The Blue Coat School, Oldham)? Apart from the weird image in the first paragraph, shouldn't this be in our encyclo? And if the info is non-encyclopaediatic, i wouldn't describe it (with the exception of the wierd image) as being a "Bad Joke" or "Deleted Nonsense" --[[User:4836.03|User:4836.03 Oh yeah! i am cool!]] 16:26, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• It seems to have resulted from this discussion. It's quite interesting to see that the BJAODN page and the real page have both been actively edited since that time. AndyJones 21:36, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the BJAODN page ought to be reverted to the version put there originally. Editing an alternate version of the article is not what BJAODN is for. Any objections? -- SCZenz 21:40, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sounds like a great idea. The edits to the BJAODN one are bizarre. I remember reading it back when it was still kind of funny. I'd put a note on the current article's talk page reminding editors there that there might be stuff to merge from the history of the BJAODN version, and maybe put a header box on the BJAODN one noting that the real article is elsewhere. — mendel ☎ 21:48, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Good ideas. AndyJones 23:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]
        • I have reverted the BJAODN version, put a note at the top reminding people not to edit it, and put the entire edited version from BJAODN into the talk page for the current article for reference. Case closed, I hope. -- SCZenz 08:55, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I served aboard the Butte from 1985-1987 and the article holder on this site uses an improper identifier (AE-26 instead of AE-27). The USS Surabachi (sp?) was AE-26 so you may want to correct that info. I will try to track down my history material for use on the USS Butte article. Thanks --brownbagcomics

I'm guessing that you're referring to Template:Kilauea class ammunition ship, where indeed the number was wrong. Corrected now. However, attention U.S. Navy buffs: on Current United States Navy ships, we seem to have links for these same ships under different names: USNS Butte (T-AE-27) instead of USS Butte (AE-27).

BTW, the USS Suribachi is AE-21; AE-26 is the USS Kilauea. Lupo 19:23, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Are anybody else's links showing up as not underlined? A sort of weird plain blue or red text with no underline. Like when you are not logged in sometimes. Is this a new feature, or is my comp just being a little retarded right now? Thanks. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 20:27, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm new here and things may have changed but if you click preferences (at the top of the page) and then skins, there are different settings available which make links look different, including underlined by default. Charlie Richmond 20:42, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but mine is selected as always underlined. It just happened maybe a half-hour ago now. Anyone? --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 20:49, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, now it seems to have righted itself. Maybe I was just connected to a different server that automatically renders links that way. Odd nonetheless. --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 20:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Try clearing your browser cache when this happens. The server seems to screw up the cookie that holds this preference, but a clae cache seems to normally fix the matter. This happens to me fairly regualrly. DES ^(talk) 21:30, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When browsing math pages, I frequently see the infamous square-box symbol for an undefined/non-displayable character (where a math symbol should be displayed) Is this a problem with the page or my browser? I use both Win98/MSIE 6.0.2800 and XP-SP2 MSIE 6.0.2900.2180 and the problem is consistent, i.e. appears with either browser.

I've checked the IE settings. 'Install on Demand' is enabled.

meta:Help:Special characters talks about UTF-8 and how-to used special chars. but is mostly silent on how to make them display. It does mention 'forcing IE' to use specific fonts.

Wikipedia:Browser_notes doesn't mention much (useful) related to IE and special chars except:

IE cannot handle numeric character references (NCRs) in UTF-8: if a page uses this encoding and NCRs the encoding must be set to User Defined.

Is there something I can do to make my IE smarter or is the problem on the math pages? I'll add links here to the math pages as I find them. - LarryLACa 21:40, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It helps if you set your font to Arial Unicode MS, if you have that. However, this gives the problem that a character in italics often touches the next character, if that is not in italics and there is no blank space in between. I recommend using TeX for symbols which do not display in a common font of a common browser like IE, and using a blank space between italics and normal text, so that various fonts work fine.--Patrick 22:21, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback Patrick. The problem is definitely dependent on the proportional font selected for MSIE. Selecting other fonts (Quick Type) makes it much worse. TNR, Arial & Tahoma all seem to work equally well (on my Win98 computer), but are still missing most math chars. I still need to try Arial Unicode MS, but that will take a while to setup. -- LarryLACa 04:02, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How do you cite an article using MLA format? Is there a way to find the author's name?

Have a look at Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. Shimgray | talk | 22:52, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How has earth's climate changed(if at all)?

Hello, thanks for your question. This page is actually for questions about how Wikipedia works. For factual questions, please see the Wikipedia:Reference desk. You may also want to see the article on Climate change. Good luck! Johntex\^talk 23:57, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I'm trying to delete several articles I once submitted as a joke to be played on a friend. Unfortunately, I'm having a difficault time trying to delete said articles. The joke is over now, and I don't want this false information broadcasting all over the web. The articles in question are for "Marren," "Brian Marren," "Earl of Kensington," "Enda Marren," "Winston Marren," and "Tourlestraun." Everytime I try to delete them in the way I thought was the proper manner, they reappear, and I usually get a nasty comment from an administraitor or two. Could somebody please help me with this? Thanks.

Hello - thank you for your note. We appreciate efforts to help us cleanup the Wikipedia. I am looking into these articles right now to recommend or take some action to clean them up. Best, Johntex\^talk 00:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Report - some very simple Google searching seems to indicate that these articles are not factual. Unfortunately, these articles were created by a different IP address than the person that requested they be deleted. Also, they have been edited by various people since they were created. Therefore, as much as I wish they could be speedied, I don't think they can be. To the creator of these articles, please don't EVER do this again. This is a lot of work to clean up. I'll start the AfD process on the articles. Johntex\^talk 00:34, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• New Report - OK, I decided to list Marren, Brian Marren and Winston Marren for Speedy delete. This way, someone else can check my research. Enda Marren has actually survived an AfD before, with a total of 2 keep votes. Talk about exposing the flaws in AfD, perhaps? I dunno, there is an Enda Marren in Dublin, according to Google. I listed that one at AfD. There are no articles for Earl of Kensington or Tourlestraun currently. Johntex\^talk 01:04, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the record, I checked the official website of the House of Lords. Not only is Brian Marren not the Earl of Kensington, neither is anyone else. DS 02:04, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• According to [13], the title of Earl of Kensington became extinct in 1765. Notinasnaid 08:30, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey everybody. Does anybody know if there's a way to fit an image to its allocated box in an infobox? I'm doing the Disciples II: Dark Prophecy article and I'm trying to insert a logo in the infobox. The picture is dark, so there is a white outline around it. I tried simply making the 'px' value higher in the article editing, but the outline doesn't go away! Is there any way to be really clever and make the picture fit the box exactly? Thanks in advance, Dragonfly888 00:57, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's no easy way, really. One option, which I do not recommend would be to edit {{Infobox VG}} and try to remove the padding with some CSS in the table definition. Don't edit the template unless you're absolutely sure of what you're doing, in any case. Another option, which will be a pain, probably, is to edit your monobook.css and find a way to force there to be no padding. —HorsePunchKid→龜 03:34, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the fact that I don't have a clue what any of that meant, I think it's fairly safe to say that I shouldn't tamper with it for now. I suppose it's alright as it is. Hmph... Cheers by the way. Dragonfly888 00:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking about moving the redirect at Brendan Frasier to a vote for deletion, but I wanted to check on the policy first. The article sends it to the correct page, Brendan Fraser, and while his name is likely misspelled, I wasn't sure if that means it merits a redirect. It seems that if one was created for every misspelling, there'd be a lot of em around WP. Any advice on whether it's usual policy to create redirects for common (or uncommon) misspellings and pronunciations is welcome. Thanks. Deadsalmon 02:29, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the general attitude is that "redirects are cheap", though I don't know of a specific Wikipedia guideline to point you to. You might start by reading here. If I had my way, misspellings of article names would be strictly forbidden, but alas... :) —HorsePunchKid→龜 03:04, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Any advice on whether it's usual policy to create redirects for common (or uncommon) misspellings and pronunciations is welcome. It is. -Greg Asche (talk) 03:28, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A popular Wikipedia aphorism is "redirects are cheap". In general, it's more trouble to delete a redirect than to leave it in place; we only get rid of them if they are malicious, utterly absurd, or in contravention of a specific Wikipedia policy (a redirect from article space to a user page, for example). It is our usual practice to create redirects of common misspellings; not only does it help poor spellers to find articles, it also helps reduce the number of duplicated articles. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:37, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's not so much common as essential for names transliterated out of another language - Greek, Chinese, Korean, Japanese certainly, but the worst offenders are historic Russians who may have had their names spelt a dozen different ways in English-language texts. I've been cleaning up the lists of desired biographies recently, and the names we have for some Russians on them looked wildly unlike the articles we already had... Shimgray | talk | 11:15, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having the craziest time figuring out how to get the Babel and CVU boxes on my user page to align to the right side while allowing text on its left, without appearing above or below it. I attribute this to my lack of knowledge about HTML; in any case, I can't figure out what to do. A quick glance at my page will probably explain better than I can do here. If you can decipher what I'm asking, can somebody let me know how to fix this? Thanks. Deadsalmon 04:27, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The only problem you had is that you hadn't declared the start of the table ({| ) in Wikitable syntax, and you had everything as one row, instead of multiple rows. I moved the table to the top of the page so the text would wrap around it. I hope you like it now. :) Titoxd^(?!?) 04:32, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's a beaut. Thank ya very much. Deadsalmon 05:43, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How do I find out the number of edits I have made? I have seen it before, but I do not recall. Mirlin 07:00, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can use Kate's Tool to see the number of edits you have. Beware of editcountitis, though. -Nameneko 08:01, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How do you add someone to a category? Matt Elliott (english footballer) is not on the Leicester players list despite beng one of our greatest ever players.

Is there an article on him? If there's no article, then he can't be in a category. Create the article, and add it to the category by adding [[Category:Leicester City F.C. players]] to the end of the article. Update: I've done this. — PhilHibbs | talk

Hi,

I have just saved an article and I think I have not put under the correct heading. the title of the article is: "EFT: Simple & Non-Invasive yet Highly Effective Solutions for Emotional Release" and when making a search on EFT should come up. But it does not. As this is my first time I would be really gretful if you could help me please.

Many thanks

Angela [email removed

The article is there, but it doesn't look like a Wikipedia article to me, it looks like original source material more suited to Wikisource. Who wrote that text, and do you have permission to publish it under the GFDL? Can you provide any published confirmation of the accuracy or widespread academic acceptance of this information?

Also, I'm not sure how long it takes for an article to be indexed to show up in a search. — PhilHibbs | talk

I've tagged this article as {{POV-title}} and {{Advertisement}}. If I'd been around longer I would probably have nominated it for deletion. Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view and should not be advertisements or written in the style of advertisements.

--David Woolley 12:17, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I may not have nominated it for deletion, but it went through the speedy deletion process at 12:35 UTC! Annotation was "speedy - ad for lifestyle coach".

--David Woolley 14:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I refer to The coming American Revolution. This page is a POV article, detailing the reasons why America will soon have a new revolution. I do not consider this a worthwhile source of information on Wikipedia. Is it a candidate for speedy deletion, or does it actually belong here? Mushin 13:26, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're certainly right that this article is not appropriate for Wikipedia. As an op-ed piece, it may not have easily fit any speedy delete criteria, so I moved it to User:Dvanhart and left a note explaining why. Friday (talk) 13:42, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice and cleanup. Mushin 13:46, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just for reference, since the article has already been deleted, Wikipedia has an official policy about articles speculating about the future: Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --Metropolitan90 09:04, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See Marie Antoinette, or enter her name into the search box at the left of your screen. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:54, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There was a stub that I thought should be deleted (World Without Zionism) because the event that is the subject of the stub is not particularly significant; the only reason the event is even known about is because the statements made by one person at the event (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad). But since the statements are already on the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad article and the event is already mentioned there, there would seemingly be no reason to have a stub for the event itself.

I can't figure out what step I should take here? Should I merge the article? Is deletion appropriate? I read the entry on deletion of stubs, but I couldn't figure out what exactly I was supposed to do. I didn't know if it was a "stub template", "stub category" or what. The process seems rather confusing to me so I have no clue which way to go. Thanks for any help. --Jakob Huneycutt 14:33, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is a "stub article" or just an article. The template is the tag like {{writer-stub}} that you put into an article to mark it as a stub. The catetegory is the collection of articles so marked, like Category:Writer stubs -- it displays as a page that lists the articles in the category.

you can merge the article to another appropriate artilce if you choose, by simply copying the contnet and incorporating it into your desirted target article, nd converting the stub into a redirect, like this:

#REDIRECT [[Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]]

Or you can just convert the stub to a redirect if all the content is already at the target. Or you can list the stub on WP:AFD to propose truly deleting it, see the detailed instructions on that page. Does that help? DES ^(talk) 16:31, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I read the WP:AFD page and that's actually the reason why I'm confused. It sounded as if there was different process for stubs from reading that page, as it says: "Also, the only pages that should be listed here are articles and their associated talk pages. Go to the appropriate pages to nominate templates, categories, redirects, stub types, pages in the Wikipedia namespace, user pages, or images and other media, or to report a copyright violation."

I think I get it now, though. Just a bit confused by the attention to stubs at first. So, AfD would apparently be appropriate. Thanks. --Jakob Huneycutt 17:13, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. A stub type consists of a stub template and a corresponding stub category. You can see the list of stub types at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types. Thus if someone thought we shouldn't use {{writer-stub}} anymore (perhaps because it ought to be split into {{author-stub}} and {{poet-stub}}, say) or that a hypothetical {{pimp-stub}} was a bad idea, that discussion doesn't happen on WP:AFD but rather on WP:SFD, because that is not about article content, but about how we categorize and label articles. Whether a particular article that is a stub (and so an example of a stub tub, and a member of a stub category) should be deleted or not is normally discussed on AfD. I know it can be confusing at first. I hope that is helpful? DES ^(talk) 17:43, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Very helpful. Thanks :) --Jakob Huneycutt 18:28, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

how to write a covering letter and resume

This is a page for how Wikipedia works. Try Wikipedia:Reference desk. -- SCZenz 16:02, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to place a reference to the time, like {{CURRENTTIME}}, in a template, apply the template on a page, and freeze the time signature on that page? I am attempting to do this for my signature instead of using the usual --~~~~ or ~~~~~.

When I tried this, the time automatically changed as the real time changed (of course, this is the function of the {{CURRENTTIME}} template).

-- Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) ★ 17:50, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

.

I think you could do this by using the subst: keyword when you invoke the template. DES ^(talk) 18:28, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried this, but I'm pretty sure templates are not interpreted in sigs. I thought it'd be nice to do something that would put the time in my sig as [[{{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}-{{subst:CURRENTMONTH}}-{{subst:CURRENTDAY2}}]] {{subst:CURRENTTIME}} so that people would see the date in their preferred format, but the templates are just left as raw text. —HorsePunchKid→龜 19:46, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you raise this at bugzilla: - I for one would vote for it. Thryduulf 22:37, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have filed a bug. It's the first time I've filed a bug here, so I'd appreciate someone who cares about the issue double checking for any serious errors in the submission. —HorsePunchKid→龜 23:41, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am a 'Newbie', brand-new to Wiki . . I'd like to contribute and/or edit some of the psychology and psychiatry entries - yet I am lost in your labarynth - where do I begin again ? ~ ~ Matildah-B

In measuring a circle, one begins anywhere. In editign a wiki, one also begins anywhere.

You might start at Psychology or at Category:Psychology. There is also Wikipedia:Pages needing attention/Applied Arts and Sciences#Psychology. Read through any of these, adn when you find an artilce you can improve, be bold!. DES ^(talk) 20:03, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Just as a little side note, try not to use "Wiki" as shorthand for Wikipedia; Wikipedia is a wiki, but not all wikis are Wikipedia (for more on this, see meta:Wikipedia is not Wiki.) Welcome to Wikipedia!--Kwekubo 23:27, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be appropriate for an officer to have both titles of CFO and COO?

I think it would be at best unusual at any major corporation. Ina a small business, this might easily happen. DES ^(talk) 22:54, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An article I helped create has been repeatedly modified by an anonymous poster to include selective, misleading materials that reflect his (negative) POV concerning the person who is the subject of the article. He has now used the edit summary, rather than a talk page, to reveal personal info about me in an attempt to intimidate me from deleting or making edits to his POV materials.

I'd like to know if there's a means of removing the personal information from the edit summary and restricting his comment to my user name. I've read the pages on personal attacks and don't see an answer to this - whether there is a means of accomplishing the edit myself and removing the dispute to the talk page, or whether I must work with an administrator to accomplish this.

Thanks for any help and/or redirection.

Dcs47 21:04, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The only way to remove edit summeries from the history, as i understand things, is to delte the entire articel and selectively restote all revisions except the one with the nasty edit summery, or to get a developer to make direct changes to the database. Both are significat effort. If it is jsut a matter of baised or uncivil comments, that is not worth addressing. But if he is actually revealing pesonal info in ways that violated your privcy, this may need to be dealt with. I'll look into this a bit further.. DES ^(talk) 21:39, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not that much effort for a short edit history. I've done it for you. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 22:47, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I forgot my user name & passe word can you please send it to my E-mail address: schuman49(at)hotmail(dot)com

Thank you.

I'm sorry, we don't have it. What you can do:

• Try to remember the password (probably won't work :-(
• Use the forgot your password feature, that sends the password to the email address you registered in your settings.

If you didn't register a mail address that won't work of course, but then there is no way for us to help you. Theoretically, a developer could help you if he/she was convinced it was you account, but in practice none of the developers have time for this or want to do this. So then you're out of luck. — Sverdrup 00:47, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, you can always simply create a new account, if you wish. Write down the password and/or register an email address this time. DES ^(talk) 16:58, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am a frequent user of wikipedia and thought I would take a crack at editing an article I know something about. The article is the one on Tammany Hall. I'm a professor at NYU and also a fellow at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School in urban studies so I know something about the subject.

There are a fair number of innacuracies in the article, and I made some changes to it. They took. However, about five minutes later, I noticed that the changes had all been undone.

I then made those of my changes that I could remember again and again they took. However, the next day, they had disappeared and the old text was back.

Could there be some automatic program doing this or is there perhaps someone watching the pages who changes everything back as soon as he or she sees any changes?

At the end of the day is it just the person who made the last changes who wins or what happens? Please respond to *emailremoved*

• Click on the "history" link at the top of the page, it lists all previous edits, and hopefully a reason will have been given for the reverts. Try using the talk page to reach a consensus, and it will be helpful if you can cite a source for your changes. Kappa 01:13, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please take 60 seconds and make yourself an account so we can communicate. There are lots of possible answers to your question and potential responses on your part. You will find many allies trying to encourage those with academic expertise to keep those kinds of articles accurate. alteripse 02:39, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at the article. It appears our NYU friend used the IP User:68.161.26.201 (which resolves to Manhattan) to make these changes to Tammany Hall. Then, they were reverted by User:Wikibofh without comment. The NYU person then edited this page from User:128.122.42.13, which resolves to Brooklyn, which explains why the same IP doesn't show on this page. I've asked Wikibofh to comment on his or her reverting of the page. --Quasipalm 04:06, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• • • I was doing RC patrol and found it. On the whole it looks like better quality than the normal stuff, but some of the hyperbole seemed to indicate that it was vandalism (and I was in that mode). In particular:
      • Tammany is forever linked with the rise of the Irish in American politics.
      • However, Tammany was consistently able to survive and, indeed, prosper in spite of opposition and continued to dominate New York politics and by extenstion the politics of the country[...]
      • [...]and the society adopted many Native American words and customs, going so far as to call its hall a wigwam.
    • The obvious way to keep these things from happening is to create an account, so that on RC patrol it doesn't show up as something to check. Citing sources would help as well. That being said, it appears the rollback was in error, and I apologize. Wikibofh 14:22, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How do I mark an orphaned article as such?SD6-Agent 10:35, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the editor of wikipedia?

All of us. You too, if you want to be. Just read the instructions on every page about how to edit. alteripse 13:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Or if you're trying to cite Wikipedia as a source for your paper or project, please see the first line of instructions at the top of this page. Dismas|^(talk) 15:02, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sir/madam,

Please link to our website <link removed> to help those affected by the devastation that was caused after hurricane Wilma last week.

The more exposure this website will get, the more we can help rebuilding Cancun and help its people, animals, flaura and fauna to survive.

Thank you very much,

Kind regards, Grace Rattue Webmaster

Wikipedia does not generally engage in advertising or promotional activities. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:41, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On the following page are listed articles that have been "tagged" for copyediting attention:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_needing_copy_edit

I have an extensive background in publishing as an editor and writer, and would like to undertake some of these projects. I've already done some minor editing and article writing on the site, so know all about how to edit a page. However, this is my question:

Once you are finished copyediting an article that has been tagged for attention, how do you let the powers-that-be know that the task has been completed, so that it is then removed from the list of articles needing copyedit? Do you simply remove the copyedit tag at the beginning of the article (i.e., the word "copyedit" surrounded by two curly brackets), or is that some grand poobah's job? Don't want to be presumptuous or step on anyone's toes, being a newbie and all....

Thanks very much. --Victoria 16:51, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, once you think that an article no longer needs copyediting, just remove the {{copyedit}} tag.
Secondly, the 'list' that you mentioned is a category - if you put the copyedit tag on the page, it automatically gets listed (see Wikipedia:Categories).
Thirdly, to link to another Wikipedia page, surround what you want to link with '[[' and ']]' (see Wikipedia:Links). Thelb⁴ 17:06, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just a little detail to add. To link to a category on a page, without putting the page in that category, put a : immediately before Category in the link. It will not show up in the text, like this: Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit. 130.243.135.145 18:07, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Or, perhaps more simply, you can use the "category link template" {{cl}}. This shows up like this: Category:Writers. DES ^(talk) 18:36, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all! You have been very helpful. --Victoria 18:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested a photographer for permission to use his Image in wikipedia. He is willing to license it under GFDL. But he asked me what does he need to do (procedure) to license the Image under GFDL. --Vyzasatya 16:47, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

He should send you an email explicitly saying that he releases it under the GNU Free Documentation License for use on Wikipedia and for use by others under wikipedia's GFDL license. You should quote that email on the image page of the picture when you upload it, and be sure the image is tagged with {{GFDL}}. Then forward a copy of the email to PR (at) wikimedia (dot) org, the wikimedia foundation's permissions and releases department, along with a note indicating the file name of the image that the licencse applies to.

Please be sure that the photographer understands that anyoen may use or modify his picture, includign for commercial purposes, without paying any fee to him, provided that his copyright is acknowledged and that the picture is made available for furhter re-use under the same terms. As a practical matter, this almost surely means that the photo involved will have no future commercial value for him. (He may wish to release only a version with limited resolution, for example.)

Note, you might want ot upload to commons rather than to the english wikipedia. that will make sure the image is availabe to wikipedia projects in other languages.

Also be sure that the image page lists the photographer and carreis a proper copyright notice like "Copyright 2004 by John Photoguy, and released under the GFDL". If the photographer has a web site, you could put a link to the site on the image page. DES ^;(talk) 17:48, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks DESiegel, that helps me a lot --Vyzasatya 21:25, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently updated a stub into what I think should now be a full article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wally_Boag. How is this done? Is it something I can do, or do I need to wait for a moderator to change a parameter somewhere? Thanks very kindly. --ccdesan 17:37, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is discussed at some length in our page on stubs. Basically, once you think an article is long enough that it should not be labeled as a stub, simply remove the stub tag. Please be sure that it is listed in at least one non-stub category. There is no need for any admin or other person to approve this change -- although if another editor disagrees with you, the change could always be reverted, just as with any edit here on wikipedia. If you aren't sure, you can post a question on the talk page of the articel in question. The classic rule of thumb is that anythign with more than a dozen sentences, or more than a superficial coverage of the subject, is not a stub. But ther is no hard and fast rule on what is and what is not a stub. DES ^(talk) 17:41, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I welcomed ccdesan, thanked them for updating the article, and given some additional tips. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:38, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to suggest information that should be included in a particular article? For instance, I'd like to suggest that the article on artificial satellites say something about the approximate number of satellites that are in orbit at this time, or even better, the approximate number of each type of satellite. Does each page have a link to a forum where I could request such supplementation? Is so, it's not immediately apparent to a newbie. ````Cliff S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.4.29 (talk • contribs) November 2005

Yes it does. At the top of each artilce you will see a tab labeled "discussion" (in the default skin). Clicking on this takes you to the article talk page. This is the forum for discussing what is in that article, and what should be there, how the article can be improved, etc. You can post a request that the articel cover a particular issue there, or post dradt text for other people's reveiw. Howver, remember that there is no requirement that any particualr person respond to your request. People may not feel that your idea is a good one, or no particualr person may feel like doing the work to add the content needed. Remember that all content here is supplied by people like you, unpaid volunteeers. if you are able to do the research to give even part of the answer, that may help spur others to do the rest. Good luck, and heppy editing. DES ^(talk) 19:15, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I sould add that if you register for an account, log in, and sign your posts with four tildaa (like this ~~~~) your request may be taken more seriously, as may our other edits. it will also then be easier to communicate with you about the project. DES ^(talk) 19:19, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A while back, I asked a question on this page at #Delete or merge?. I got a partial answer, but when I asked a follow-up question for clarification I didn't get any reply. Would somebody please be so kind as to have a look at the question and either give me an answer or an indication of a better place to ask it? Thanks! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:28, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Hmm... sorry about that. I'm surprised no one saw that the question needed follow-up. Maybe it related to the fact that more questions came in, so no one went back up to the top. You can summon an administrator by posting your request at WP:AN. I would be happy to assist you myself, but I'm a newly created admin and I don't have time to learn how to do a page merge today. If you still need help by this weekend (and I certainly hope you get help by then) drop me a note on my talk page and I'll use your page as my learning experience. Thanks, Johntex\^talk 19:59, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Just to clarify what I think was probably implied by my message - I think you do technically need a page merge to correctly resolve the issue. Johntex\^talk 20:02, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Johntex! I'll go put a report on WP:AN and see what results. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:25, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I just discovered there is also WP:RM for requesting page moves. Johntex\^talk 20:34, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RM has pretty specific rules and procedures, and I'm not sure whether the merge-and-delete I'm requesting fits. I've put a request up at WP:AN, though. Thanks for your help. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 21:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to have a private area of your user page that others don't see? I'd like to have a list of editors whose work I like, a list of ones whose work I don't like, and a list of administrators I can call on, but I don't want anyone else to see that. I know I could keep the list in my own file, but it would be more useful if it was on my user page, but hidden from others. Bubba73 (talk) 19:35, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• No, this is not possible. Wikipedia is open in every regard, as is shown by the fact even userpages are editable by anyone. Hiding pages from view doesn't fit Wikipedia's goals. Still, I'm pretty sure listing admins you can call on and the users you like isn't going to cause any problems. If anything, the users you like are going to be feeling happy because you appreciate their work. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:44, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I'd also want to list ones I don't like, and I'd rather keep that private. Bubba73 (talk) 21:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can other users see my watchlist? Bubba73 (talk) 21:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Bubba, you could create a subpage, like Bubba73/resources. If you don't link to the resource page from your user page, then no casual user would know the page is there. Of course, if someone goes to the trouble of checking your Recent Contributions or if they are watching Recent Changes, then they can learn about the page by noticing that you have edited it. Therefore, it is semi-hidden, but not secret. Johntex\^talk 20:06, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That will probably be good enough! Can you point me to how to create a subpage? Bubba73 (talk) 21:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Simply type User:Bubba73/PageName into the search bar, and click go (replace PageName with what ever name you choose). You will be taken to the "no such page exixts" screen, one of the choses is "start the page". Click on that choice. Edit and save as on any wikpedia page. Note that anyone really wanting to find this will be able to do so. But no casual user will evenr know it is there unless you tell such a person. Yopu can have several such pages. For example i use User:DESiegel/Test for testing templates and wiki-code I am working on. By the way, other users can not see your watch list, even if they are admins. I suppsoe developers could see it via direct database access, but that is about it. DES ^(talk) 21:49, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Besides the above (and below) ways that people might find your "secret" subpage, if a user ever clicks on "What links here" from their own userpage, they'd be able to see if they were listed, which could be either a good or a bad thing. A way around that is not to use [[User:name]], instead just typing their name in plain text; that way it won't show up under What links here. You could do that for the list of "not likes" while using regular links for those you do like. Or something. —Brim 00:07, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't necessary to check someone's contributions to find their subpages. One need only query special:allpages, producing a search which shows all pages in the user space beginning with a certain name. Here's the one beginning at Bubba73. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:01, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's a much easier way to see a page's subpages: Special:Prefixindex. — mendel ☎    #    03:27, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Watchlist is invisible to other users.--Commander Keane 06:50, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid others connecting the pages to you, you could use sock puppets and put the material in their subpages. Also, you might be able to find an actually different user who would be agreeable to "hosting" your pages. In the same vein, User:Broken is host to a number of other users' pages, probably without the knowledge of anyone involved (until now). ‣ᓛᖁᑐ 07:12, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This passage contains an error and is found under Oreopithecus.

"The Swamp Ape (Oreopithecus bambolii) is a prehistoric primate species from the Miocene epoch whose fossils have been found in Italy (Tuscany and Sardinia) and in East Africa.

Their habitat appears to have been swampy, and not savanna or forest. The fossils are sufficient to indicate that there was a lumbar curve, implying some adaptation to upright walking, in distinction to otherwise similar species known from the same period. Since the fossils have been dated to about 8 million years ago, this represents an unusually early appearance of upright posture, lending itself to the aquatic ape theory of human bipedalism, especially in conjunction with other evidence of a possible earlier date for the evolution of hominids, such as the six to seven million year old, very human-looking Toumai skull."

An early time of appearance of bipedalism in no way supports the aquatic ape theory. Time of origin of bipedalism may well be fifteen million years ago during the miocene ape radiation. The bipedal mode of walking is fifty percent more efficient than quadrupedal ape locomotion. Association with water in fossils does not assure those animals were swimmers. Many pteradactyls were found preserved in sediments!

This passage contains an error and is found under Oreopithecus.

"The Swamp Ape (Oreopithecus bambolii) is a prehistoric primate species from the Miocene epoch whose fossils have been found in Italy (Tuscany and Sardinia) and in East Africa.

Their habitat appears to have been swampy, and not savanna or forest. The fossils are sufficient to indicate that there was a lumbar curve, implying some adaptation to upright walking, in distinction to otherwise similar species known from the same period. Since the fossils have been dated to about 8 million years ago, this represents an unusually early appearance of upright posture, lending itself to the aquatic ape theory of human bipedalism, especially in conjunction with other evidence of a possible earlier date for the evolution of hominids, such as the six to seven million year old, very human-looking Toumai skull."

An early time of appearance of bipedalism in no way supports the aquatic ape theory. Time of origin of bipedalism may well be fifteen million years ago during the miocene ape radiation. The bipedal mode of walking is fifty percent more efficient than quadrupedal ape locomotion. Association with water in fossils does not assure those animals were swimmers. Many pteradactyls were found preserved in sediments!

You would do better to point this out on Talk:Oreopithecus. That is where problems with the article should normally be discussed. DES ^(talk) 23:17, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I've spent about half an hour looking through 'help' and 'FAQ' to no avail. I used the upload tool to upload one of my photos and can't find or insert the image. I think the file name was changed during the process. Could you please point me in the right direction?

Many thanksTatty 00:36, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can get a list of all files you've uploaded by going to Special:Log/upload and putting in your username (or anyone else's, for that matter). Your image seems to be Image:Fish, chips & mushy peas.JPG. Incidentally, there's no source listed - if you took the photo personally, could you note that on the image? Clicking "edit this page" on the image page lets you edit the descriptive text attached to it. Any questions, feel free to chase me. Shimgray | talk | 00:47, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How do I create a new page on Wikipedia?

• Wikipedia:How to start a page - Mgm|^(talk) 05:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings to all...

I have a few, possibly redundant, questions; I need to ask, since I believe in this project and want to add the 'very best' to what you have all worked so hard on.

I have a problem with the 'fluid' nature of this project: Q. If there is a 'fact' known by any single person(s), and that fact comes into conflict with some 'existing' position or perception and consequently this 'fact' (i.e. a fact that is personally known or experienced which adds to the 'flavor' and 'integrity' of an article) is changed to accommodate the 'latest' edit, how is it possible to maintain the integrity and truthfullness of the article or veracity of any or all research? If the above question is considered, how then can any definitive conclusion be arrived at?

Q. If a judicial account of preparatory research establishes a 'fact' as seen by the researcher, and the facts prsented are irrefutable, is there a way to 'lock in' this position and have it accepted as 'FACT' for all viewers? If the above cannot be done, how then is 'our' encyclopedia to be considered difinitive...that is to say, a source which is impecable, and then becomes the THE SOURCE for knowledge and factum?

If someone makes a position clear regarding an individual (either living or dead)or postulates a schedule of events (i.e. timeline) or other elements concerning the veracity of their comments, and it is not true...is then edited for veracity...and then edited again, incorrectly,how then is the truth of the matter to be resolved?

I hope I have not over-stated this issue...but I think you will get the drift...

Thanks for the opportunity...

--Keltic 03:01, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See Why Wikipedia is so great, Why Wikipedia is not so great, Replies to common objections, Critical views of Wikipedia, and WikiWatch. Wikipedia works mainly by assuming editors will be reasonable and by using majority voting (or, rarely, consensus decision making) to decide which positions are correct. This works fairly well surprisingly often, and very well in articles on uncontroversial topics. However, it isn't perfect; systemic biases shared by the primary editors of a page can compromise neutral point of view, and unreasonable monomaniacs can force articles to promote fringe viewpoints simply because nobody else has the energy to compete with them.

Articles that become contentious can be protected to prevent further editing, but this is only used as a temporary measure. Protection is usually unconstructive; for example, a protected page will often be considered by someone to be the wrong version, in need of correction. Citing sources is the most effective way to demonstrate the correctness of an article.

Nonetheless, regardless of its flaws, Wikipedia is currently the largest encyclopedia in existence, and will at least be seen as definitive due to its popularity (its Alexa rank is 41) and its large number of mirrors, which ensure that its content is widely disseminated. ‣ᓛᖁᑐ 08:09, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have been trying to check out the quotes on the wikiquote site, but cannot see any. The site contains the names of all the people who's quotes are listed, but when I click on the person's name, the search engine takes me back to the wikipedia description of that person, and not to his quotes. Can you please help me? Thanks.

• Which Wikiquote page are you looking at? - Mgm|^(talk) 05:51, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My article was tagged as needing cleanup (rightfully so, it was posted before it was finished), and now I believe it is up to an acceptable standard how do I either remove the cleanup tag or request that it be removed?

Anyone (including you) can remove the tag when they feel the page is acceptable.--Commander Keane 06:42, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. How do I change my signature so that an en-dash appears before my nickname? Right now, the four tildes produce:

Matt 07:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would like the result to be:

–Matt 07:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

• You change that in your preferences (top right of the screen in the standard skin). Parts of your sig are automatically added so, you'll need to put the code in the box and click "raw signature". - 131.211.51.34 08:25, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Customisation help--Commander Keane 10:03, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • It works now. Thanks for the help. –Matt 19:39, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1. how are the unique policemen of London called?

2. who is the major trade partner of the UK for exports and imports?

For factual questions, please see the reference desk. This help desk is for questions relating to Wikipedia and how to use it. Dismas|^(talk) 13:46, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was working on my first article (Post anesthesia care unit), left my computer for a while, came back, and finished it. Unfortunately, my computer managed to log me out without noticing, so when I created the article it wasn't connected to me. Is there any way to remedy this? If not, no worries, it's about the information anyway, but I was just excited to have my first article. Thanks! Natalya 12:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly no.Geni 12:56, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit used to be used for this, however it has a notice that this service has been suspended. You may still add your request, but it may never be implemented. --Quasipalm 14:33, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to put a category in your namespace? I want a category for articles in my user space but User:RHowarth deleted it. I am User:4836.03.

Article catigories should not include pages in the user namespace.Geni 12:55, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Many articles about Bionicle related topics dont sort out the difference between fact and fiction. I was going to fix it myself but I didn't realise how widespread the problems were. Examples include: Metru Nui Mata Nui (Island) Kanohi But this is true of most articles in Category:Bionicle.

Thanks for bringing this up. We have a template that will flag these articles for review. Add {{fiction}} to the top of the article. If you don't have time to fix it yourself, this will flag the article for someone else to clean up. The template looks like this:

--Quasipalm 14:29, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, I have repeatedly run into this error when attempting to save changes to a page:

"Sorry! We could not process your edit due to a loss of session data. Please try again. If it still doesn't work, try logging out and logging back in."

After clicking "Save page" multiple times, the save eventually takes. What is happening? Wiki bug or something on my end? (and it just did it again trying to save this change, and again)--Durin 14:06, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just you. I've been getting it today too. I just logged out and back in again. Also cleared my cache. Maybe that will fix it...? (edit: Strike that... It happened when I tried to save this.) Dismas|^(talk) 14:58, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

lol..all this poeple banned today!

• 11:24, 3 November 2005, Khaosworks blocked (expires 11:24, 10 November 2005) (contribs) (persistent vandal of Lee Kuan Yew) why does a fool wanna vandal this?
• 03:30, 3 November 2005, Golbez blocked (expires 03:30, 5 November 2005) (contribs) (vandal Witch craft) lol satan

i can't go on:D will you banned me for this?:D anyway..you are telling me all this fools are banned today?>x<ino 14:16, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I checked on an article I wrote about Kaskaskia Baptist Association and it said it needed to be wikified. I am not sure how that is done.

Saluki64

That means to put in proper wiki code, and in particular, to link terms that could lead to other articles. For example you might replace "Baptist" with "[[Baptist]]" which will show up as Baptist. Links to an article on the city or locality where the church is located, adn to articels about significant concepts mentioned are probably good ideas. DES ^(talk) 15:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a Category is also a good idea, and maybe a stub notice.--Commander Keane 16:18, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Baptist would be more appropriate here than Baptist. Conversely, if the intended meaning was not 'a member of the Southern Baptist Convention' some work will be needed to disambiguate the concepts, even if you don't link.

--David Woolley 19:05, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There was an article somewhere that Wikipedia may be printed one day. How many pages would Wikipedia be printed out?

What is the size in relationship to the Encyclopeadia Brittanica?

If someone is able to answer this, please also put the answer into the FAQ. I can't believe this question either has not come up or is not easy to find in the FAQ.

I've gotten that compressed earlier this year there is a dump that is nearly 17 gigabytes. How big is it uncompressed?

I'm actually most curious about a comparison between Wikipedia and other encyclopedias such as MS Encarta, World Book Encyclopedia and Britannica.

The Main page of the Wikipedia tells you how many articles there are right up at the top. Something like 800,000 or so. Also see this recent news article about a print version: [14] Hope that answers some of your questions. Dismas|^(talk) 16:03, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's very hard to say - it would depend a lot on the form of the printing. However, the current Britannica has some 65,000 articles in 32 volumes (a fairly standard size for a large encyclopedia) - we nominally have just over 800,000 articles, which would suggest about 400 volumes. But a lot of our articles are remarkably short - just a few lines - so it'd probably be less than that; I'd estimate around 2-300 volumes.

This is huge, but not impossibly large - some major libraries have runs of several hundred bound volumes in various journals or catalogues (the Library of Congress catalog for 1899-1947 was 200 volumes!). However, what's more likely is that in a print edition it would be cut down to a few dozen volumes, 30-50, removing most of the less useful material. Shimgray | talk | 17:03, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also see Wikipedia:Size comparisons (somewhat out of date). ‣ᓛᖁᑐ 17:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are 6,927,159 articles. Thelb⁴ 18:49, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Are pictures and/or diagrams allowed to be taken from articles as long as they are sourced properly in other works?

-anon

Click on the picture or diagram that you wish to use. This will bring up the image's page and allow you to see how it is licensed. This will help you determine if you may use it for your own purposes. Dismas|^(talk) 16:52, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did an edit and it didn't show up.

There are a couple of reasons. Most commonly, this is a caching issue - your computer or your ISP hasn't realised the page has changed, so hasn't fetched the new one.

However, looking at your contributions, are we talking about the edit to Veganism? If so, it was removed shortly after you added it - two minutes later, in fact, with the edit summary of please try to integrate your contributions into the article itself. I can see why - your edit simply repeated material already in the first two paragraphs. Shimgray | talk | 16:49, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I'm posting in the right place and I apologize if I am not. I believe I have detected a illegitimate sock puppet and I was curious as to what action I should take. The user who I believe is using a sock puppet uses one anonymous account (it appears to be a static IP) as well as a user name. The latter account (which he names "NPOVenforcer") only has about 10 edits on it. Of the 10+ edits, the two major substantative edits to articles were both reverts after other users had reverted material inserted by anonymous account. On talk pages, the annonymous user, as well as the account with the user name, both employ simliar argumentative strategies, labeling everyone that opposes them as being "libelous" or 'trying to enforce their POV'. There's more than that, but I'll spare you the whole case. But basically, I think the user is using the second account to make himself look more neutral and get his way on edits. I was wondering if there was someone I should submit a request to in order to perform an IP trace or anything that would help confirm the user was in fact a sock puppet (he denied that he is a sock puppet when someone assumed the two were the same user after one of his reverts). The similiarities between the two are so thoroughly striking, I just do not see how they could not be the same user. Thank you. --Jakob Huneycutt 17:05, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is not against wikipedia policy to use more than one ID, or edit soemtimes logged in and soemtimes not logged in. It is against policy to use multiple IDs to vote multiple times in polls, or to try to create the impression of broader support for a position (content or policy) than really exists. If you think that such policies are being violated, report the matter on WP:ANI. Please include links, or better yet diffs, to show exactly what you think the problem is. Please try to be clear but brief there. It is possible to do an IP lookup with a tool known as "checkuser" but such lookups are generally only done where there is a pretty good reason to do them, and only a very few people have access to this information. You can see considerable discussion on this matter at the WP:ANI page - it has come up in a rather large discussion recently. DES ^(talk) 17:49, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't clear how to respond to you in your last response.

It also isn't clear how to integrate my contributions into the article itself. When I selected edit on the article I wanted to edit, none of that article came up, but instead another article that was much lower on the page came up. The reason I put my information there was that even though the term has what I say in it much further down, most people just glance at the first paragraph and assume that's the only meaning, which it isn't.

Also, what happened to my article on Income Tax?

Thanks

Why didn't my edit show up? I did an edit and it didn't show up.

There are a couple of reasons. Most commonly, this is a caching issue - your computer or your ISP hasn't realised the page has changed, so hasn't fetched the new one. However, looking at your contributions, are we talking about the edit to Veganism? If so, it was removed shortly after you added it - two minutes later, in fact, with the edit summary of please try to integrate your contributions into the article itself. I can see why - your edit simply repeated material already in the first two paragraphs. Shimgray | talk | 16:49, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

To respond to your initial question you could have just clicked on the "edit" link to the right of your question. Also, the information you placed in the article isn't "much farther down", it's in the second paragraph. If people aren't willing to read even that far then they more than likely don't really want to know/read the article in the first place. Dismas|^(talk) 17:13, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To edit the first section of any page, click "edit" at the top - clicking the edit links in the body of the text will only edit a particular section. Your edits to the page were replicated in the two paragraphs following it - indeed, your second sentence was identical to the first sentence of the latter parapgraph. Summarisation can go too far.

By your "article on Income tax", I take it you mean the vast amount of text dumped into income tax on October 25th. As this is a) partly incomprehensible, b) original research, and c) apparently an advertisement, it was removed. Shimgray | talk | 17:22, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I log in when I come to Wikipedia, but as I move between editing, discussion and history pages, I find I am repeatedly logged out. What am I doing wrong? Thanks for your assistance. --66.241.89.131 17:15, 3 November 2005 (UTC)--66.241.89.131 17:15, 3 November 2005 (UTC) Okay. This just happened again. I logged in (again) before coming to help desk. When I checked the page preview, I had been logged out. No doubt this is a simple matter to fix, but I can't figure it out. Again, thanks for any help. Nan[reply]

This happes to a good many people, including myself, fairly oftn. it seems to be some sort of cookie issue. Try clearing your browser's cache (ctrl+F5 on IE) that soemtimes helps. failing that, try closing all browser windows, deleting all cookies (or at least any onnected with wikipedia or quite recent) and all temporrary internet files. Then log back on, and the problem seems not to happen for a while. This has been reported by many people, and i think the developers are trying to work on it. DES ^(talk) 18:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't find your response in the edit section so I can reference what you said exactly.

From recollection, I agree with you now after looking at the Veganism article, that it does indeed say what I wanted, but that what I'm really dealing with are some hard headed people.

Second, please cite for me on the Income Tax information what was incomprehensible, for it wasn't an advertisement, so much as it was citing law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.111.181.109 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 3 November 2005

Please try to make your edits in the aprpopriate sections. The edit button for each section is just above the dividing line for that sextion, or its section title, and on the right side of the screen. DES ^(talk) 18:04, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When you made this edit you included at the end your email, telephone, and web address, that looks a lot like an advertisement. You also included "This concludes Part I of III of Constitutional Income - We encourage you to check out the Audio Library at <URL>" this looks like a copy vio or an attempt to use a wikipedia articel as a hosting service. Wikipedia articels are not signed, and are not owned by any one contributor. DES ^(talk) 18:18, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As to the content of the edit, it states as fact a larege number of veiwws which are far form generally agreed. it is a statemetn of the position of some people who generally feel that the US Income tax, as presently constituted, is not constitutionally valid. That view is not held by a majority of judges or constitutional scholars in the US, and the IRS dismisses cases that cite it as "frivilous" and "without merit", adn the courts uphold their actions. This may be legally wrong, but it does happen. Therefore including this text as if it were the generally accepted view of the law is PoV, and since it is uncited it may be origianl research as well. There are people who hold such views, adn it would be proper to report on their views and their arguemts. but the views should be properly attributed to those who hold them, and citations provided. It should be made clear that these are currently minority views. DES ^(talk) 18:18, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help on the editing issue.

On this matter "This concludes Part I of III of Constitutional Income - We encourage you to check out the Audio Library at <URL>" The URL substitutes for me rewriting several cumbersome paragraphs. Why re-invent the wheel?

2. Just because a fact is not generally agreed to doesn't lessen it. Whether corrupt judges say it's frivolous and without merit or not, it is still in the Constitution, is nowhere in IRC book, income is not defined there, it is defined in Supreme Court decisions, which haven't been overturned, as "corporate profit". There are many court decisions to support this. As you wish, I can add that it is a minority view, but that doesn't remove the facts. Can you please put it back now?

Incomprehensible translates to "I got a headache trying to figure out what it was talking about", in this case. If you want it reinstated, I suggest you take the matter up at the discussion page for that article. Shimgray | talk | 19:03, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On my template User:Commander Keane/Disambiguation/Dab nav small I can't get the header text to be bold. I've tried !, ''', font-weight:bold with no success. --Commander Keane 19:10, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I've tweaked it and the header is now bold. But somehow the font turned larger. You could probably add font-size:70% or something to the top line of code if you want to make it smaller. I didn't do it yet, I want to see what you think first. If you want to know how to make a certain template, try copying part of an existing one. I think the one about Forensics, or Cuisine related things like Cheese are a good place to start. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed that worked, but I do want the font-size to be reduced, and when I add back in "font-size: 80%" as a style, the bolding disappears (to my eyes at least).--Commander Keane 05:14, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently added two disambiguation pages for the Battle of Alnwick. One "Battle of Alnwick" works in the search fied but the other, which looks like the example "Battle of Alnwick (Disambiguation)" doesn't.

Please, firstly delete the most appropriate page and, secondly, how do I get the (Disambiguation) into the title but still allow a search to find it?

Thanks

--ljd 20:51, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just created my account, and was reading the "predestination paradox" article, and made an update involving the show Beast Wars. It was soon edited so it was more concise, which was fine, but then it was deleted. I reposted it and it was deleted again. I seemed to think it was relevant and informative, so I'm wondering if there was something wrong with it, or does someone who isn't a mod just have it in for me?

The best place to discuss a dispute over information on a specific article is on the article's talk page. The link at the top of the page that says "discussion" is the one to look for. Also, you could go into the article's history, from the "history" link at the top of the article, to see who took your contribution out. That way you can post a message on that user's talk page (if it was done by a registered user and not an anonymous IP) asking them why they took it out. Dismas|^(talk) 21:51, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the copyright issues / wikipedia policy is on this - should an article about a specific song (e.g. Somebody's Watching Me) have lyrics or not? Thanks!

In my view (IANAL) that would go far beyond copyright fair use, unless the lyrics are out of copyright. My view would be that it would be a copyright violation.

--David Woolley 22:20, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A short quote from the lyrics, up to a single verse or stanza, or a few key phrases, particualrly if the article comments on the the lyrics, might well be proper under Fair use, but more that that would be dubious under copyright, and probably not appropriate even if the song were in the public domain. (IANAL either.) DES ^(talk) 22:27, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Better to just link to another site which already has the lyrics WauloK 05:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I believe there is a policy against linking to pages which violate copyright. User:Zoe|^(talk) 06:00, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

i frequently access the history of pages to find the creator and no user name is present, just a number and when you hover the mouse, the little yellow text box says 'special:contributions' where it would normally say the username. how can i find out who put these pages or edits up???? (preceding unsigned article by 83.70.29.239 2005-11-03 22:01:25 (UTC))

Thag is an IP addrfess, indicating that the person who made the edits was not logged in, and so we have no user ID for him. If you follow the link it will go to a page that lists all edits made via that IP address, which may or may not all have been m,ade by the same person. That is the 'special:contributions' page. DES ^(talk) 22:29, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(After edit conflict.)

Special contributions is the function that you can access from my contributions, at the top of the screen, for yourself.

If, like you did when posting this question, you edit a page without having logged in, the only identity the system has for you is the technical value that allows Wikipedia's computers to find your computer to send the responses. This is called the IP address.

In general you can only identify the ISP from this information, as, for most users, the ISP allocates a different value every time they connect to the internet. For the ISP to identify the user, you will need to supply the time as well, and will almost certainly also have to provide them with a court order! Proxies complicate the matter, and they may not log enough information to allow the originating computer to be located.

I believe that Wikipedia servers log the IP address even when a user is logged in, but this is only feally useful if the user has a fixed or reasonably stable address, and for privacy reasons they won't reveal that information, anyway.

It doesn't make much sense to go to a user page for an IP address, so the history takes you to the contributions page, which contains a history of all the edits associated with that IP address.

--David Woolley 22:55, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear, it's "Special:Contributions". This just means it's a Special: Wikipedia page, like "Special:Whatlinkshere" and "Special:Allpages". The contributions aren't special, it's just a naming thing.--Commander Keane 05:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This edit moves a very long sidebar into the preceding section to avoid some awkward white space. In my view that is not a valid edit to make, but I take a very structuralist view in the use of HTML, so I'd thought I would try and get second opinions before moving it back.

I did leave a message on the editor's talk page, over a day ago, but there has been no reply.

My general impression is that Wikipedia also takes a structuralist view, generally trying to suppress custom styling, but it is not structurally pure in HTML terms, in particular tending towards having italics rather than a cite element, so its not certain to me that it isn't considered acceptable to compromise correct structure for visual display.

In this case, I think that there is a good case for moving the section with a very long sidebar into an article of its own, but I think that may trigger a revert war (hint: I've also tagged the page {{NPOV}} citing that section as one of the main offenders). The other alternative is to convert the sidebar into a normal sub-section.

--David Woolley 22:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Converting the thing into a section or turning the section with the bar into a subarticle are both viable things if it's done right, but I don't have a problem with the sidebar being moved as long as it shows correctly for most browsers and screensizes. It looks fine on this end. - 131.211.51.34 08:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This article section uses colour codes to classify words in grammar examples.

This violates a basic usability principle that you should never use colour as the only distinguishing feature. Also the particular colours used are not very distinct when printed monochrome, and, I suspect, there are some colour vision defects in which they will be difficult to distinguish.

The other problem is that it involves embedding HTML markup in the text of the page.

I can't however think of a better way (italic didn't work well, especially with the Chinese characters (Chinese actually uses smaller characters for emphasis)). Any proper way really should use class attributes, so that the coding can be skin dependent.

Is there a better way that I have missed?

--David Woolley 23:08, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, We work at a golf club in Minnesota USA, named Somerby, and would like to see if you had information on the community of Somerby. We are looking for names of people, places and things; for example, the name of the local tavern, and the local newspaper. Thanks for your help. Tim Shea

... is discussed at the Reference desk. This page is about help with Wikipedia. — mendel ☎    *    02:07, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On the page on Alaska, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska , there is an error in the date of accession. According to the article, it says 'It was admitted on January 3, 1859, '. However is should be 1959, not 1859, and there (as far as I can see), is no way to edit the initial section.

Brendan

If you click "edit this page" on the tabs right at the top, above the title, you'll be able to edit the entire page not just the individual sections. (It's a bit confusing, I know!). In future, please feel free to correct mistakes like this (though this seems to have been vandalism of the article rather than an error). I've just checked the page, and the date was corrected a few hours ago - you may be viewing an older cached version, so if you reload or refresh the page the problem should vanish. Shimgray | talk | 01:24, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How can I make wikipedia my homepage?

A: Yes! Just set your browser's homepage to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
42istheanswer 03:20, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So (if you use IE or Firefox at least), go to the Main Page. Then...

• In IE: Tools > Internet Options... > Use Current
• In Firefox: Tools > Options... > (Click on the general tab on the left) > Use Current pages.

--Commander Keane 05:27, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

i heard a rumor that wikipedia might go to print.

• The trees of the world say "no"! Seriously, who, apart from a few libraries, would spend tens of thousands of dollars to buy hundreds of volumes that will be out of date long before they get it...? Notinasnaid 09:07, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  Those can't access wikipedia in any other form? — Sverdrup 11:54, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Try WP:1.0 and related pages for discussion of static versions like print or CD. Kappa 16:42, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on simple square grid to demonstrate problems for Sudoku. This requires setting the border style to solid. The only way I see to do this is with style parameters for each cell. This is going to be very bulky if I have to do it for all 81 cells. Even with templates it's messy.

Is there a way to use CSS table descendant selectors so that all TD's for the table use the style? This technique is used in wikimedia.common.css for info boxes. Is wiki(media) limited to inline style declarations?

I need a CSS rule like <style> table.someclass td {border: solid 3px silver; ...} </style> -- LarryLACa 04:35, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was not able to find any information on CSS selectors, so I implemented a solution using templates and style parms for each cell and border element (right/left, top/bottom). For various trivia on table cell border usage see the templates described in Template:Sudoku 9x9 grid.

If anyone finds a way to define CSS rules for a template, please let me know at User_talk:LarryLACa. -- LarryLACa 01:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Does Wikipedia keep a log of the number of times a particular article has been accessed?

Thanks.

James J.

This question was asked earlier this week... here it is.--Commander Keane 05:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I want to help fix up some of the missing articles, but there's a lot of articles listed with the same subject name, but a different year suffix.

I started to add REDIRECTIONs to each year article back to the main subject, but then thought I should check if this is the right way to do it.

eg.

Article_name_1999 Article_name_2000 Article_name_2001

I was going to redirect all occurrences of these back to the main (existing) article "Article_name".

Is this correct?

Could you give examples? Are you talking about films that may have been released in different years but have the same title? Maybe something like Movie Name (1990 film) and Movie Name (2000 film)? In general, unless these were remakes of the same original book or novel, they would point to different pages for the different films. There may be a disambiguation page that points to all of them though. Dismas|^(talk) 13:09, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hello,

i tried to ad an external link but when i went back, it was deleted. what is the rule for including relative commercial links under the external link heading?

thank you. (preceding unsigned article by 210.55.0.195 2005-11-04 09:53:15 (UTC))

Commercial links are generally avoided, unless the page contains something very useful and relevant to the article which cannot be found on a free source. (See Wikipedia:Spam) - 131.211.51.34 10:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you are referring to the Stock footage article, you ought to ask Vilerage, who actually reverted your changes, but my guess is:

1. There were already enough examples to demonstrate the nature of the concept. (Wikipedia isn't trying to compete with Google Directory and giving examples at all was probably asking for trouble.)
2. What probably sealed your fate was using the word "Affordable", which looks like commercial hype.

--David Woolley 12:36, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely am facinated by your site, but do not know how I am to trust the information that I am gathering from it. How do I know that the information in the articles is true if anyone, even an anonymous user can edit the information at will?

• See Wikipedia:Replies to common objections. Also, we aim to provide reliable sources as often as possible, so you can check that something's true for yourself. Also, there's numerous Wikipedians with a track record of good work. If one of those did extensive work on an article, you can be pretty sure it's all right. And if all else fails, you can always try the reference desk. - 131.211.210.15 11:53, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to add a link to a page about Charles Darwin, and I couldn't figure out how. The page is called "Darwin in Warsaw", http://www.darwin.com.pl - and exists in polish and english. kind regards, lene berg, stockholm

The URL you quoted seems to relate to a current event. Wikipedia isn't the place to promote such events. (I also found the site to be over-designed.)

--David Woolley 12:47, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

how do you revert!? and put a mini message why it has been reverse >x<ino 12:22, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Revert. Dismas|^(talk) 13:03, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a search engine, to get a specific answer you need to ask a specific question. However, if you are looking for information on how to cite Wikipedia as a source, please see the instructions at the top of this page. Dismas|^(talk) 16:47, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to the boxes around the cleanup templates for tone and verification (and probably others)? Without such a box it's pretty hard to distinguish them from the article itself. Has this change been widely discussed? - Mgm|^(talk) 19:28, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Like {{Cleanup}}? It looks fine to me and has not been changed in that way recently. {{Inappropriate tone}} looks fine, too, though its main div had a class added recently. —HorsePunchKid→龜 04:19, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Are images taken from Google Earth permitted? If so, what copyright tag does a photo get? Specifically, I'm interested in adding an orthophoto (air/satellite photo) to Dawson Creek, British Columbia and among other towns. --maclean25 20:12, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Google Earth images are legally complex; different datasets are copyrighted to different people and used under license. However, you can get around the copyright issues relatively easily by taking the image from NASA World Wind, a precursor to Google Earth (though functionally quite similar) - all the image datasets it uses are sourced from the US Government, and thus can be tagged {{PD-USGov-NASA}}. Shimgray | talk | 20:24, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the quick response. I'd also like to add another question concerning image tags. Can you tell me if I have the correct tag for this official city logo and this flag, keeping in mind that it is for a Canadian city and that the city hall emailed me them personally after I requested them specifically for this page in Wikipedia. --maclean25 20:54, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The former is certainly correct, the latter probably so. Flag images are a little dubious - we're still working out what to do with them and how copyright applies, I believe - but that tag is as good as anything we have. Shimgray | talk | 21:12, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On the former, you might also use {{Non-free fair use in}} as your comment basically claims exactly what that tag asserts. DES ^(talk) 22:54, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I tried NASA World Wind. Indeed, that is amazing. However, the it has poor quality in my area. If I were to use the Google Earth image, what tag would I use?

{{unknown}} I fear, i.e. your images are likely to be deleted as copyvios, unless you find out which database google obtained that particualr image from and give reasons why it is PD or subject to fair use, or get a GFDL release. Good luck. DES ^(talk) 02:18, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. How about this air photo here: Image:Dawson Creek 1996.jpg. It is from this gov mapping place here: Ministry of Energy and Mines. --maclean25 02:46, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The source of the Google Earth images can be determined through the software, but it gets complicated if more than one source was used. Assuming you're not using any overlays, the area around Dawson Creek is entirely sourced from one supplier, DigitalGlobe. They're a major imagery reseller; the quality of these shots suggests aerial photography and thus likely purchased rather than acquired from USGov satellite sources. So their claim of copyright is probably correct.

Looking at the new image, again we know the source; we know it's copyrighted. Legally, we're in the same situation for both; we know the source and the copyright owner. If you discuss the imagery, and what it indicates, in the article, then you probably have a decent fair-use claim for either of them. Shimgray | talk | 03:05, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WHilst noting IANAL, I think it would only be fair use to use the imagery if you were discussing the nature of the imagery itself (e.g. the technical limitations of the imagery), rather than the subject itself. When you use copyrighted material for its primary intended use, it is very difficult to claim fair use, as part of fair use is that you are not causing commercial harm (lost advertising revenue) to the source.

The other consideration, when using anything accessed through commercial software is that you need to look at the licence agreement for the software, as often that will impose contractual limitations that prevent you from doing things that would have been allowed by copyright law if you had obtained things without using the software. Web sites also often try to impose such conditions (e.g. I'm unwilling to use some obituaries from the online versions of major British newspapers because they attempt to establish a contractual limitation on the use of the site that goes beyond copyright law in a way that prevents use on Wikipedia). Whether web site "terms of user" establish valid contracts is probably a controversial subject.

--David Woolley 09:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for you help. --maclean25 21:27, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

how does a person create an article?

• See Wikipedia:How to start a page and how to write your first article. Good luck! - Mgm|^(talk) 21:09, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am grappling with Wiki's table syntax, and so far it's winning. Any and all interested parties are cordially invited to examine The Table of Annoyance (scroll down a bit). My essential problem is that the "Village Noble" cell should fall immediately below the "Village Elder" cell. However, no combination of mojo I have used thus far (and I have used many mojo-riffic combinations thus far) have worked. If there's anybody who knows how to Make It Work(tm), I'm all ears. Thanks. Extreme Unction 21:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Did a tweak and posted to his talk page. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:22, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many thanks. That's the look I was going for. Extreme Unction 22:35, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The table has been tweaked to my satisfaction. MGM's suggestions, unfortunately, were ultimately insufficient for what I hoped to do (though I certainly appreciate his/her sincere efforts on my behalf). Interested parties (and I don't imagine there are many) are cordially invited to my User Page to examine the results. I'm also going to edit the Wiki Table help page to provide examples for this sort of thing. Extreme Unction 11:40, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am an instructor with Central Texas College and I am looking for a video on how the New York Stock Exchange runs. Do you have such a thing?? How much does it cost?

Thank you

Sasisopin Kobayashi

Welcome! 1)No, as far as I know all the content we have is at NYSE 2) Everything here is free under GNU Free Documentation License. Broken S 22:04, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a Wikipedia policy that I may have missed that deals with "trivia" sections in biographical articles and such? I haven't found one but thought I'd ask. To me, trivia sections seem like a cop out. Like someone said, "I have this bit of info but was too lazy to think about how to fit it in the flow of the article so I just stuck it onto this ever expanding list of trivia." So is there a policy on trivia sections? Like if they're frowned on but tolerated or if they outright don't belong or what? Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 22:02, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't if it's official, but I hate Trivia sections and all content in them should be deleted or merged into the article. Broken S 22:04, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• It really depends on whether the info contained in it is encyclopedic. I like the trivia section in sodium chloride. The info is relevant, and could be merged into the article. Some trivia sections house info which wouldn't have a home otherwise. If discussion reveals you're dealing with the last type of info, I don't have a problem with it being deleted, but er on the side of caution and merge and move, rather than delete. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:25, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Of course, you could also move it to talk if you're unsure about whether something is fully deleteable...- Mgm|^(talk) 22:57, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What is "remote editing"? This guy here goes on about it, and I've never heard the term before, nor can I find any reference to it in the help...

I think he just means the ability to edit wikipedia while sitting at home, that is, "remotely". Oh boy!. DES ^(talk) 22:56, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, he probably thinks he's hacking. -82.7.125.142 23:52, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that some articles using your footnote/endnote format come out fine on the screen, but when you print the articles, next to each reference number in the text a bunch of garble is printed as well [for example: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...)]. Is there any way to overcome this?

Thanks a lot!

Were you using the "Printable version" link (in the toolbox, on the left, under the search bar)?--Commander Keane 05:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a bunch of garble. It looks like you are talking about the full URL for the online sources. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:54, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Printing the full URL is deliberate. It allows people to access the web for a reference, even if they only have a printed copy. However, this doesn't happen for footnotes, so I think the subject of this question is wrong; what is actually being observed are short form external links, which do not generate any footnote (unless you tell the browser to print a table of links.

The URL expansion can, probably, be suppressed by using a custom style sheet.

--David Woolley 10:07, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What sort of things are worth making a new article for? Bobguy7 02:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You might take a look at requested articles for some ideas. Walter Siegmund (talk) 05:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm running into loads o' trouble with information boxes. I've tried creating an info box for ferry vessels (I would like to create articles for each individual vessel of the Alaska Marine Highway System, but I would like to start once I have an information box template and know what information the template will contain) but I can't seem to make any headway. Is there a place in Wikipedia where I can request for one to be constructed by those more versed than I in info box construction (or technical issues at large)? Jarfingle 05:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Here (WP:HD) is a good place to much such queries. Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) is meant for discussion of "technical issues". I find tables and boxes can often be confusing. I used to just find an infobox that is already working and I copy the formating. Broken S 05:43, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I don't understand why the content is keep reverting back.

This is Rajput page and as a Rajput I can expect you to think we can do better job to publish rajputs related info here.

If any info is not correct then you can let us know and we can take it out or come back and provide some reference.

If anyone comes and provide proper reference about any info and you take that out then we don't see any problem in that too.

I hope you understand and extend your support to improve our relation with other users instead of messing up everyhting here.

I know it's open source edit website and anyone can come and post anything on any page but when any page is disputed many times then you need to give some preference to right people and ask other to provide references for any kind of modifications, additions or subtractions.

Looking forward for your reply.

Thanking you in anticipation.

Regards, Ajitsinh Solanki

I don't know what the other editors' motivations are for reverting your changes, but the best place to discuss it is the Rajput discussion page. I'm sure if you bring up your concerns there, the other editors will participate in the discussion. —HorsePunchKid→龜 06:28, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, take a look at the message at the top of that discussion page. With many controversial subjects, the current article is a compromise worked out over a long time, and carefully balanced. That doesn't mean it can't be improved! But it means you need to engage in full discussion before any changes, or they are likely to just be reverted instantly. Also, check the article's history for comments about your changes. Another tip for controversial articles: do you think someone reading your words would guess what your own point of view is? If so, then it doesn't belong. Even if writing about one point of view, or another, the author's own voice must be neutral. Notinasnaid 07:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a new user, and before making an account, I made small edits to some pages I found interesting, which were signed with my IP address. Now that I have a name, how can I add those edits to 'my contributions' (I have an IP that doesn't change, so they can be confirmed to be mine, I think). This also includes a fairly large edit of mine after creating an account that didn't get my name on it because I got logged out without knowing it during the typing. I very much want that one on my list.

Is claiming those edits possible, or should I just let it be? KLSymph 06:58, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• There used to be an option for that, but it requires a lot of work by developers with database access, who really should be working on improving the software. If there's no other edits by that IP you can just link your anonymous edits (especially the diffs on your userpage and tell people you edited using the IP for a while. Sorry, there's no better option. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:00, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I followed the instructions and created this: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/JamesMLane,

but when I try to add the link where I am supposed to, I see only this:

"((Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/JamesMLane))" .

Help!

Rex071404 ^{216.153.214.94} 09:06, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You've used round brackets, you should have used curly ones. --David Woolley 09:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Next time, it would be a good idea to ask a user whether they'd like to be nominated before doing so. Occasionally it can safe you a lot of time. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:37, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree. I've nominated at least one or two users for adminship, who have been completely shocked at the prospect that anyone in the entire world would think them of worthy of AdministrativePower®, and they all have had complete, or almost complete, support, and become admins. The only user who I nominated for adminship who didn't become one was a user who declined the nomination. — JIP | Talk 21:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

which countries have not accepted the children's rights movement?

• Please read the instructions at the top of this page. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just received a dire warning "83.205.38.52 : this is the last time we warn you that you vandalized a page, next time we will prevent you from etc, etc..."

I've no idea what this is about !

Is it a bug somewhere ? Is it somebody else using my address to do evil things ?

I find wikipedia very useful, and I rarely change anything on a wikipedia page.

AC (preceding unsigned comment by 83.205.38.52 2005-11-05 12:27:23 (UTC))

I have seen this happen a few times since I started editing here. For newbies it is extremely disconcerting to have such warnings suddenly leveled at them and the whole process of explaining what has likely happened has fallen to me a couple of times. I presume discussions around the pros and cons of making all potential contributors create a user name with a legitimate email address have already taken place. Right now, only IP addresses are logged for most vandals and of course in most cases this gets reassigned dynamically, thus alienating those who are potentially useful contributors. It also seems to me that anyone who genuinely wants to contribute usefully should have no problem with the registration process and, of course, vandals will be much less likely to damage pages if they know they can be traced and effectively banned. Charlie Richmond 13:15, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(after two edit conflicts - I've reverted the second one that obfuscated the IP address, as that is a matter or public record on the History page and should have been included in the original signature)

I cannot see any justification for a vandalism claim, however, your IP address was used to make this edit to the hurricane Katrina page in violation of a guideline, commented on the page, about not being a place for large lists of links. It's possible that there was a revert war. It's probable that your are on a dynamic IP address and the Katrina change was made by another user of that address.

There are many other Katrina related contributions from 24.165.233.150 the IP address used by the not-logged-in user that added the warning. They maybe correlated many accesses from Wanadoo. Maybe you are just sharing an interconnect point with the person who kept trying to add the links.

There is a standard piece of text (template) that can be added to the talk page of an IP address that is defnitely dynamically allocated, that makes the warning about this, that already appears at the foot of the page, more specific. As the standard warning indicates, the best solution is to create yourself an account.

There is some possibility, here, that the final warning was put on without giving earlier warnings, which would be abuse in its own right. They appear to be using a static IP address, so there shouldn't be any problem in communicating to them with their talk page, although they won't be able to reliably talk back if you have a dynamic address.

--David Woolley 13:58, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but what about my suggestion? ;-) Charlie Richmond 00:05, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid it has been proposed before - see Wikipedia:Village pump (perennial proposals)#Abolish anonymous users. — Catherine\^talk 01:16, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that when using Konqueror, the "Watch this page" button isn't checked by default like it is in Firefox. Is this some sort of bug, or just a consequence of my browser settings? Ojw 13:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on your user account preferences at Special:Preferences. If you login to the same account with both browsers, or use identical settings, it may be the browser that is the problem. — Sverdrup 15:33, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hallo i come from Sicily and to be direct, i have a lot kilograms of oranges more then 40.000,00 kg and i will like to send overseas. there is a way to sell those by you? or thre is a way to sell oranges in one of those big chain such as auchian? thanck you

rispectfully Bruno Antonino

Bruno, this is an encyclopedia, not an orange-selling-place. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 14:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be starting a Business class soon and was looking over the scheduel. I ran across this heading... Robert's rules of order. What is it? Or should I ask, What are they? Thanks in advance. Lstp

See our article on Robert's Rules of Order. Please note in future that the Help Desk (this page) is for questions about Wikipedia policy and procedure; the best place to ask questions about factual matters is the Wikipedia Reference Desk. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:00, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to install a "visitor"/"hit" counter (e.g., "[26,724] people have visited this page since ...") on the User page (given the interactive editing nature, I realize it would be inappropriate—and probably useless—on an article page, but it seems reasonable for the User page...and I haven't seen any policy prohibition against it)? I've tried installing one, but it just shows up as HTML code.
Or is there a special Wiki counter (or even just a way—"Special page"?—to find out how many User page visits there have been). ~Kaimbridge~ 16:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Basically no. MediaWiki contains software to run hit counters, but it's turned off globally due to the amount of strain it puts on the servers. I don't believe it can be selectively turned on. As for "installing" one, the software suppresses (for obvious reasons) most attempts to do fancy HTML to call external resources. Shimgray | talk | 16:45, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This question was asked here on Oct 30. Check it out for additional comments. --hydnjo talk 16:50, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Technical FAQ#Can I add a page hit counter to a Wikipedia page?. I suspect as far as the front end caches are concerned, user pages are just like pages in the main namespace. They could be treated differently, and the software's page counter mechanism could be changed so that it could be enabled per namespace. Both of these changes would be software changes. Feel free to suggest this as a new feature at Wikipedia:Bug report, although without a compelling argument for why this is needed I doubt it would be implemented. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How do I format multiple paragraphs of direct quotes, like that in Maria Sabina, which includes a poem? Thanks. -- Perfecto  17:48, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That poem is assuredly copyrighted. It's probably unacceptable to use it here, unless you're planning on doing a detailed analysis of each line. I've commented on the article's Talk page that I plan on deleting it in a few days if I don't get some arguments as to why it should stay. User:Zoe|^(talk) 22:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Into your encyclopedia?

On the top of every page is a history tab that will show you every user that has contributed to that page. If you are looking for this information because you want to cite Wikipedia, you can find out how to do that at Wikipedia:Citing_Wikipedia. Canderson7 17:59, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have a problem with my entry on I Capuleti e I Montecchi which was deleted by another user who didn't realize I was re-using my own article forom Opera japonica. What can I do? Kleinzach 18:00, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't seem to have ever been an article with that title. Are you sure that's its name? When did you create it? User:Zoe|^(talk) 22:17, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I added the title and linked it. It was originally a run-on from the previous article. I had to guess the page title....Found it. It's not deleted only in the process of a copyright violation deletion -- David Woolley 22:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC) re-edit 18:48, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright violation procedure doesn't seem to have been correctly followed as the article was never listed on the Wikipedia:Copyright_problems. This should have been done by the person raising the issue. --David Woolley 19:12, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Who is User:RickK? His talk page has 11,000 edits. Perhaps he deserves an article. -- Perfecto  18:02, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A former Wikipedia user and administrator especially well-known for his vandal-hunting as the vandal-hunting award in his name shows. I don't remember the details, but there was an incident that prompted him to leave Wikipedia and he hasn't come back since. - Mgm|^(talk) 18:29, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2005-06-27/Article_blocking for more information on the incident. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 18:40, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RickK was also somewhat infamous for having very little patience, a tendency to not assume good faith, and a low tolerance for users perceived to be trolls. ‣ᓛᖁᑐ 18:52, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please tell me how my article on farnham kung fu club can be considered to have broken a ny rules in order to be considered for deletion?

This appears to be an arbitrary process in which one has no facility for responding to the alleged problem.

In this particular case, the only 'evidence' I can see cited is that one single person considers that the club 'might not be a NOTABLE kung fu club'... which seems something of a value judgement to pass on a small club that has produced numerous British champions and at least four world title holders in 23 years.

Can anyone enlighten me? Is anyone free to vandalise someone else's posting, just by objecting to it?? (preceding unsigned article by 195.92.168.166 2005-11-05 20:42:40 (UTC))

Nominating an article for deletion is rarely vandalism (only when there's clearly bad faith involved. If you can provide written sources to back up the article and post it to the deletion discussion page, there's a good chance it might be kept. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:14, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(After collistion.) Please do not start lines with spaces. That is interpreted as being preformatted text.

You can respond to the alleged problem by commenting on the page that is brought up by the link in the notice box and by improving the article so that it it makes it clear why it should be considered notable.

In general small organisations are considered not notable, otherwise every social club would want an entry.

Another test of notability, the presence of multiple, independent, Google hits, also fails. The only hits are from your local (government) council[15].

Here you claim 4 + n famous people, but on the article page, there is only one famous person claimed and they are not famous enough to have their own article. There aren't actually any links at all in your article, but I did search for Gary Turner. If you can find a verifyable quote by a world champion that they owe their success to the club, and cite that quote in the article, you might make a good case for being notable, but as things are, I think the nomination is correct. (There are enough Kung Fu related hits on Google for Gary Turner to possibly justify an entry for him, but none with any mention of Farnham.)

There are currently two votes for deletion, as well as the nomination.

-- David Woolley 21:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way for #entries to begin with a number other than 1? Thanks! -- Perfecto  21:45, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• As far as I know the only method is actually writing out the numbers by hand. Why are you trying to do this? - Mgm|^(talk) 23:04, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See Strunk and White. -- Perfecto  23:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can't do it in wikimarkup, but you can in html:

4321. you need to use
4322. html li tags
4323. and set the first one's value parameter

-- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:09, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• See meta:List of Wikipedias -- BrokenSegue

So I'm a relatively new user, and ive been unable to figure out how to revert. For the most part its been no problem, because most of the time what i would revert is simply a one-line vandalism of some kind. That being said, I've also seen cases of page-blanking, in which case i couldn't just edit the one sentence out of the article. how does one actually revert a page?

second, and also as a function of my newness, i know almost nothing about any html or wiki coding (what i do know ive either figured out by mimicing previous edits or through the how to edit a page page). I nominated a list for FLC, and one of the criticisms was that i should make the tables a standarn width (which i agree with, but just dont know how to implicate it.) it seems that a template is used ("prettytable" or something of the sort), and i cant find anywhere where i can specifically adjust the width. in any case, the article is List of NFL champions, and if anyone could help me out thatd be great.

jfg284 23:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Revert for details, but basically, provided that there have been no legitimate changes since the vandalism, you use the History tab to find the last good version, pretend to edit, but do nothing except add an edit summary explaining the reversion, and save it.

--David Woolley 00:12, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:How to edit a page provides information on how to write wiki code. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 22:22, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vanitas vanitatum et omnia vanitas! I can't figure out why my sig is rendering differently on different pages. I want to have a Canadian flag there, but I don't want to link an image, so I've got &nbsp;'s with a red background, followed by a "#" in red on a white background, followed by more &nbsp;'s. On my sandbox they render fine, but when I use them on the Reference Desk (like here for instance) and on some other pages, the backgrounds don't render, and I just get a red #. I notice that in the HTML source, the working ones convert the &nbsp; to a &#160;, but the non-working ones convert them to ordinary spaces (" "). What can I do to make that work everywhere? — mendel ☎    #    01:17, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh, even that one showed up correctly in preview, and now that I'm editing the page I see the &nbsp;'s are still there. Grr. — mendel ☎    #    01:18, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... your sig (mendel ☎    #   ) seems OK at WP:RD/M and now here. --hydnjo talk 01:24, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's even stranger. I have a new approach that I think might work -- underscores in the same color as the background instead of &nbsp;'s. Mostly I just need to try it here because here is one place the old one failed consistently. — mendel ☎ _ * _ 19:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to split part of an article (cutting) into another article (cutting tool), and I was wondering how to do this while preserving the GFDL history requirements. The Wikipedia:How to rename (move) a page article doesn't mention how to handle partial movements. Wikipedia:How to break up a page, which is linked from the FAQ, tells you *when* to break up a page, and the formatting details, but doesn't tell you how to perform the actual break. I'd be happy to help update some of the documentation if someone can let me know how to do this. -- Creidieki 01:28, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cut and paste. Leave a good note. Worry not about the history requirements. -- Perfecto  02:35, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My impression, as noted in a long thread here, now archived, is that the de facto Wikipedia licence is not the GFDL, differing particularly in the areas of the History section and the copyright notices, and also in the provision of URLs that provide the complete transparent form and nothing but. That's probably only a problem for anyone trying to import GFDL material from elsewhere, as anyone directly contributing can have no real expectation of seeing copyright notices immediately after the title line (there is no title page requirement), etc. My user page has standard templates that are intended to make it easier to use my contributions if fhe GFDL status ever gets formally challenged.

(Note, I believe that complying with the GFDL rules for opaque copies would make pages unreadable, even in default of cut and paste.)

-- David Woolley 08:38, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that the Wikipedia:Help desk page is very long, and is sometimes archived. I was considering trying to archive the page, but I couldn't find any archival instructions linked. Are any instructions available? --Creidieki 01:56, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, am wondering what the usual process is (for my own purposes), and I could not find anything specific after quite a bit of searching. My guess is that you move this page to something like Wikipedia:Help desk/Archive 34 (so as to preserve the history), then recreate the page with whatever boilerplate goes at the top. I'm not really willing to do that (and certainly not on this page) without knowing that this is actually the correct way to go about it. —HorsePunchKid→龜 06:30, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• No. That would also archive still active questions. The best way to go about it is to cut and paste the text to whatever the next archive is and mention it's archive from the main HD page to show where the history is. Be sure to link the new archive in the list of archives mentioned. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:30, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• See also: Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. Thelb⁴ 14:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RCP and WP:V helps little regarding this, so I appreciate any advice. I tried to expand Thelovefest but found absolutely nothing about it on the Internet. User:RHaworth reverted the ((nonsense)) tag I placed, so I put the ((dispute)) tag. What should I do - nominate to ((afd))? Thanks! -- Perfecto  02:24, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AFD would be the logical next step if you believe it to be false.Geni 04:05, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It would be a nuisance if it went to AfD and then it was discovered to be legitimate. Try to find an Irish Wikipedian and see if they know anything about it - they will probably have better resources than us.--Commander Keane 04:30, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've placed a note here.--Commander Keane 04:38, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you CK. You beat me to it. I'm watching that page. -- Perfecto  04:42, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Have you asked RHaworth to provide sources for the article? - Mgm|^(talk) 11:32, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An anon user created it, not RHaworth. Anyway, User:Cormaggio gave us an official site in WP:IWNB. Thanks! Unfortunately, all that remains to do now is to nominate it to ((afd)). -- Perfecto  17:17, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did quite a few bits of editing in Wikipedia before I actually getting myself a user account. Those edits are visible in the history section of each article (under my IP address, rather than an account name). I wondered if there was a way to change this so that clicking on the link (my IP address) would take me to the contributions section of my new user id? Or otherwise to merge the two accounts?

I apologise in advance if this has already been asked, but I wasn't successful in finding anything about it.

No. In theoy it is posible at a database level but are developers are busy doing other things.Geni 04:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conlfict) No need for apologies, but it was asked earlier. Above, here.--Commander Keane 04:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hey, check this out

    http://www.nndb.com/people/934/000049787/ 

the whole page is almost copy paste so plz tell me what this is all about.

Wikipedia licenses all of its content under the GFDL which gives anyone certain rights to reuse articles, as long as they follow certain rules. If NNDB copied their article from here, I think they're required to at least attribute it to Wikipedia in some way. If the Wikipedia article is copied from NNDB, that's a more serious problem, and we'll need to rewrite our article to avoid copyright problems. It's not immediately clear to me who copied whom here. —HorsePunchKid→龜 06:25, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged this as a copyvio to initiate further investigation. Please use Talk:Gilbert du Motier, marquis de La Fayette for further discussions. -- Perfecto  07:07, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually this doppelganger is not a copy. They have erronous stuff, and little to do as clean up. Origionally, I went there to fix something, and found it fixed here. The have not synced up in a while so...Artoftransformation 10:14, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear editor, I was looking for the Mexican Revolution and history regarding the persecution of Christians and came upon your site.At the top of the Mexican page and I'm assuming others,there is reference to stuff happening in the land 28,000 years ago:

1. 1.This cannot be proven no more than evolution can.
2. 2.Carbon dating as well as evolution has been proven wrong.
3. 3.Stick to the facts please.Do not spread theories of evolution as it is linked to communism.

James ,Missouri email address removed

If you have an issue with the factual accuracy of the page, please bring it up on the talk page for that specific page (just click the "discussion" link near the top). I have removed your email address to prevent spamming. —HorsePunchKid→龜 07:33, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• It appears you don't like evolution much, but what you said is not true. Carbon dating may in some cases be somewhat inaccurate, but it certainly hasn't been proven wrong and as for evolution being linked to communism, I don't think there's anything that proves that's true. If you want to bring up issues with the accuracy with an article, be sure to cite sources. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:36, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Evolution is a theory, that explains the fossil record, and rock strata and the connection between species. It is now in its ultimate test as there are recent reports of Evolution being observed. Right now, it looks like Evolution is being resoundingly verified.
• Carbon dataing, another theory has proven, and has been used sucusfully in proving certain artifacts in British museams, and Russian Museams, were taken from Easter Island. It has authenticated these artifacts. If you have another theory, that would withstand scientific rigor and reproducability, I am sure we are all ears and eyes.
• Creationism, and Intelligent Design are not theories. They are faith based decisions made by men of god. They have no place in the scientific world. They are Religion.
• Contrary to your beliefs, there are communist christians worshiping in a religion recognised by Rome. Some of them believe in Creationism, and some of them do not.
• I have no appatite for the truth. The truth comes knocking at my door, a few times a month, with their 'WatchTowers' and I have to point out Timothy 2:12. Its nice to be a biblical scolar. Keep the faith

I was trying to figure out how to get this out to the general WikiCommunity, but, due to my inexperience with the site, was unable to figure out the proper place to ask the question. Maybe this is the place??

Anyway, I'm a 2 time combat vet who served over 12 years with the U.S. Army. At each place I was stationed, I became (volunteer) an unofficial base historian. There is no actual real job as that, but I would simply spend a couple hours a week researching the past history of units on that base, & most usually, the base itself.

After being wounded & discharged, I beame interested in researching ALL defunct U.S. bases that I could locate, or at least ones which are at a fraction of their mission during WWII. Although many bases trace their origins to the late 1800's, I mainly, with some exceptions, pick bases from the WWII/Korea/Vietnam era that have fallen into disuse. Needless to say, after 20-some-odd years, I have gained a large collection of this type material.

Data on these old bases is extremely hard to find sometimes. Try doing a search right here on Wiki for Camp Gruber, Camp Beauregard, & Camp Robinson, & you'll see what I mean. Do you think this would be an appropriate series of articles for Wiki?? I don't want to spend time posting them only to have them deleted for some reason that I wasn't aware of.

Each article would be about a medium-length page, detailing stuff like the following--Name of base, location, when it was in operation, what it's mission was, which units were home there, any notable figures that trained at, or commanded them, etc. It would also include an aerial picture of what the base looks like now, usually from Microsoft TerraServer. Their rules allow sharing of images like this, since the maps & pictures are actually public USGS issue.

It might also include a picture of when the base was in operation, although these are sometimes VERY hard to find, and maybe pictures of anything that's left from ground level...like foundations, markers, etc.

I have been threatening to put this stuff on my own web-site some day, but there's a problem. I'm not that good at maintaining web-sites. I just want to get the info out there, 'cause I know there's some interest in the field. I could supply the info, get each page started as best I could, & then Wiki users with more knowledge of working with Wiki could correct my screw-ups in format whenever they got a chance if they wanted to do that for me.

Give me an honest answer. If it's not something that sounds appropriate, no big deal. If it sounds OK, I'd probaly start in a few days. There would eventually be 3 or 4 dozen, with a new one added every couple weeks after that as I found ones I haven't researched yet.

Thanks in advance.

Welcome! Well you don't need permission. Although it's quite optional, I suggest you spend 30 seconds to create a wikipedia account. Then, Help:Starting_a_new_page is a great guide. I think Camp Gruber and Camp Beauregard would be useful entries. By the way, are you referring to Fort Robinson? -- Perfecto  07:27, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Huumm...I coulda sworn that I WAS logged in when I posted that. No, the Fort Robinson is a completely different place. Guess I'll try a few & see what happens. 67.14.205.145 22:34, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am searching for relatives of Franz Weninger. Who was a copral Panzereramee Afrika 1943. My Father served in Africa with the third ishlone New Zealand artillery battery. After my father had passed away and cleaning up the estate the family has now come acroos a diary of Franz Weninger. Inside the diary is three photos.To help anybody his first entry in the diary on the 1st of January had a hang over and sleeped with Finy before departing for Vienna on the 3rd of January. In his diary he mentions Finy on two other occasions so i only ashume that he is reffering to the lady in the photograph in his diary. I dearly love to hand this diary back to the descendents of Franz Weininger and the three photgraphs. If anybody out there who can relate to what has been said here please don't hesitate to email us (email removed) Thats my wifes email address.

My full name is Robert McIntosh

• Please read the instructions at the top of the page. This page is meant for questions regarding Wikipedia. Your question belongs on the reference desk. Also, check back yourself and don't leave an email address. It's going to be picked up by mirror sites and almost certainly results in tons of SPAM for your wife to go through. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:24, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How old are the oldest and youngest Wikipedia Users?--Ali K 09:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From here (a self-included list) the oldest would be CoppBob, born in 1921 and the youngest would be Isabel Santiago, born in 1998. --hydnjo talk 13:08, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

After I reprimanded an anonymous user for making a remark that used profanity to attack all members of a religion (and had no other content) on a talk page, he asked me to point him to the Wikipedia policy that prohibits religious slurs. Since it wasn't technically a personal attack, I am not sure what this falls under. Can I get some guidance? -- SCZenz 17:43, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CIVIL specifically mentions religious slurs. --GraemeL ^(talk) 17:52, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that, but it lists them as an example of a personal attack. Obviously, saying "You fucking XYZ" to another user is against policy, but it's not so clear that saying "All XYZ's are worthless and greedy and should die" is, because it's not a personal attack. At the same time, I stand by my reprimand of the user; if the latter example isn't explicitly prohibited by policy, it sure should be. -- SCZenz 21:16, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

One might say that it is common sense that if User:X is a member of XYZ, and someone says "Alll XYZ's are worthless and greedy and should die", then they have made a statement about all members of XYZ, including User:X. Johntex\^talk 23:25, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I fear logic like that could lead to over-use of WP:NPA through Wikilawyering. On the other hand WP:CIVIL defines civility quite generally, and obviously insulting someone's ethnic or religious group fits under the definition whether it is a personal attack or not. -- SCZenz 01:44, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Even if there is no explicit policy against this, it is not appropriate anyway. WP:NOT a soapbox or a forum for unregulated free speech, so a contentless tirade is inappropriate to begin with; WP:NOT a system of law. We do not need an explicit rule against something that is implicitly unwelcome. (I find it helpful to think of it as a common-law system, still slowly developing out of the feudal period by establishing its first courts, but with a monarch from whom all justice flows; many assume it is more akin to a civil law system...) Shimgray | talk | 16:09, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree completely. It was difficult to take a stand and say "I speak for Wikipedia when I say religious slurs are unacceptable," when I hadn't encountered the problem before or seen an explicit policy. But, if there's no explicit policy because everyone agrees it's a no-brainer, that's good enough for me. -- SCZenz 16:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have occasionally seen some pages put 'msg:' before a template (like {{'''msg:'''stub}}). What purpose does this serve? Thelb⁴ 18:38, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the olden days of templates you had to explicitly say "msg" in order to tell MediaWiki that you were expanding a template (as opposed to substing one). Later this requirement was removed, and mediaWiki figures out that it's a template from the wikisyntax. Tim write a script that was supposed to find all the cases of msg and remove the msg: bit. If you remove the msg the template should expand just the same. I believe the script left a change entry as "template initialisation script". -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:50, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that the reason there are some templates in the msg format still around is that it took a little while for people to stop using them.Geni 20:36, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

what is the publication date of wikipedia?

If you're asking because you want to cite Wikipedia as a source, see wikipedia:citing wikipedia. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:45, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I love this site, but am totally unable to navigate around it. I am relatively clod-like with regard to computers and "chatting" on them. Is there someone out there who can give me a brief description of how to make corrections or additions to articles I have read. I sem to be able to "look up" definitions by simply typing in a word in the search box. But it seems like there is more depth to this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.47.151 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 6 November 2005

You might find Wikipedia:FAQ useful. If you would like something more specific, just let me know. -- Psy guy ^(talk) 20:19, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• If you want to make corrections and additions to articles, you can click the "edit"-tab at the top and put them in the edit window, like you did when you asked this question. Wikipedia:How to edit a page might be helpful in describing the wiki markup for easy linking and such. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I pressed an edit button on your page by accident and received a message telling me that I have violated some copyright law. I am sure you have a log of it somewhere. My deepest apoologies as I did not mean to press it. Sorry for the misunderstaning.

You're suppposed to be able to edit things; that's the way this site works. It's only a copyright violation if what you insert into the site is plagiarized from a copyrighted source and is not covered by fair use rules, and there's no way for the automated software of this site to tell this. I'm not sure what message you're talking about. *Dan T.* 20:43, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Probably {{nothanks-sd}}? Titoxd^(?!?) 20:54, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he is just referring to the message DO NOT SUBMIT COPYRIGHTED WORK WITHOUT PERMISSION that appears at the bottom of the edit screen for any page anywhere in the entire Wikipedia? — JIP | Talk 20:57, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to be having trouble editing the "Skrewdriver" article. There doesn't seem to be any options/links to edit the history/biography of the band. There are also track listings for only one of their many albums, and I was wondering how I could add tracklistings to all the albums listed. And finally Ian stuart (Key member of Skrewdriver) also has many side projects including three albums under his own name (Ian Stuart) But when I search "Ian Stuart" it automatically redirects me to "ian Stuart Donaldson" which is just a short biohraphy about the person... not ythe band. I also would like to know how I can add bands on here (Like his other side projects). Thanks.

If Ian Stewart has a solo career, then that info should go at Ian Stuart Donaldson. Unless you mean that he had another band called "Ian Stewart" in which case you could just create a new article about the band at Ian Stewart (band).

Also, there should be no reason that you can't edit the history section of the article. You can click the "[edit]" button for just that section, or the "edit this page" button at the top for the whole article. If you are talking about the introduction, dometimes people are confused about there being no section edit button. You just have to use the one at the top. Tell me if you need any more help! Dmcdevit·t 01:45, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From <email address deleted> From aurelio23 While I recognize that Wikipedia is not a newspaper but a glorious idea about knowledge, I wonder if you already have or plan to have a section devoted to opinions, comments, articles or other references?24.99.254.178 22:47, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, we don't. That doesn't seem at all compatible with our goal of building an encyclopedia. Indeed, there are those who feel our current events sections and its kin aren't relevant to that goal, and occasionally folks suggest we should remove them. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:58, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Each article has a talk page, and talk pages welcome opinions and comments, within limits of civility of course. If you mean about articles that are entirely opinions, e.g., essays, then check out the Wikibooks project. Good luck! -- Perfecto  05:23, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When I was on your site, I saw that the articles could be edited. I thought that was weird, so I clicked on the edit button, and I made a few innappropriate changes. When I realized that everybody could see my changes, I switched it right back. I'm really sorry. I hope no one saw what I wrote. I guess it wasn't that horrible, I just want to apologize.

Being able to edit a website is an unexpected experience, and I think everyone makes their first edit and says to themselves "do they really let me do that?" You can practice editing in our sandbox, where much silliness is permitted. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 23:17, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And we hope that after some experimentation, you may want to contribute. Many people start contributing to Wikipedia by fixing a simple typo that you might find. Others write short articles on topics they have familiartity with. Let us know if you have any questions. Johntex\^talk 23:21, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits were funny! (Yeah now everyone will see what you wrote :-D) I felt exactly as you did when I made my first edit. -- Perfecto  05:00, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]