Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2007 January 31

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

January 31

Uploading images

I've tried to upload an image in the past but it didn't upload for some reason. Why didn't it upload? Kamope · talk · contributions 00:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I went through your contribs and you have never uploaded one you might want to check out Wikipedia:Uploading images for information about uploading.— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 00:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Schindler's List page

At the top of the page it says "Schindler's fucked the shit out of many jewish ladies and then beheaded all of them" and another sentence has been partially deleted.

It was fixed under 60 seconds after it occurred. Thanks for notifying us though. Prodego ^talk 01:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I require assistance from an admin in fighting vandalism.

A non-registered user, using two separate ip adresses, continually clears the Joe E. Newsome High School page and replaces it with the word "DESU" typed several thousand times. He has been given many warnings from myself and another user, and will not stop. Please block him. If a non-admin is reading this, please let an admin know, as I do not know how to go about contacting one.

The ip addresses the user has used for vandalism (and vandalism only) are 62.224.216.124 and 62.224.237.85.

Thanks for the help. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 01:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You should report the abuse (basically, just as you've done here) at WP:AIV. First, though, you must have warned the users on their talk pages (for this purpose, it doesn't matter that they're anons); see WP:AIV for instructions. --Tkynerd 01:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Main Page's Features Question

How is the main page's features selected? Is it by person, or at automatic random? However, I notice that in the featured 'did you knows' and 'of the days', etc., there are short summaries of that article. This summary does not look like it's written by the creator of the article, but I may just be overlooking. Is this true? Thanks!

Featured articles have to become WP:FA class before they can be shown on the main page, and yes the are added daily by one person. The same rules apply for features pictures see WP:FP. "did you knows" have to be articles created in the past five days or articles that have been expanded beyond 1000 words in the past five days and are nominated here Template talk:Did you know. As for the last part of you question you are correct DYK's are small fragments of an article and the dyk sentence may not be found it the actual text of the article. — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 01:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The Numbers?

When I was viewing the Recent Changes, I noticed numbers like -93, +100, etc. What do they mean? And why do I have a -92 near my name? Thank you. --ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever 01:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You see the numbers on lists of changes, and they show you how much the length of the article changed (in bytes) with a given edit. --Tkynerd 01:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank You. --ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever 01:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Procedure for Deleted / Protected Pages - Request Unprotection

If I am interested in making a page that has previously been created, deleted, and protected against recreation, how may I go about doing this? In this case a junk page was made by other users under a title that I would like to use for a legitimate article.

I don't want to dispute the deletion, since according to deletion guidelines the original article was junk and should have been deleted. How can I request that the article be unprotected so that I may post a valid article with the same title? Thanks, Mike wiki 03:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

There isn't really a procedure for this that I know of. What is the page? Prodego ^talk 03:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I guess I would start by requesting unprotection? The page is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikilobbying&action=edit , and due to the popularity of a TV show it was instantly filled with spam / nonsense, but a legitimate entry could be made. I'd at least like to get the Talk page unprotected. There are some comments in the deletion discussion, but I'd like to find out what the general procedure is in this case. Thanks, Mike wiki 03:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I've found additional info at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RFPP but I'm still a bit confused about what steps to take.

Hmm, I forgot about that, I suppose that would be the best place to ask. Just tell me and I will decide to unprotect or not, rather then you having to wait. Prodego ^talk 03:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

That is probably not going to be unprotected, because any article on it would not be verifiable. It is a recent thing, that is not widely known, so I would hold of on that. At most it could be mentioned in an article about Colbert Prodego ^talk 03:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I think a good article could be written on the subject, summarizing the supposed definition, known examples matching that description, similarities to political lobbying and other historical comparisons. Since it's not impossible for a article on the subject to be meaningful, how can that article be created and consensus reached on the article's value? How can we discuss what would define a useful article on the subject when the Talk page is protected? Sorry if this is covered in the pages on protection and page deletion, there is a great deal of detail in those pages and I've had difficulty figuring out what to do. Thanks, Mike wiki 03:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

First, this would not have a place as a mainspace article. The term would have to be notable outside of the Colbert incident before it should be an article here. Eventually it might be, but right now the only notability it has is to fans of Wikipedia & The Colbert Report.

Secondly, it's not really a good term to describe what's going on. Lobbying is different than paying contributors to edit articles.

That said, the phenomenon itself is real enough. Personally, I'd say this should be an WP:ESSAY using a different term (WikiMarketing? WikiAdvertising?) and include non-paid individuals who are simply creating/editing articles to gain attention to their favorite product/person/cause.

I'd say you can create a good essay in the vein of Wikipedia:No angry mastodons or There is no cabal. It's self-referential to Wikiediting and the Wikipedia community, so it's really not relevant to mainspace. An essay, though, would be appropriate. -- Kesh 03:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

It seems to me that the specific term is fictitious, created by Colbert to describe actual events, so I guess I'm not clear on which must meet the notable guideline, because while this term was recently coined and may or may not be adopted or discussed in a manner as to be notable, the subject certainly is. Would a redirect be appropriate? In my opinion, it is more relevant to mainspace because it relates acknowledged and studied political and business behavior to some Wikipedia behaviors. Sorry this has turned a bit from a unprotection how-to request into a more vague question =) Mike wiki 04:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

This is a neologism, which is already stated does not belong on Wikipedia. Heck, it's not even a week old yet. That's why it doesn't belong in mainspace, and articles not in mainspace should not have a redirect. No angry mastodons doesn't redirect, so you have to put Wikipedia:No angry mastodons, specifically because it's an essay and not a proper article. Maybe if the term catches on and we an cite reliable souces using the term, an article in mainspace would be appropriate. Right now, though, it's not. -- Kesh 21:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I have been warned about vandalism

A user named Zubdub--to whom I could not respond beause he or she doesn't allow emails--said I would be blocked if I continued to edit the Kirsten Powers entry.Who decides this?

I may have crossed the line when I called her a "shameless liar"--"shameless" is an opinion; "liar" can be documented.

However, I have noted that many biographical articles have factually negative content. How do I edit a biography to point to the warts on a person?

Why is "shameless liar" blockable, but the extant content calls her a "prominent" commentator. By any objective standard, Powers is not prominent.

I'm quite new to editing here, but why is "prominent" allowed in but "liar" edited out? Would it be vandalism to simply dele "prominent"?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Latichever (talk • contribs)

If you honestly believe that calling her "prominent" is biased, no. But if you're just doing it to prove the point that you should be allowed to call her a shameless liar, please don't. -Amark moo! 03:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you should read the policy on WP:NPOV as your edits to Kirsten Powers are all just insertions of your own opinions. If you have a well known, reliable source that calls Powers a liar, placing that information in an article is ok. However, just inserting your opinion is not. —Mitaphane _?|! 04:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Is it fair to say that if any statement can be cited by a reliable source, then it is okay to put in the article? If you have a reliable source for the shameless liar statement Latichever, then I see no reason why you can't put it in. However, I doubt there will be any. "Prominent", despite probably being true (I don't know enough about her), is unsourced & sounds to me like a peacock word. So all in all, I feel that whilst Latichever has a point, under no circumstances would "shameless liar" be allowed in an article unless it was in a quote. Please say I'm half right? Gulp, this is my first time at the help desk... Spawn Man 04:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

That's all correct, Spawn Man. The "prominent" bit doesn't need to be there and can safely be removed, per wp:peacock, although this is not of course a top priority for removal. — coelacan talk — 07:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify a little more (I hope), the only way such a phrase could appear in an article is in a form like this (completely fictional), The New York Times of 29 February 2005 reported that Richard Notarealname, a professional golfer, had called Someone Smith a "notorious liar". The article reported that Smith said Notarealname had been "mounting a smear campaign after being sacked for stealing twinkies". The essential thing here is: the exact words can be verified by looking in a newspaper; it is very clear who said these things; and the quote is not selective, it covers what both sides said about the incident. A citation should also be included. I would recommend such a piece be proposed on the article talk page first, so that all parties can agree it is neutral and fair before it goes in the article. Notinasnaid 09:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I have never even tried to e-mail another editor. The usual way to contact them is placing a message on their talk page, e.g. User talk:Zubdub. I agree with others that your edits to Kirsten Powers do not meet Wikipedia policy because they are unsourced opinions. Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons has especially strict rules. Please read it carefully if you consider adding any negative material. PrimeHunter 15:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Notification of edits

Hi,

Would it be possible to create some kind of "ownership" for articles? What I mean is, if I create a new article and want to be kept informed about any changes made to it by others, can you create a function that sends an email to my account informing me the article has been changed so I can verify the changes and if need be, make corrections?

Thanks,

69.159.108.202 04:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

If you register an account, you can put articles on your watchlist, so any changes will be tracked. However, keep in mind that the articles are not "yours", so acting as though you must approve all changes is something you should not do. -Amark moo! 04:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

As Amarkov put it, articles can never be "owned". You can take credit if you take them to Featured status & you can certainly make a bunch of edits to them so as you are a resident editor on them & people may value your opinion, but you can never "own" an article & control what goes on in them. All material, once added to Wikipedia, can & probably will be, changed dramatically without the author's conscent. To make sure you know what's going on in an article, you can put it on your watchlist & even change your "Preferences" so that once you edit an article, it is automatically placed on your watchlist. Then, you can check your watchlist to see all changes made recently to the articles on there. Another way to help maintain your articles, is by talking it over with other contributors to find a solution to any disputes etc. Hope this helps! :) Spawn Man 04:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You see, using the word "ownership" really rattles our chains here. See Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. You are of course encouraged to take a keen interest in the process by which all editors form a consensus on what is in the articles, and if you replace ownership by "active participation and monitoring" that probably sounds better. Notinasnaid 09:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

See also "Can I subscribe to an article" higher up where an editor says there is no e-mail notification. PrimeHunter 14:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia suggestion box?

Where can I make suggestions of new features for Wikipedia? − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 04:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure, but I'm sure you can find some information here Wikipedia:Village pump... Hope this helps a bit? Thanks, Spawn Man 04:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, WP:VPR is the one I want. How dumb of me, I have that on my watchlist! − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 05:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

NP - Glad to be of assistance... :) Spawn Man 05:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Broken OS template in WikiProject for User Categorisation?

I read about the WikiProject for User Categorisation at Wikipedia:User_categorisation, and navigated from there down to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedians_who_use_Mac_OS_X but the template for that category ("User OS:Mac OS X") does not exist so that category is broken. Is something wrong or am I missing something?

The template was deleted[1] as part of the "Userbox Migration" (see WP:UM). The category is fine. You can still add yourself to it by copying and pasting the category code as that page instructs. Did you also want the userbox to display? — coelacan talk — 07:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• That helps, a little. The old version of the page said you could use "User OS:Mac OS X", I didn't realize that was wrong/obsolete. But I'm still confused how to use the code shown on that page, and I find no explanation or examples anywhere (I'm noticing Wikipedia is a little light on examples, I wish it had more, it's a lot more clear & concise than lots of help text). When I paste in, exactly, "[[Category:Mac OS X users|{{subst:PAGENAME}}]]" (without the quotes) it clearly isn't working right. Am I supposed to write something in place of "PAGENAME"?

--Jason C.K. 18:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Anyone have an answer to the above?

--Jason C.K. 15:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• All set, I found someone to help me, and they fixed the wiki page

--Jason C.K. 22:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Slow bot?

This image is tagged as an orphan and the tag says that it will be deleted on 30 January. Since it is now 31 January, I'm curious if this is due to a slow or overworked bot or if I can help to get it deleted in some way. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 05:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Admins do the deleting, so it could be a few more days. Nothing really to be done to speed it along. If you absolutely must have it deleted immediately, you could find an admin and ask them to do it, but if it can wait a couple more days, just let it go, and it will soon go. — coelacan talk — 07:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. No rush. I just went through and asked for a few speedy deletes of various other images that user had uploaded. Seeing that that one was already tagged as an orphan, I was curious when it would go as well. Dismas|^(talk) 10:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

printing issue

When I take a print of any wikipedia searh result, the links do not appear in blue as they normally do for other web pages. I need this to have a view of the resources at hand. How can I do this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freshasafresh (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure what you mean, can you explain further? — coelacan talk — 07:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I think what is meant is: When I print a Wikipedia page (as in, File→Print, or Ctrl+P), the wikilinks do not appear blue in the printout like they do on the website. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 07:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I understand now. This is a CSS feature and I'm not sure how to get around it without digging around in code that I only sort-of understand. Perhaps using the "Printable version" link over on the left sidebar would be helpful? That doesn't make blue links but it does make the URLs appear, so links can at least be identified. — coelacan talk — 07:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

No, printable version doesn't work. More clues please! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freshasafresh (talk • contribs)

To clarify: it is specifically designed not to print the links in color. Maybe you need to print a screen shot. Notinasnaid 09:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

But that's terrible. Don't others want the same thing? Why is it so?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freshasafresh (talk • contribs)

I can't imagine I'd want a printout with words in blue; especially on a black and white printer they are just grey and harder to read. I can't click on a printed page, so what good would it do me? But you obviously do. Can you explain why? Maybe someone will have an idea that can help you. Notinasnaid 10:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Well it's just that I usually take a print out of long articles to peruse at my leisure and circle the links I would like to / need to visit. It just gives me a better overview of the whole subject in a way. Besides, all other web pages that I've come across seem to print the links, (hence I'm used to working this way) so why not wiki?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freshasafresh (talk • contribs)

I don't want to put words into their mouths, but I think the designers of Wikipedia might say that they have gone to a lot of trouble to make it print properly, like an encyclopedia article, rather than a printout of a web page... Notinasnaid 12:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You could try getting an account (which is necessary to customize the stylesheets), and then going to your user stylesheet and typing

a {text-decoration:underline !important}

(which should cause all links to be underlined, both when browsing and when printed). I'm not sure what would happen if you set all links to blue; possibly, redlinks would go blue, and possibly, it would interact in a bad way with the existing printer code (although the underline might interact in a bad way with the existing underline code; you might have to try a third style to keep it different). --ais523 12:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

How do you type into the box?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freshasafresh (talk • contribs)

What box? Adrian M. H. 18:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

To edit your stylesheet, click on the link given by Ais523, then click the "Edit" button (top of the screen) to type into the box. Don't worry, it had me confused at first as well! — QuantumEleven 10:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Nubio 95 has some similar css, I'm not sure if it is better that the one above.--Commander Keane 01:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Teleportation page

In the teleportation page, underneath the heading of Religious traditions.. the link for Kefitzat ha-Derekh leads to Kwisatz Haderach which is not the correct link.

Fixed. In the future, you can solve these problems. See Help:Links to learn how. — coelacan talk — 07:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

lists of songs and books that relate to article

I notice a lot of articles have lists of songs and movies and books that relate to the subject. Some of these lists are very long. What policies apply to the existence and content of these sorts of lists? SmithBlue 08:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Can you give an example? - Mgm|^(talk) 10:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

  The applicable guideline is Wikipedia:Guide to layout#See also, but it won't tell you a whole lot about what's too long and what's too irrelevent. The main thing is, try to weave the "see also" links into the text of the article somehow. That's the better place for them anyway. Then the information isn't lost (Wikipedia is supposed to be good at showing people connections that they didn't know about), but it doesn't stand out in a big unsightly list anymore. — coelacan talk — 11:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

An example - Rapture - The rapture in the English-speaking media

SmithBlue 16:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion history merge

Hi there! John1569 (talk • contribs) made an article titled MWE which was subsequently deleted. He then made a comment to User talk:Jane Doe. (who doesn't exist) asking for a copy of the page to be emailed to him. I replied to the comment but later copied and pasted the comment to his talk page which already had a comment on it. Now what I want to happen is for the history of User talk:Jane Doe. to be merged with User talk:John1569 to preserve the history (the GFDL requires it or something) so User talk:Jane Doe. can be deleted per WP:CSD#U2. So what should happen? --WikiSlasher 09:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Done, about to delete the Jane Doe page. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Perfect, thanks! --WikiSlasher 05:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Linking to disambiguated pages

I'm trying to clean up some stub articles, but am not sure how to link to pages that use disambiuation pages. For example, I'm trying to link to Snipe (dinghy) instead of just Snipe, but when I preview the page it just shows me my attempt at a coded link instead of an internal link. How would I link straight to the Snipe (dinghy) page? Thanks. AdmiralKit 09:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• If you want to go to Snipe (dinghy) you can link to it like any other page. If you want to not show the bracketed modifier, use Wikipedia:Piped links, like this: Snipe. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I think Mgm means: [[Snipe (dinghy)|Snipe]] will give you Snipe − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 10:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• I did. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

hello

i have no clue why there is a message now on every wiki page i open saying i have a new message why is that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.5.199.190 (talk • contribs)

• Because you have new messages. Click the link in the bar and it will take you to the your discussion page (or the one for your IP address if you're not logged in. There, you can see what the message is. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • There have been a few cases when an IP (non-logged-in editor) has reported a persistant orange bar appearing even after they viewed their message. It's an error, but in all the cases I know it disappeared just as mysteriously a couple of days later. --ais523 11:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Clearing the cache might remove it.--John Lake 12:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I've actually had this problem once before when I was logged in, and clearing the cache fixed everything. Natalie 21:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Adding images

Hello,

I've been working on this article and I have here a scan of the cover art, but I'm not sure about the guidelines on uploading and license and stuff.

• Use the {{albumcover}} license tag. —Dark•Shikari^[T] 11:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• I recommend you add some more info besides the tracklisting to the article. Our featured articles might provide some idea of what to include. As for the image, use {{album cover}}. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

bibliography

where can i find your bibliography

• I suspect you need Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. If you don't, please be more specific. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• A list of all the sources that Wikipedia uses would be incredibly long if kept in one place, so the sources used by each article (corresponding to the bibliography in a book) are listed on that article itself. --ais523 12:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

How to get namespace of pagename

Is there a way to get namespace of a pagename that is known. What I am seeking is for examples

• {{#ns: Image}} = 0 or "Main"
• {{#ns: Help:Image}} = 12 or "Help"
• {{#ns: Image:Help.jpg}} = 6 or "Image"

This is to be used from other page than the known pagename, so is no help using {{NAMESPACE}}. Hevesli 13:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be anything available that would do this, see m:Help:Magic words, but is already an enhancement request, see bugzilla:8249. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Hevesli 18:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Image for deletion still up

Hi all - a week ago I nominated two images for deletion - both were used in a nonsense article. It looks like no action has been taken on either of them. Did I miss something in the deletion nomination process? The joke article itself was deleted but the images are still there. What gives? SmartGuy 14:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

There's a backlog of a few days - the nominations from January 24th are currently being worked on. I'm sure they'll be gone soon. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. This was my first time putting an image up for deletion, so I just wanted to make sure that I didn't miss something. SmartGuy 15:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Holocaust denial in German wikipedia

I would like to know what happens if I deny holocaust in a talk page on German wikipedia. Will police of my country arrest me and transport me to germany to court? Or will I be arrested next time I visit Germany? Is German wikipedia inside Germany and inside German law? I am not denying holocaust but i am just curious about this. Ksari 14:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm no lawyer, but: the German Wikipedia is not subject to German law - it is hosted in the Florida and governed by Florida law. Individual contributors may also be governed by local laws, so a German posting to the German Wikipedia could commit an offence by denying the holocaust but they could equally do so posting to the English Wikipedia or any other website. --Cherry blossom tree 15:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

addition of a word

Is there a short cut to add a word i haven't seen here - or anywhere else? Tom--Memanme 14:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

This isn't Wiktionary. Is that what you're looking for? In any case, nothing can be added to Wikipedia unless it can be backed up with reliable sources, which would exclude something you "haven't seen...anywhere else." I suspect Wiktionary has similar rules, but you'd need to check there. --Tkynerd 15:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Confused about formatting

I have recently started the article of "Survival (film)" which is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_%28film%29.

I am pleased with the article thus far, however there are two very ugly warnings on the page which I have no idea how to get rid of. One of them states that "This template has been placed on a non talk page. This template should be placed on Talk pages only." I cannot figure out what this means, nor can I figure out what exactly is wrong with the template. I have done my best to follow what other movie articles have done and for some reason I can't get rid of this warning.

The other box on the page reads "This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion." Again, I'm not entirely sure what this means because I don't see this on other film pages, and I cannot figure out how to get rid of it.

I have read through the FAQ's and I have scoured many other pages to see what is wrong with my formatting, all with no luck. I'm at a point where I am confused as to where to go from this point. --Iateyourpetfish 16:06, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You (or someone) used the template {{film}}, which tags the article as being within the scope of Wikiproject Films, on the article rather than its Talk page, which is where it should be. I've moved the tag to the Talk page, which should sort out those problems. Note that the article still needs to be added to appropriate categories; if you don't know which categories would be appropriate, place {{uncat}} at the top of the page (which is a maintenance tag that will attract other editors to add the categories). You should also add the references you got your information from to the article, so that the information can be verified; if the article can't be verified, it might eventually be deleted. I hope that helps! --ais523 16:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Another suggestion: I don't think it's a good idea to redlink everybody who's credited for this film. They should only have articles written about them if they are notable by the Wikipedia definition, but redlinks encourage people to create articles about them. Just a thought. --Tkynerd 16:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Randy Quaid image

how do I post an image on a page for Example how do I post an image of Randy Quaid on Randy Quaid's page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boston24 (talk • contribs)

I added the image, see also Wikipedia:Uploading images#Adding images to articles for instructions so that you can do it next time – PeaceNT 16:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Note that you will need to update the licensing information for the image; you've indicated in text that the image is a 'fair use, promotional' photo, which implies that the copyright is held by someone else and that they have released it as a promotional image. Meanwhile, the licensing tag indicates that you (Boston24) created the image and released it into the public domain.

Please be very careful about choosing copyright and licensing tags; it is extremely important that they accurately reflect the image's owner(s) and licensing terms. If you need help, ask back here. Images which have conflicting or inaccurate copyright information are apt to be deleted on sight. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

peoples discussion pages

how can i get to a friends discussion page if i want to post on his to talk? Nextbigpaint 17:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Well if you know that persons username you can simply go to their userpage by clicking on their username and then click discussion. If you don't have a link to their userpage you can can go to the url http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:YourFriendsUserName— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 17:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

error

in the 'merchant' definition, there's a spelling error. It reads: organise instead of organize

That isn't an error. Both are valid spellings. --Cherry blossom tree 17:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Wikipedia uses both British and American variants of English. Only when a topic specifically refers to a country, is a specific variant forced. For example. George W. Bush should be in American English, Tony Blair in the Queen's English (British English). See WP:MOS for more details. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Help me, please

This is my monobook: User:Power level (Dragon Ball)/monobook.js HOW THE HELL do I use it to utilize nav/popups, Vandalproof, and undo revisions? Also, what is a "web browser right now"? I am also trying to "bypass my cache". What does that mean? For more information about what I need help on, see User talk:Kusma#Vandalproof, popups, and undo revisions. Please, please, please, help... 17:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The most probable reason why your monobook isn't working is that you haven't bypassed your cache. See Wikipedia:Bypass your cache for instructions for your browser; Control-F5 (Command-F5 on a Macintosh) works for many popular browsers, and Shift-Refresh (on the toolbar) works for most of the others. (Apart from that, your monobook looks fine to me.) --ais523 17:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Watchlist formatting question

I read Help:Watching_pages#What_do_the_colored_numbers_mean.3F but it didn't explain why sometimes they're bold and sometimes not. Anyone know?

If the numbers are bold, it's flagging a large removal or blanking. Sometimes this is legit (especially if the edit is to archive a Talk page, rather than an article, or it's reverting vandalism), but such edits are often worth checking. --ais523 18:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

highlight search term from iMac

I would like to be able to highlight a term from an app, such as Firefox or NeoOffice, then click an assignable mouse button to search for that term in Wikipedia. I can assign a button to a URL, but what do I append to the Wikipedia URL to make the search start automatically without having to type the search term into the Wiki search box?

74.135.137.115 18:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search/search_terms_here --ais523 18:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

That is some help, but....how do I get the highlighted term into the "search term" position, so I can just highlight the term, then click the mouse button?

I'll have to leave that question for someone with an iMac to answer. --ais523 18:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the help you gave. Thanks.

ASAP FOUL LANGUAGE ON PAGE

Please check IQ page. Someone inserted foul language just above "contents".

It's been reverted. Vandalism is generally removed within minutes of appearing. -- Zanimum 18:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

American style punctuation versus "logical style"

Why does Wikipedia (including on this help page!) use the so-called "logical style" of punctuation when American style is the accepted usage for 99% of written documents? The articles regarding punctuation imply that this is due to the increasing use of logical style in the computer and chemistry industries, but most Wikipedia articles are about other topics. Every other English-language encyclopedia I've ever seen uses American style--why not Wiki? Every time I see a period or comma hanging outside quotation marks I feel an overwhelming urge to edit it back inside. 158.111.4.26 19:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

This is an English encyclopedia, with a great number of American editors. However, as you're surely well aware of, much of the rest of the world also contributes using English. Xiner (talk, email) 19:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Though the American style may be common place in the USA, the rest of the world uses logical style. Have a look at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Quotation_marks. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 19:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You'd be amazed at the bitter arguments over national differences in spelling and grammar. I think you might that talking about "99% of written documents" isn't really taking a broad view of worldwide usage of English. Anyway, Wikipedia's manual of style (Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Quotation marks) recommends a particular style and suggests editors do not change existing articles if they weren't written that way. (This method of keeping the grammatical peace presumably allowing people to focus on more important objectives. Maybe.) Notinasnaid 19:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Please remove foul language from biography

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

It's been removed, thanks for the mention. Garion96 (talk) 19:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

smallest building in london

I live in Hampstead London NW3 I was waiting on the corner of Flask Walk and was listening to the tail end of a walking guided tour that was going on .The Guide stated that they had 2 more stops to go before the end of the tour one of which was the smallest building in London,Can you tell me where this is .I've lived in Hampstead for over 40 years and I've never heard of it.

Thank you

Please post this at the Reference Desk Adrian M. H. 20:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

hepatitis B

how long can i live if i have hepatitis B? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.81.64.34 (talk) 20:14, 31 January 2007

See Hepatitis B. In the future, please use Wikipedia's Reference Desk for knowledge questions. Jacek Kendysz 20:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, please read Wikipedia:Medical disclaimer. It is better to ask a doctor or other reputable medical source for vital medical information. Prodego ^talk 20:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Selective biased editing

Last week I used a wikipedia chart on stages of development of the embryo in a debate about the development of the brain by the 8th week, only to have the other person just recently tell me to check wikipedia on it--the source I used to begin with. It seems some facts have been taken out. I hope someone checks the recent editing on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus I realize its a touchy, personal issue, but that is no reason to alter facts

Thanks

Disputed articles such as this one change regularly as people attempt to reach a consensus over what should be included in the article so it is inevitable that the content of articles will alter over time. It isn't a case of Wikipedia attempting to 'alter facts'; it is the process of writing an article collaboratively. --Cherry blossom tree 22:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

long term abuse

what happend to the long term abuse pages for the users Willy on Wheels and Wikipedia Is Communism? does the real willy on wheels still vandalise wikipeidia?--Crocadog 22:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

They were deleted on the theory that keeping them would only glorify vandals and give ideas to potential vandals. We still get the odd page moved to "...on wheels!" but it probably isn't the original Willy. --Cherry blossom tree 22:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Unblocking an ip address?

I have no idea how to do it, but recently i forgot my password for this account (stupid i know) so i tried to edit anonymously at my sixth form, but it has been permanently blocked. Checking it on this account it seems there was no previous partialblocks, just a full blown permanent block after warnings. I know it isnt much of a case for unblocking but i know a few people who want to edit genuinely and cant (they have no home internet so cant set up an account). So, here is the ip (195.194.74.227) and could someone help me out with it? cheers Fethroesforia 23:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

This IP was blocked due to repeat and extensive vandalism. Permanant blocks on schools tend to be rare on Wikipedia, and it takes a lot of vandalism for it to happen. Because of that, it's unlikely that IP will be unblocked. See the statement at the bottom of the talk page. I'm sorry, but a number of vandals at that school have ruined things for legitimate editors. You will have to be logged in to edit from that IP. -- Kesh 23:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok..but..is there a way to allow some form of limited account creation..or something? because looking at the edit history there have been some constructive edits and comments on talk pages. Urgh, wish i could find out who they are, sixth form is generally sensible.... Fethroesforia 23:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

There's nothing to stop you creating accounts at your home and giving the names/passwords to people who want to use it at your sixth form. I understand that administrators can also create accounts for other people to use. If you want to formally request the unblocking of the address (or possibly having it blocked with account creation allowed) then add the {{unblock}} template to user talk:195.194.74.227, giving your reasons. Hope this helps. --Cherry blossom tree 23:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you:) Ill add the template in the morning:) Fethroesforia 23:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Francais

Hey, the French version Christian Potenza is in Esperanto. C'est quoi ca? My French is not good enough to translate this whole thing or to ask people on French wikipedia to do so, so can someone please do so? Thanx

Interlaker 23:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Conflicting search results

If I do two searches, one for "Machu Picchu" and the other for "machu picchu" I get what looks at first to be the same page but it's not. On one the translation of the name in "old peak" and on the other "manly peak".

I can't work out what is at fault here otherwise I would fix it. Can anyone help please.

TomeBrown 23.24  331 Jan 2007

Try reloading the page. Is it fixed? Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 23:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes that's working fine now - thanks.

No problems, I am pleased to be able to help out. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 23:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)