Help desk
< November 21	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 23 >

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

November 22

Click template

How can I fix this to show? -- A ^talk/_contribs 01:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, needed a = instead of a :. Sunderland06 (talk) 01:26, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- A ^talk/_contribs 01:57, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

geometry(shape and size,undefined terms)

tell whether each of the following represents a point, a line or a plane.

1.top of a box- 2.four corners of a room- 3.side of a blackboard- 4.curtain rod- 5.star in the sky- 6.edge of a table- 7.cover of a book- 8.tip of a pen- 9.a clothesline- 10.a grain of rice- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.199.4 (talk) 06:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misevaluation, but it is our policy here to not do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn how to solve such problems. Please attempt to solve the problem yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to ask at Wikipedia Reference Desk to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. Thank you. —teb728 t c 07:07, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

javascript

what is linking javascript? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashant neha (talk • contribs) 08:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but your question is not clear. Is it something related to using Wikipedia? If so, please ask again with more details. If it's something about javascript, ask your question at the computing reference desk. The people there will be glad to help you. Cheers. Chamal ^talk 08:44, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

javascript

What is linking javascript? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.96.82.151 (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This help desk is for questions related to Wikipedia itself, to get an answer to this question, please post it at WP:RD/C. — neuro^(talk) 09:56, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image Issue

I came across the first at CSD, but I doubt the first is a copy of the second, as that would involve time travel. Both people claim ownership. I'm gonna contact the second user. Any other bright ideas on what to do?

Image:Img 5655.jpg
- Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GFDL 1.2
- Uploaded 01:37, April 4, 2008 by User:Arthurv.
Image:Albert_dock_at_night.jpg (at commons)
- Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GFDL 1.2
- Uploaded 10:53, 3 June 2008 by User:BokicaK

-- = Mgm|^(talk) 12:03, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look at the deleted edits and Arthurv uploaded the Albert dock one to Wikipedia thus:

"03:09, 4 April 2008 . . Arthurv (Talk | contribs | block) 1,280×960 (150,648 bytes) ({{Information |Description=Albert Dock at night |Source=self-made |Date=April 2004 |Location= |Author=~~~ |other_versions= }})

It seems Arthurv renamed the Img 5655 one himself by reuploading it under a different name. The new image was then moved to commons by Bokicak who correctly cites the English Wikipedia as its source. So, there is no problem here, just you couldn't see the deleted edits. So, I have deleted the "Img 5655" as a duplicate of one on commons. Regards. Woody (talk) 12:17, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Times archive: all copyrighted as they indicate, or able to be used verbatim?

I already asked this (slightly differently worded) at the media question help desk but didn't get an illuminating answer. The New York Times archive goes back to 1851. It would be really useful in articles if some of this material could by copied word for word (where appropriate) for article text. All of the pages on NYT.com, right back to 1851, indicate an existing copyright at the bottom; here's an actual copied example: "Published: September 29, 1851 Copyright © The New York Times". Just because they say it's copyrighted doesn't necessarily make it true does it? So is it all really copyrighted no matter the age? Are any of these articles old enough that their copyright has expired? If yes, before what date is the content public domain? If no, how old does the content need to be before it ages out (if ever)?----68.237.2.254 (talk) 15:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In general, we use 1923 as the cutoff year. Everything that was published before that year in the United States is in the public domain. BUT copyright can be renewed if it expires. Since digitizing old newspaper articles takes significant effort on their part, these newly digitized forms could be considered a separate work which has its own copyright (which expires 70 years after the death of the creator, if I remember correctly). Still, quoting very short passages in the right context can be considered fair use. I'd stick to paraphrasing and only use verbatim text if the quote is really neccesary. Have anything particular in mind? (Of course, I'm not a lawyer, so don't take my word as gospel. The best thing to do is to check Public domain and the official US copyright office website which has an extensive FAQ section. - 87.211.75.45 (talk) 15:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- That comment was mine. - Mgm|^(talk) 15:17, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thanks for the answer. I was aware that we could use short quotes of copyrighted text under fair use, but what I was thinking (hoping) was that, in the same way that there are some articles which state at the bottom "This article incorporates text from the public-domain Catholic Encyclopedia of 1913," we could do so for old New York Times articles, and so could then write whole articles on some subjects with a great amount of effort saved. There are great articles on all kinds of subjects that could be turned into encyclopedia articles just by a little reorganization, but I would only do it if I knew it was legal.--68.237.2.254 (talk) 16:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but that is not correct.

You cannot renew copyright on work prior to 1923. Renewals were part of the law that was replaced in 1987 or so. If it's prio to 1923 in theUS, then it is in the public domain. period.
"Sweat ofthe brow" is not copyrightable. The fact thte NYT went to great effort to digitize it des not affect its copyright status.
if the work is added to or modified in any creative way, then the modifications and additions are copyrighted. the result is called a "derived work." The existance of a derived work des not affect the copyright sttaus of the work the original work: you cannot add new material and then claim that the original material is now copyrighted.

-Arch dude (talk) 21:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a proud member of the union which won New York Times Co. v. Tasini I hate to be quasi-defending the Times; but I believe what they may be claiming a copyright on is the scans of the old copies of said paper. In other words, if you're lazy and just print their scan, they claim a copyright on said scan as an image. Is this valid? I dunno; IANAL. But it's marginally plausible. The text, on the other hand, has long since passed into public domain and they know it. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Placing tables right next to each other

How does one place two tables next to each other? I'd like to do that with the two tables that are in this link. Thanks! CarpetCrawler (talk) 16:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Put both of them in an invisible table together.- Mgm|^(talk) 16:51, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mahatma Gandhi

A lot of people in countries outside India think that Sonia Gandhi and Indira Gandhi, and their family members, are related to Mahatma Gandhi. This is not true. Therefore, it will be helpful if you can comment, maybe in brackets, "No relation to Indira Gandhi or Sonia Gandhi. I was hoping to do this myself but I found no edit button on the page. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kshetty123 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mahatma Gandhi redirects to Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi which at the top says:

Gandhi (disambiguation) says they are unrelated and lists many people belonging to each family. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi is semi-protected. Suggestions can be made at Talk:Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:42, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needing help about Numbered Lists

I have encountered a problem with numbered list. You can see the list below.

Example 1 (Blue background; Yellow background)
Example 2 (Blue background; Yellow background)

The source of the list above is :

#'''Example 1''' (Blue background; Yellow background)

#'''Example 2''' (Blue background; Yellow background)

The above list is alright, but sometimes it appears that there is a blank line between the "Example 1" and "Example 2" and 3 appears on the side of "Example 2" (by using the same source). -- Myrecovery (talk • contribs) 17:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No reply in one day. It disappointed me. But I myself has resolved it by using HTML codes. Now I think that HTML codes are stroger than Wiki. -- Myrecovery (talk • contribs • count • contrib summary • global contribs) 17:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist limitations

Aloha. Is there any hack to get around the 1,000 changes limit for watchlists? Beyond unwatching articles/manually checking every page, that is. Any help appreciated, the skomorokh 17:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can see a list of all the pages you're watching. That makes unlisting them a lot easier than visiting each article separately. - Mgm|^(talk) 18:03, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes but you see all 12,000 articles are of the utmost importance and I don't want to unwatch any of them. My processor is perfectly capable of handling, say, 1500 changes, so I'm wondering if there is some way to increase the limit. Thanks for the reply, the skomorokh 13:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

helpme

helpme —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.204.46 (talk) 20:03, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you want help with? PrimeHunter (talk) 01:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Periods in image captions

Resolved

Was I right here? If not, why not? If so, why? (If you see what I mean.) Any chance of a link to any relevant guideline? AndyJones (talk) 20:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS the article's currently at FAC so we want the "perfect" answer rather than the "what'll get by" answer. AndyJones (talk) 20:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Answered on my talk page. AndyJones (talk) 20:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For those interested, the guideline is Wikipedia:Captions. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 11:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fonts needed by Wikipedia

Hi - I read and edit Maths articles. But some symbols do not display on my computer - I just get square boxes. Do I need to add some maths/symbol fonts to my Windows Font folder? If so, how do I know which ones, and how do I get them? Thanks SteveWoolf (talk) 20:31, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Searching the Help desk archive for: math font finds a few past instances of similar questions. For example:

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2007 June 6#what font to use (although the last comment was from the original questioner saying the problem still occurred)

If you don't find anything useful in the Help desk archive, see Wikipedia:Browser notes and other links under WP:EIW#Browser. You could also tell us what browser(s) you are using, and give us some sample maths expressions that produce some square boxes in your browser. --Teratornis (talk) 02:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Band infobox members ordering?

Is there a guideline for the order that a list of band members should follow on a band's article's infobox? Voyaging^(talk) 21:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of one, but definitely put a lead singer in front if there is one. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:43, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nirvana (band)

The image that was in the infobox on the Nirvana (band) article was deleted recently and, because of this, I tried to move another image from the article to the infobox like this. However, something didn't work because the page turned out like this. I've heard of this happening before, but I'm not exactly sure how to fix it. Does anybody have any ideas? Thanks in advance. —Łittle Älien ¹⁸² 23:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it. In tables like that one, all you need to enter is the file name. No complicating wikicode. - Mgm|^(talk) 00:00, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. —Łittle Älien ¹⁸² 00:43, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no standard: some infoboxes format the image, some require the entire image syntax. Read the infobox documentation to ensure how it works. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 10:58, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Upgrading image on commons

Hi all -

I hope I haven't made a grievous error in something I've just done... several years ago I added a file to WP as Image:NZflag proposal-dignan.gif. It was eventually transferred to WikiCommons, with the version on en:Wiki being deleted as a result. I've just created an improved version of the image and uploaded it to commons with the same name, overwriting the image that was there. problem is, I don't know how to upgrade the inage as it appears on the en:Wiki file description page. Can someone help me out? Grutness...wha? 23:51, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like your computer is remembering the previous image. Have you cleared your browser cache (purged the page)? - Mgm|^(talk) 00:03, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Compare all these things:

Image:NZflag proposal-dignan.gif (the image page as it appears on Wikipedia)
commons:Image:NZflag proposal-dignan.gif (the original image page on Commons)
commons:Image:Image-NZflag proposal-dignan.gif (the image you just uploaded to Commons)

You could try uploading your image to Commons again, this time using the same name as the image you want to update. I guess you could put a template on commons:Image:Image-NZflag proposal-dignan.gif to tell an administrator on Commons to delete it. Unless you want a copy of the file with that name. --Teratornis (talk) 01:46, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidently the procedure for marking an image for deletion due to uploading with a bad name is:

Made a mistake?

Did you want to rename or move a file? Simply upload the file again and mark the old one like this: {{bad name|correct name}}

That instruction is from the Welcome message on my user talk page on Commons: commons:User talk:Teratornis. I am not very familiar with Commons yet, but I have been playing around on it a little lately, categorizing some images from other people. Maybe someday I will try actually uploading my own images. --Teratornis (talk) 04:01, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Uhh. No idea how I managed to upload it with that name. Thanks - I'll reload and leave a message to delete the misnamed one. Cheers. Grutness...wha? 06:40, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The scientific term is "maladaptive brain activity change" i.e. brain fart; I average several dozen per day, and that's before I finish breakfast. Interestingly the brain fart article describes some research that finds a brain scan can detect an impending brain fart 30 seconds in advance. Someday we will all carry around brain fart detectors which will start beeping alarms 30 seconds before we screw up again. --Teratornis (talk) 09:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gundagai Article

On the Gundagai article page it has that Aboriginal initiation circles have been located at Gundagai. The reference does note that "bora circles" have been located but there is nil to say they are inition circles. I know about the large circle at Gundagai that has been located as it wa sme notifed the proof of it to Council and then pushed till DECC (the heritage managers) listed the site on the restricted access AIHMS Register. One large ceremonial circle has been noted near Gundagai, its been surveyed and blollards put around it by DECC, and its listed. This circle is not an initiation circle. Bidgee refuses to allow what is in the article to match what the referenc eon that articke page noted as [5] State of the Environment Report, says. h ewants the version that has inserted the word "initiation" to be on the article page instead. H ewants this though there is no proof of it in the reference used by wiki on the article page.

Initiations did not happen in large circles. That there is a large circle is not an indication of initiations.

Furthermore, the circles at Gundagai are not "bora" circles. That is a term used elsewher but not at Gundagai. Hope someone at wiki can encourage Bidgee and Wattle to not have incorrect and unreferenced content on the Gundagai article page. I put stuff on the discussion page that further explains it all but wattle reverted it.