Help desk
< October 6	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 8 >

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.

October 7

how do you find pages which are tagged non notable?

please let me know --Anshuk (talk) 00:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Articles with topics of unclear notability - Icewedge (talk) 01:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks--Anshuk (talk) 01:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, for articles tagged as speedy deletion candidates under CSD A7, see CAT:NNSD.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, A7 is for articles with no credible internal claims of importance. "John Doe is a cool guy and he's a student at Anywhere High School. He's the best" is A7 deletable. "Jane Doe is a city councillor of Anywhereville, and owner of the largest female owned business in Anywheresville (pop 10,000)." isn't necessarily A7 deletable, since it makes some claims to importance. Whether these claims qualify as satisfying minimal notability requirements is up for debate, but A7 is distinctly not about non-notable topics. From WP:CSD#A7 "to avoid speedy deletion an article does not have to prove that its subject is notable, just give a reasonable indication of why it might be notable." --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am intimately familiar with A7's applicability and inapplicability, parameters, history and indeed have engaged in discussions seeking to clarify its use and language. I thought this might be a link useful for this user given his question and the common reference to it as the sole notability-related speedy deletion criterion under which articles are tagged.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

saving pages to work when offline

i want to know how to save pages on our computer and use them without connecting to internet59.93.91.62 (talk) 01:53, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In your browser, click File then "Save Page As" or equivalent. For more, try asking at the Reference Desk Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 02:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to download many pages at once, see Wget and Web crawler. --Teratornis (talk) 06:36, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia pings

Hello, I'm browsing with my firewall log open as I type this, and I notice that I'm getting a lot of pings from an IP that traces to the Wikimedia Foundation. Here's a sample (my own IP edited out for privacy):

Oct  6 21:50:20 165 Firewall[38]: Stealth Mode connection attempt to TCP aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd:49367 from 208.80.152.134:443
Oct  6 21:50:32: --- last message repeated 1 time ---
Oct  6 21:50:32 165 Firewall[38]: Stealth Mode connection attempt to TCP aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd:49366 from 208.80.152.134:443
Oct  6 21:50:38 165 Firewall[38]: Stealth Mode connection attempt to TCP aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd:49367 from 208.80.152.134:443
Oct  6 21:50:56 165 Firewall[38]: Stealth Mode connection attempt to TCP aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd:49366 from 208.80.152.134:443
Oct  6 21:51:44 165 Firewall[38]: Stealth Mode connection attempt to TCP aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd:49366 from 208.80.152.134:443
Oct  6 21:52:04 165 Firewall[38]: Stealth Mode connection attempt to TCP aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd:49384 from 208.80.152.134:443
Oct  6 21:52:34: --- last message repeated 3 times ---

Is this normal? It happens even when I haven't recently clicked on any Wikipedia links.

My apologies if this is the wrong place to ask, and thanks. LovesMacs (talk) 03:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's odd. I seem to recall reading that Wikimedia did many, many years ago try out some code that would scan editors' IPs to try to detect (and block) open proxies, but it was quickly disabled because people complained. Certainly I haven't heard of anything like that being run these days. Anyway, you might get a better response at the technical village pump, or possibly on the wikitech-l mailing list or the #wikimedia-tech IRC channel on freenode. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 03:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's still happening. Does it matter if my IP changes each time I connect? I'm not going to name my ISP publicly, but I noticed that it allocates me a different number every time I connect, sometimes quite far from my physical location. Thank you for answering. LovesMacs (talk) 03:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Googling for the log message turned up http://listserver.themacintoshguy.com/pipermail/X4U/2005-July/007705.html, which quotes http://forums.macnn.com/92/networking/259581/lilbit-confused-about-incomming-scan/ saying:

“

This is not an attack. It is return traffic from a web server for which the firewall connection table timeouts have been exceeded. It can be ignored. Latency or misconfiguration on the remote end is what I would blame for the delayed response from the server that got dropped by the firewall.

”

I believe that could well also be the case here. It seems to be happening fairly often: my Google search even turned up a report of someone getting these "Stealth Mode connection attempts" from Apple's own www.mac.com:80. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 03:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, Google. Thank you very much for looking up this issue! LovesMacs (talk) 03:59, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phishing site?

I was playing around and I was entering into my adress bar wikipedia.net wikipedia.com etc. Which both redirected to this website, but I entered wikipedia.tv in and it went to the site but my McAfee siteadvisor showed that it had not tested wikipedia.tv but it has wikipedia.org, so it must be a different site. When I click on a link it loads the other page but my address bar still says "wikipedia.tv"

Is this a scam/phishing site? Bonne Nuit Bijou (talk) 03:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They seem to be wrapping http://www.wikipedia.org/ in a frameset. I didn't spot any outright malicious code at a glance, but it's certainly misleading at best. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 04:00, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, all I'm getting from them is:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
   "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>

<head>
  <title>Wikipedia </title>

</head>
<frameset rows="100%,*" border="0">
  <frame src="http://www.wikipedia.org/" frameborder="0" />
  <frame frameborder="0" noresize />
</frameset>

<!-- pageok -->
<!-- 07 -->
<!-- 7.9-->
</html>

Where the number in  seems to vary in the range 01–07. Oh, and the HTTP headers say they're running "Microsoft-IIS/6.0" with ASP.NET 2.0.50727. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 04:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If that's all the returned HTML then it's just a Wikipedia clone or similar. It's definitely not the actual Wikipedia, though. Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 04:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiEmperor should probably try to contact the owner of the site. 75.175.127.114 (talk) 19:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template for top of article

Is there a template I can place at the top of an article saying:

"This article is about _____. For ______, see ______"

Or would I have to make one? Thanks :) —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 06:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try {{about}} —teb728 t c 07:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or, to avoid the redirect, {{Otheruses4}}. – ukexpat (talk) 16:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More generally, see WP:DAB for an explanation of why, how and when to disambiguate page titles, and the templates used in various circumstances. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 05:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tipi article vandalised

It needs reverting back to the previous version, unless they were really cheesable and made out of human skin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.171.114.12 (talk) 07:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warning; I reverted it. —teb728 t c 08:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is a particular picture locally uploaded instead of on Commons?

I wonder why Image:Mercia family tree.jpg isn't on Commons? As far as I can see it is not a fair-use picture. I would like to use it on another wikipedia language version so I need to know what the problem is with this picture, if any. Åsa L (talk) 10:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only because the user who uploaded it and assigned it a GFDL license did so here instead of there. More to the point, because it is a GFDL licensed image, you can upload it to the Commons or ask for its upload there if you don't feel like doing that task yourself. To simply request it, mark the page with {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}. This places the page into Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons. There is no guarantee how long it will take for someone else to actually do it. If you want to attempt the upload yourself, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Åsa L (talk) 12:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What font or typeface is used for Wikipedia?

What font or typeface is used for Wikipedia websites? I have searched numerous Wikipedia websites (cascading style sheets [CSS], fonts, style manual, typefaces, etc.) but have not been able to find the answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.240.147.2 (talk) 12:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It depends which skin you are using. My understanding is that when you're using Monobook, it tells your computer to use sans-serif, a category of font rather than a particular font itself. Your browser then chooses whichever sans-serif font happens to be its default. So you might see Arial on one browser but Optima on another.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moving a reference desk question

How am I supposed to move a reference desk article that has been put in the wrong category?Leif edling (talk) 13:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What article is this? Do you just want to change the category? --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cut the source of the thread from the wrong desk and paste it into the new desk. Normally, one would also leave a note at the original desk with a link to the thread at the new desk. And a note at the new desk saying that the question was originally asked at another desk. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 14:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Help desk - Typing password at Wikipedia

Why sometimes insert symbol has disappeared? like typing password at Linux login???

as title. JustbeBPMF (talk) 14:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What time wikipedia's function has growth to strong. JustbeBPMF (talk) 14:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow you created a subpage; I have moved the content here. I'm not sure what you are asking. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted article

Hello

My article titles 'Eversley Storage Services' has been delted, and I can not find it in the deletion log. Please can you let me know where the content has gone and why it was removed?

Many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Storage Geek (talk • contribs) 14:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?. That article was deleted per WP:CSD#G11. Here's its entry in the deletion log. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 15:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

picture

How do I upload A picture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by HUFF12 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's more information at WP:UPLOAD. You must be an autoconfirmed user as well. Your account has been active long enough, but you must make ten total edits before you can upload a picture. I hope this helps! TN‑X-Man 15:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If they are your images, I would urge you to upload them to Commons where they will be available to all the Wikipedia projects. Commons does not have autoconfirmation requirements. – ukexpat (talk) 17:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How can this image be properly displayed?

Someone just uploaded and added this image to the University of Houston System article. I believe the image fits the content nicely, but the way the Wikipedian who added it has it currently displayed seems odd. What would be a more appropriate way to display this in the article? A thumbnail? Thanks for your help! Brianreading (talk) 16:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have thumbnailed the image and added a caption. Let me know if this helps! TN‑X-Man 16:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I keep getting spammed for adding external links

Hello,

I work with the Encyclopedia of Alabama (www.encyclopediaofalabama.org) and have been getting blocked from adding links to our website. We have over 500 articles that are relevant to articles already found on Wikipedia, and I feel our material is not spam. Here are my questions;

1. As a non-profit, educational project, are we not allowed to link Wiki articles to our articles?

2. Is there any way we could apply for an exception, or an over ride of the bots that keep blocking us as spam?

3. If I try to add an external link, and a Wiki bot removes it, is the author of the article notified that I attempted to add this external link? In that case, would the author be able to decide if it is relevant and then reinstate the link?

4. How would I contact the author of an article to let him/her know of the existence of our material?

Thanks,

Justin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22starala (talk • contribs) 16:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of notes. First of all, adding links to a site you are affliated with is considered a conflict of interest (see WP:COI) and is discouraged (read: don't do it). Secondly, it is expected that the addition of external links to articles will be a natural part of the process of adding real text to the main body of articles. The external links section is not merely a repository of every link that is tangentally related to the topic of the article. The link should also meet our rather stringet requirements as a reliable source. Any trouble you have run into is largely due to your pattern of behavior. Repeatedly adding nothing but external links to multiple articles, with no other substantive edits, is considered spamming regardless of the merit of the links being added. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. So, even if the link is removed, is the author notified so he/she can decide whether to reinstate it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22star (talk • contribs) 17:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No they are not notified unless the page is on their watchlist. Also see #13 on this page WP:ELNO Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 17:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

maybe a side issue, but: most wikipedia articles probably don't have a single author. they're created by multiple contributors. Sssoul (talk) 17:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where would I add a suggestion that we might be a useful link? I understand why I am not able to post these links, and completely accept the reasoning. However, I would like to find a way to let the author(s) discover our presence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22star (talk • contribs) 17:32, October 7, 2008

Wikipedia is not the correct method for advertising any link. You would be better served to build awareness of the site externally to WikiPedia. While it's a worst case scenario, and does not appear to currently be a concern for this link, links have been known to be blacklisted if it's perceived that self-promotion of a link is outweighing its value to Wikipedia.

To build external awareness, work on getting the link published in either dmoz or yahoo directories, published on university websites - or if sufficient news covereage from third party WP:reliable sources exists to establish its notability, consider creating a Wikipedia article about The Encyclopedia of Alabama. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be clearer... External links is not the place to put a bunch of links. What you should be doing is reading the articles. If there is a fact in an article that does not have a reference note, but you have the same information in your encyclopedia, then you can use your encyclopedia to reference it. For example, assume you have an article on Jimi Hendrix in your encyclopedia and you are reading the article about Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band on Wikipedia. In that article, it says that Jimi Hendrix played the song in concert 3 days after it was released. After that fact, you can add <ref>As noted on www.encyclopediaofalabama.org/JimiHendrix</ref>. As a reference, your link is beneficial. In External Links, your link is just spam. -- kainaw ™ 17:59, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:LINKFARM for more explanation. The External links section of a Wikipedia article is primarily a temporary tool for further developing articles. We expect that as articles evolve toward featured status, the (undifferentiated) external links will shrink, and the topical References section will grow.

To learn about citing sources with footnotes, see: WP:V, WP:RS, WP:CITE, WP:CITET, and WP:FOOT. (Caution: these procedures are not simple, and don't expect everything to make sense instantly on the first reading.)
Peruse our featured articles to see the proper balance between references and external links. For example, the first featured article I just randomly grabbed, 7 World Trade Center, has 101 footnote references and just three external links. As featured articles illustrate the best content on Wikipedia, that is approximately the balance between references and external links every article should evolve toward. Bot programs that delete external links are a heavy-handed aspect of that evolution - admittedly, not ideal from an ergonomic standpoint, but we have the Help desk here to clean up the mess and confer understanding.

Wikipedia has complex rules that are often unintuitive and difficult for new users to understand. However, these rules have helped to make Wikipedia a top ten Web site. If everyone already understood these principles, then anybody could build a top ten site. However, most people cannot do that, and thus it follows that most people, upon deciding to contribute to Wikipedia, will have to learn to think in new ways - the type of thinking that produces a top ten site. A new hire at, say, Google would undoubtedly have to learn new ways of thinking as well, to catch up to the particular rules that Google has worked out to become the enormous success that it currently is. Google's rules may be different than Wikipedia's rules, but the difference on Wikipedia is that we publish all our rules for the whole world to freely study and emulate. --Teratornis (talk) 19:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To answer the OP's latest question, the proper thing to do is to use the talk pages of the articles. Choose one or two actively edited articles, and post a discussion at the talk page of those articles (look for the tab at the top labeled "discussion"). DO NOT simply spam the link to 100 article talk pages, that will just get you into more trouble. Instead, try to engage other editors, get their opinions on the issue, and see what consensus develops over your website. You never know, editors may deem the site both reliable and useful. Be prepared, they may find it unreliable and consensus may go that way, but if so that is the way that Wikipedia works. You may want to read WP:BRD, which contains a rather good essay on this process. Good luck! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:53, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please be sure to read WikiPedia's policy on sock puppetry (and the sub-section on meat puppetry). I noticed a pattern of user accounts that were adding the links - all of which were created within one hour of each other earlier today:

Regardless of the appropriateness of the link, using multiple single purpose accounts to add the link to multiple articles will tend to raise even more questions around a potential conflict of interest. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check an edit, please

Could someone with a Yahoo account, please check this edit? Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 20:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yahoo groups are not considered a reliable source. Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 20:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right, and I see you reverted it. The one-line mail can be seen at [1]. I see no reason the author http://profiles.yahoo.com/mistercoke44 should be allowed as a selfpublished reference. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Malformed MfD

Why is the topmost transclusion malformed here: Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion#October_7.2C_2008? RJaguar3 | u | t 23:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pages change. Can you be more specific about the problem, or is it gone? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's gone. I think it disappeared when another MfD was added on top of it. RJaguar3 | u | t 17:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]