Help desk
< September 15	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 17 >

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.

September 16

External image
External image
	Gavin Lambert

PDF version tool

Where can I find out how the PDF version tool of the toolbox works. I would like to explore using something like it on my own website. —teb728 t c 00:43, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Extension:Pdf_Export —SpaceFlight89 08:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting around copyrighted picture problems

WP policy is understandably very strict about not downloading copyrighted pictures to illustrate articles.

However, what is policy concerning adding a link to a published copyrighted picture, and listing it in the External links section and referring to it as a "Recent photo"? If this is OK, what a great solution to the problem!

Here's one that caught my eye Gavin Lambert. Check it out. JohnClarknew (talk) 01:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ELNO is pretty clearly against such a link, see #13 "Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject", linking to a page just for a picture seems like a rather minor concern, if anyone wants to see a picture, they can use Google Images like anyone else, they don't need us to do it for them. Also, if the webpage in question is itself violating the copyright of the picture, we should not link to it, per WP:COPYLINK. Pictures are nice when we can get one we can use, like if you yourself could take a picture of that person and upload it. But when we can't, they are not all that vital. --Jayron32 03:24, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Color me confused. From the lead of WP:EL, “Such pages could contain … information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright”. Sounds precisely on point.

The exception #13 seems to apply to a website that, for example, discussed screenwriters in general and mentioned Lambert in passing. That isn’t the case here. While the general site [1] covers far more than Lambert, that situation is covered specifically in #13, “If a section of a general website is devoted to the subject of the article, and meets the other criteria for linking, then that part of the site could be deep-linked.” The Lambert picture was deep-linked. This sounds like exactly what is desired. Am I missing something?SPhilbrick T 14:39, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could try the {{external media}} template to get: 152.91.9.190 (talk) 02:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dab help

I'm trying to dab many pages from newton to newton (unit) following a page move. What links here is returning numerous railway articles which do not have the term which is making the job more difficult. An example of a page found is British Rail Class 03. Obviously, it's got to be a template transcluding inside these class of articles (I guess either {{British Rail Locomotives}} or {{Infobox Locomotive}}, but looking at the underlying templates hasn't revealed where the culprit is. If I could just find the underlying template and dab its link(s) to Newton, I could get rid of all the what-links-here false positives. Any help appreciated.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:32, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the culprit is {{convert}}, which is used to give "Tractive effort" in the infobox. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 05:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it seems to have resolved itself (unless you made an edit though you don't indicate that). I dabbed all the templates early on but you know template changes sometimes need time to propagate so I may have fixed it myself without realizing it. I still can't figure out where the display comes from but its appears to be the listing of newton in {{Convert/list of units/force/short list}}. I guess I could go back and look at all the template dabs I made but it's academic now.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:31, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How to create a table with a image as background?

Hi, I want to create a table with a image as background. The only code; I've found was:

[[image:Beach_of_Cyprus.JPG|center|300px]] [http://www.youtube.com/v/gJswbSZgXrg&hl=fr&fs=1&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b La mer] Qu'on voit danser le long des golfes clairs A des reflets d'argent La mer Des reflets changeants Sous la pluie

La mer
Qu'on voit danser le long des golfes clairs
A des reflets d'argent
La mer
Des reflets changeants
Sous la pluie

But unfortunately it works only with plein text, not with tables! Have anyone an idea? -- jlorenz1 (talk) 07:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this for your user page? If it isn't, I would say that this would be inappropriate for an article. As far as I am aware, there isn't a way (I thought I had found a possible way using HTML - see here, but they didn't work. Consider just using background colours instead. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 09:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this for your user page? 'Yes here doesn't work in Wikipedia, although I know to work with HTML -> it shows the table without background picture -- jlorenz1 (talk) 09:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can overlay just about anything. See for example {{overlay}}. This not exactly what you want but it may contain enough wikicode, etc. for you to work it out . . . ? 152.91.9.190 (talk) 02:52, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For example:

Line	Text
1	Qu'on voit danser le long des golfes clairs
2	A des reflets d'argent
3	La mer
4	Des reflets changeants
5	Sous la pluie

152.91.9.190 (talk) 07:13, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DISCUSSION PORTAL

I have been unfortunate with wanting to discuss certain things people have said but dont because it doesnt answer the OP's question. There is a lot of people that wish to discuss that are told to go elsewere as this is not a forum ECT... I would rather they stayed here! to that end would it not be better to say something like if you wish to take part in a discussion please go here>>>>><<<<<<<< This is not what wikepedia is about i know and the reference desk is exactly that a refrence desk. but it would make common sense to have a wikipedia forum/discussion desk were debate ECT can happen. following the wikepedia rules of niceness ECT... Would this or could this be a possibility on wikipedia as it would add another dimention; to this fantiastic siteChromagnum (talk) 07:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chromagnum. As others have said (although I haven't found any examples of this in your contributions that I have looked at) Wikipedia is not a forum - not even on the Reference Desk and the Help Desk. It does not exist as a discussion place - there are plenty of other places for that, such as MySpace groups, Facebook groups, forum sites, etc. Discussion on Wikipedia tend to be either about what should or should not go into the encyclopedia, and discussing the fine points about article (like phrasing etc). Wikipedia is not a blog, webspace provider, social networking, or memorial site. Keep contributing to Wikipedia (some of your comments make me - and probably other editors - smile!) but make sure that the comments you leave are relevant to the discussion. For a forum-style conversation, you will need to go elsewhere. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 09:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no probs thanks steven :)Chromagnum (talk) 04:31, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Attempt to contact a real person, to resolve a confusing issue.

BOTH of my attempts to contact you via e-mail addresses, as given in your help pages, were reteurned as non-existent. Therfore, I am copying the message to this board, in the hope of being able to talk to a real human being .....

Originally an e-mail to:'info-en-t@wikimedia.org' See below... And also bounced from...

e-mail to wikimedia

From: G. Tingey & R. Neil <removed> Sent: 15 September 2009 22:04 To: 'unblock-en-llists@wikimedia.org' Subject: Blocking of an re-edit (as my first entry was incorrect)

Dear Sirs,

I am told that after making an (incorrect) edit on a Wikipedia page, my account is blocked.

I am told that the relevant IP address is: 79.72.171.156

Which appears to be my correct home IP address, operating through server: 212.74.102.16

The reason given, apparently emanating from Peter Symonds, was “Block Evasion” – whatever that is.

My original, incorrect addition, to the page on the “Third Wave”, was as follows. An account of the experiment also appeared in the (last?) edition of the "Whole Earth Catalog".

It SHOULD have read …

“A full account was given by Ron Jones in the 1980 edition of “The Next Whole Earth Catalog” on pp. 374-377.” I know this to be correct, as I have just unearthed my ancient copy of said volume, and checked the original article.

I would appreciate it if you could:

1] Correct my entry to the second sentence, as written above. 2] Unblock my access. 3] Explain what “Block Evasion” is?

Yours sincerely, A very confused …..

G. N. G. Tingey.

London, England.

ADDITION: PLEASE e-mail me directly, if at all possible. Thank you. G. T. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.61.177 (talk) 08:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of the IPs 79.72.171.156 or 212.74.102.16 appear on the Block logs from what I can see, so I am unsure why you would get a message saying that you are blocked. Special:Contributions/79.72.171.156 shows no edits (so any edits must have been deleted) and User talk:79.72.171.156 does not exist, and block message would have been left on it. Special:Contributions/212.74.102.16 likewise shows no edits, and User talk:212.74.102.16 does not exist - and a block message would have been left on it.

Where did you get the information that your account was blocked, because from what I can see it is not. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 09:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the edit you were referring to, it was not treated as vandalism, and the editor was not blocked. I suspect that Tiscali changes your IP with every edit, and by chance you got an IP which had received a block message. If so you could avoid that by creating an account and logging in. —teb728 t c 11:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your IP address is affected by this range block. Somebody else has probably made abusive edits with multiple IP addresses in your IP range after one or more specific IP addresses were blocked. It is this unknown person and not you who has made block evasion. The method to stop it can unfortunately affect innocent people in the same IP range. The block will expire in less than two days so you can just wait. You can also contact the blocking administrator at User talk:PeterSymonds. Where did you see the address unblock-en-llists

wikimedia.org? MediaWiki:Blockedtext says unblock-en-l

lists.wikimedia.org. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further to my response above, may I suggest that you create an account? That would avoid you being inconvenienced by the IP block, and gives benefits. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 13:17, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

REPLY:

The pages, as viewed, appear to have CHANGED since I last looked at them.

For instance, I NOW appear to be able to contact Peter Symonds - this could not be found earlier .... The web-address given was COPIED from your pages, so I suspect someone is playing silly games.

Thanks. I will now try to re-edit my contribution to the "Third Wave" page to give a more correct account.

project work

please i would like to know more about microbiology of tissue paper(toilet roll) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onyilofie (talk • contribs) 11:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried the Science section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Task force, templates, and talk page banners

I'm part of a small task force, Wikipedia:Wikiproject European History/Sub-Roman Britain task force. Most of the articles within our purview are pretty bad, and I'm hoping to raise our profile a bit. I gather that task forces can't have their own talk page banners, and in any case I'd like us to be able to take advantage of Wikipedia:Article alerts. I gather from looking atWikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Task forces that the template of the European History wikiproject could be modified to accomplish this, but I don't have the skills to do it. Can anyone help? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 13:30, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean add the task force to the project template of Wikipedia:WikiProject European history(like, for example in Template:MILHIST)? It seems Template:Eurohist does not support this, so the modification should be done to include all task forces, right? ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 13:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's what I want to do. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 08:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removing a warning

Using Huggle, I warned a user - and they were given a stage 4 warning. As they had not received any prior warnings, I'm not sure why this was issued - but checking their edit, I saw that I was incorrect to revert their edit and issue the warning. I have reverted the article to the way it was, but how do I remove the warning?

This hasn't happened with any of my warnings (levels 1 through 4 have been issued correctly). I don't want to risk the user being banned if they get "warned" again, as they shouldn't have any warnings there at all! -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 13:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just go back there and remove or strike the warning, with an explanation if you like. That's what I do. He's not likely to be blocked if he wasn't actually vandalising and received the warning in error because the blocking admin is supposed to check his contributions. The wrong warning should be reported at the huggle feedback page I think. ≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 13:40, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had already stuck the warning, and left an apology for the editor in question. It's possible that I did something by mistake, so I won't report it unless it happens again. Thanks for the advice, Chamal_N. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 13:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[2] was not an escalated warning based on prior warnings. It was a 4im first and only warning. Wikipedia:Huggle/Manual#Main toolbar says: To use a 4im (first and last warning for vandalism) template, go to advanced, and select "Level 4(final)". Maybe this accidentally happened. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:53, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how it happened, but I know that it was an accident! Thanks for the advice, guys -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 18:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the place to develop an article before posting it?

I'm totally new at this. I read most ot the instructions but am confused on a basic item.

Where is the place to create and develop a complete article (over a few weeks) before posting it?

Sandbox mode eems to be just small temporary scratch paper which is routinely automatically erased.

Actual putting it up during development would subject it to review/remove before it is done.

Thanks in advance for your answer —Preceding unsigned comment added by North8000 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Simply create your own sand box at: User talk:North8000/sandbox. Click on that hyperlink then just start to work on the article in the edit box. Good luck, if you need any further help just ask Spitfire^Tally-ho! 15:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The new Article wizard 2.0 will help you do this. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 15:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to emphasize – the general purpose sandboxes are erased or overwritten regularly, so they are not appropriate for article creation, only for testing, but a sandbox in your own user space will not be touched (unless you violate a copyright or something similar). The Article Wizard is very new, but I think it is very helpful, and it will allow you to start an article in your own user sandbox. I hope you will try it out, I think it will become the standard way new articles are created, and you can say you were one of the first.SPhilbrick T 15:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question about recreating a deleted article

I wanted to write an article about one of my father's favourite bands, Agents, because it didn't appear the English Wikipedia had one. But when I started writing it, I found out that it had had one, a very short, badly written substub written three years ago, and deleted because of lack of notability after one minute. Now, it happens that Agents is one of Finland's most famous bands, and has been active for almost three decades, so it's definitely notable. Now, my question is, should I undelete the original substub as well, to merge the article history? After all, regardless of how badly written the original substub was, it's still about the same band. JIP | Talk 17:46, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't use content from the deleted article then there is no need to undelete it. It was speedy deleted for no assertion of notability (WP:CSD#A7). That doesn't necessarily mean the subject is claimed to be non-notable. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I thought as much. I don't want to undelete a three-year-old badly written substub just to make the article appear as it was originally written three years ago. The current article, which I translated from the Finnish article at fi:Agents, is much better. JIP | Talk 18:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the deleted version, it was three sentences. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 18:40, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and it seems it was only written because they once had had a co-operation performance with HIM frontman Ville Valo. I have heard of Ville Valo (it's hard not to, living in Finland) but haven't heard any of his songs. I didn't even know Agents had had a co-operation performance with him until I read the original article. I wanted to write an article about Agents because of Agents in their own right, not out of a connection with Ville Valo. JIP | Talk 18:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Archive of "speedy delete" discussion?

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 20:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone please tell me how I can access the (presumably) now closed discussion that occurred surrounding the proposed "speedy delete" of the Nina_Assimakopoulos article? I presume the dicussion must have closed, btw, because the SD template was removed from the page. Thanks! Ohiostandard (talk) 17:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedily deletion nominations are not really discussed otherwise they would not be speedy. Arguments against deletion can be made on the article's talk page (as was the case here). In this case the article's edit history shows the reason speedy was declined ("speedy delete for copyright violation declined, author has permission, though still needs proving"). I am however, not sure it was correctly declined. Usually where copyvio is claimed, the article should be deleted ex abundante cautela until permission is proved, in which case the article can be undeleted. I will discuss with the relevant admin. – ukexpat (talk) 18:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, ukexpat, and thanks also for the templates I see you placed on the article; they're appropriate. But may I ask a related followup question, as well?

Since it appears that all of what was originally put into the article was copy-and-paste from the subject's .info web site, would it suffice to avoid copyvio if she were to place, somewhere on that site, an appropriate public-domain release/license of its content, and then just e-mail that link to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org? I know that we'd generally like to discourage copy-and-paste, would prefer to see an article rewritten for NPOV, and to meet other standards, also, but am wondering whether that would that satisfy just the copvio objection? Ohiostandard (talk) 18:53, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is possible to release material for use on Wikipedia, see the process set out at WP:IOWN. If the appropriate permission is granted then that deals with the copyvio issue. But that is not the end of it. By their very nature, subject's official websites are promotional so material copy and pasted from such websites is almost certainly going to fall foul of WP:SPAM and subject to deletion/rewording accordingly. That's why, even if permission to use is granted, it is much better to start from scratch and write from a neutral, non-spammy, point of view. That's also the reason why we have guidelines on WP:COI - it is very hard for a person with a COI (as in this case) to write about the relevant subject matter from a neutral point of view. BTW I did leave a message for User:Graeme Bartlett about the declined speedy. – ukexpat (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That clarifies it very well for me. You've answered two or three other questions I've posted here, as well, and your replies were equally illuminating. I greatly appreciate your work. Thank you. Ohiostandard (talk) 19:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad I could help. – ukexpat (talk) 20:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Create a page?

how do I make a page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.7.77.123 (talk) 19:49, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Wizard is available to walk you through these steps. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

You will need to first register an account, which has many benefits, including the ability to create articles. Once you have registered, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. An Article Wizard is available to walk you through creating an article, but you will need to create an account to use it. if you don't wish to do so, you can submit a proposal for an article at Articles for Creation. – ukexpat (talk) 20:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

use

how to mth in the wiki[edia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.148.74.233 (talk) 19:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your question is unclear, please clarify. – ukexpat (talk) 20:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

logo disapper on albert einstein college of medicine page

Hi, On my college's wiki page, our logo was there since I uploaded the file Einstein_Logo_wtagline_low.jpg I called this image use |image_name = Einstein_Logo_wtagline_low.jpg It showed up before, but now it is just a link to the file. I don't understand why this happened since the image file still exists in wiki.

Fangisu (talk) 20:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Apparently, there was an issue with the {{infobox university}} template. I removed the image_size: parameter from the infobox at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, and the logo shows up just fine now. This issue broke some other articles; more information may be found at Template talk:Infobox university. UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 20:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Philbox17

Would you please block User:Philbox17 account, he keeps deleting cited information from the article Réseau de Résistance du Québécois. This person is practicing article ownership, which can be confirmed by reading the editors user talk page User talk:Philbox17 and the lengthy problems this editor has had with this article. I believe this editor is a member of Réseau de Résistance du Québécois and lacks a NPOV. Thank you. 76.64.152.111 (talk) 20:53, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not forum shop. As I replied at the New Contributor's help page, this should be reported to the Admins' notice board. – ukexpat (talk) 21:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can I hide the redirect message?

Can I hide the redirect message on my userpage? (I'm talking about the one that says (redirected from ARTICLE))Redsoxcool (talk) 21:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there is some bit of CSS that would hide all of the redirect messages for you. Why not transclude the page by putting {{User:Redsoxcool/Home}} on your main user page? ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 21:28, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, your user page is by definition User:Redsoxcool. However, you have redirected your user page to the user subpage at User:Redsoxcool/Home. This should not (and cannot as far as I know) be concealed from other people trying to see your user page. I recommend you move the contents of User:Redsoxcool/Home to User:Redsoxcool and change your Home tab to go to User:Redsoxcool. It can cause confusion when you use a user subpage as if it was your user page. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:40, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template coding request

DCmacnut asked me for help coding a template, but unfortunately for him, I don't know how to fulfill the request. I've copied the request below; would someone please take up the question? Nyttend (talk) 21:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you could help me, but I'm working a couple of Census citation templates in my sandbox. I had originally created Template:American Factfinder and Template:Cite American Factfinder to allow for direct links to detailed demographic information about geographical places such as cities, towns, townships, counties, etc, rather than a general link to the main factfinder page. My two new templates would replace these existing templates with simplified code. The original templates required three separate templates for general, social, and economic data. The new one I'm working on will call a PDF from http://censtats.census.gov/ that includes all three, so you don't need separate citations. The templates seem to work just fine, and with a few minor changes to the handful of articles that currently call "Cite American Factfinder" there shouldn't be any broken links. I had to add a "ifeq" paramater to continue allowing for "Age and Sex" demographic table (males per 100 females data, etc) since that table is not included in the censtats PDF. The templates in question are User:Dcmacnut/DCTemplates2 (main URL generator) and User:Dcmacnut/DCTemplates3 (citation template)
Both templates work as expected and are a lot simpler. For example for Bismarck, North Dakota you'd get the following.

U.S. Census Bureau. Census 2000. "Census Demographic Profiles, Bismarck, North Dakota" (PDF). CenStats Databases. <http://censtats.census.gov/data/>. Retrieved 2009-01-31. {{cite web}}: External link in |work= (help)CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)

U.S. Census Bureau. Census 2000. "Census Demographic Profiles, Bismarck, North Dakota" (PDF). CenStats Databases. <http://censtats.census.gov/data/>. Retrieved 2009-01-31. {{cite web}}: External link in |work= (help)CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
However, I am unable to manually pipe the URLs by putting [] brackets around the URL template, similar to how you use Template:Gnis3. Instead I get this: [3]. I could force the brackets into the main template, but then it would break the URL/title display in the cite template, or I could make Age and Sex it's own template, but that defeats the purpose of simplification. Any suggestions or know of someone well verse in template syntax that could help me?DCmacnut <> 20:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

removing request. I think I was able to figure out the problem, and the templates work properly now. Thanks for taking the time to consider this.DCmacnut <> 01:48, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How to put apply for "notability

I got this far but couldn't find how to add a name to the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_articles/Biographies#Fiction_Writers.2FDramatists.2FPoets

Thanks for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roseleafpeartree (talk • contribs) 22:39, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean by your heading. As you may know, that page is a place to request somebody else writes an article and not to write it yourself. Click the "edit" link to the right of the section heading and add the name in alphabetic order on its own line in the same format as the existing entries:

*[[Name of person]] - Brief description of person

PrimeHunter (talk) 23:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]