Help desk
< May 31	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 2 >

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.

June 1

How to challenge a reference

What's the proper procedure for challenging references? I've seen quite a few that are nothing but links to vanity pages or self-published websites or blogs. I know the tag is WP:SPS but what do I do to challenge irrelevant or nonconforming references? Thanks JoKing (talk) 01:10, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something in WP:EIW#Citeprobs should tell what you need. If a reference is obviously unsuitable, you could just be bold and remove it, but for courtesy you should explain your actions to the editor who added the reference. Also see WP:SPAMHOLE. Or give us a link to the questionable reference and someone on the Help desk could handle it. --Teratornis (talk) 01:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

samssung corby plus(hydrid)

is there any widgets for samsung corby plus ? please i need some jave softwares and widget expessially for office applications —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.153.109.138 (talk) 02:05, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Computing reference desk. They specialize in answering computer questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:16, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External Editor

Hello, does anyone know how to use the external editor (mentioned in the editing prefs) - or what program to open the file that downloads in? ~QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· The Wiki Puzzle Piece Award 02:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't refer to a specific editor associated with MediaWiki. It's about external editors to browsers in general. See meta:Help:Preferences#Editing. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:58, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks — I'll try that — also, why does the time in my signature go in a box all the time? ~QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· The Wiki Puzzle Piece Award 03:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't view your preferences, but I'm guessing there is a hard return between the time code and what precedes it in your signature. Go there and pull the time code back until its snug up against what precedes it, and then space forward once using the space bar.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll try that. Thanks! ~QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· The Wiki Puzzle Piece Award 04:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent Wiki URL?

Hi, I'm an intern for a nonprofit and was assigned to create a wikipedia page for our organization. There have been about 2 edits and my boss approved of the final draft. Just wondering how I could move the article to a permanent URL that doesn't show Username: on the URL, i.e make it "official." Mariabalilo (talk) 05:31, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a much more fundamental issue that if you move this article into mainspace, it will be immediately deleted as an advertisement. Please note that Wikipedia is neither an advertising service nor a business directory. Businesses are not entitled to a Wikipedia article simply because they exist, and those that do have articles are not entitled to have the article appear in any form they wish. Articles only exist on notable subjects, and they are written in the neutral point of view (the point of view taken by indifferent, reliable sources, and not the point of view the company takes towards itself). Individuals are also strongly discouraged from writing about their own company, as this often leads to deletion of the article and the individual's being banned from Wikipedia. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Show your boss the conflict of interest guidelines here, and explain that what s/he asked you to do is in breach of Wikipedia's rules. Also consider showing him/her Wikipedia's law of unintended consequences. Once an article is established here then anyone can (and will) edit it, so your boss's "approved version" is liable to be changed at any time, and as Someguy explains above, your organisation will have no control over this process. You can request that an article be created about your organisation, using your sources and material, at WP:AFC. Ka renjc 11:23, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lisney Ltd

Resolved

Hi There,

Please can you delete this Lisney Ltd article

I posted by mistake

Thank you

djmabeizy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djmabeizy (talk • contribs) 09:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I can't find the article anywhere. Where is it? Thanks. Chevy monte carlo 10:08, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you check the user's talk page, you'll see that there's a notice that the article has been speedied. It's already gone. Dismas|^(talk) 10:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How long does a new article takes to appear in Search Result

I wrote an Article About Promotional Branding which can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Andymutt/Promotional_branding

There are two problems I have. Firstly, the article doesn't appears in the Wikipedia Search for "Promotional Branding" and Secondly the title of the article displays my user name i.e User:Andymutt/

I can guess that the article haven't yet approved. Perhaps, how and when will it start appearing in search results?

Many Thanks for answering! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andymutt (talk • contribs) 11:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your article doesn't show in the main search results yet because it is still a "user space draft". See Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft for advice on what to do next - in brief, once you have made six more edits your account will become "auto-confirmed" and you will be able to move the page to its proper name.

I've had a quick look at the article - it looks ok for layout and referencing, but does it say enough that isn't already said in the existing Brand article? -- John of Reading (talk) 12:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Time to celebrate?

I've just made my 40,000th edit. How should I celebrate it? Suggestions welcome... -- ChrisO (talk) 11:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A long holiday with no Internet access. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or you might prefer WP:SERVICE. --AndrewHowse (talk) 14:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Except 40K is not one of the milestones. It skips from 35 to 50--SPhilbrick T 15:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which seems harsh. Would a good cap-doffing from we lesser mortals suffice? Gonzonoir (talk) 15:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What fraction of the 40,000 have stuck? --Teratornis (talk) 06:10, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Diff between two shortish bits of text

If there a way, such as a template, to make Wikipedia display two shortish bits of text, side-by-side, and highlight the differences? I am sure I've seen it on a talk page somewhere. Yaris678 (talk) 11:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, you can only link to a diff of two page revisions. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... I knew about that, but that's not what I am after... Yaris678 (talk) 14:34, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As an alternative, why not create your own sandbox (perhaps in User:Yaris678/Sandbox), copy in one version of the text and save it, then edit the same sandbox again and replace the first version with the revised text. You can then use Wikipedia's version diff to see what changed. Astronaut (talk) 14:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was wanting to discuss a number of recent changes to an article and I thought it would help if I could make a number of comparisons. You know... The lead has changed like this... Section 3 has changed like this... etc. Obviously, I want to make the comparisons on the talk page for everyone to see. Yaris678 (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you went ahead with the sandbox idea and did the "diff", you could then post the URL of the diff in the talk page? -- John of Reading (talk) 20:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly what I am looking for but I could do that... Or I might just stick the pairs of passages side by side using tables. Yaris678 (talk) 15:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How to delete temporary article

I created a "temporary" article which was indexed under my user name, as in User:XYZ/Articlename. That article has now been accepted as a permanent work. I would like to delete all of the versions of the temporary article. How do I do that? Thanks. TopGun51 (talk) 13:05, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TopGun51 - just placed the {{db-author}} tag at the top of the user subpage (e.g.User:XYZ/Articlename) you created, and an admin will come along and delete it shortly. Gonzonoir (talk) 13:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on a second. It looks like TopGun51 did all the edits to the userspace version (which is good!) but then cut-pasted the text into mainspace (not so good?). If the userspace version is deleted, the edit history and any GFDL attributions go as well. TopGun was the only one who did any of the edits there so it may not be a big deal, I just want to make sure there's no loss of attribution by this act. It may not be an issue at all - I'd just like a ruling on whether the attribution requirements need every temp edit accounted for, or whether "He wrote all X words" is sufficient, which the C&P move would certainly cover for the Day-0 state of the article. Arakunem^Talk 16:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a problem - as TopGun51 provided all the content of the article that went into mainspace, it's sufficiently attributed to him, and we don't need to retain the history of all his edits in userspace. TopGun, another time you can avoid this possible worry by using the "move" tab at the top of the page to take an article from user space into the main space, thus taking the history with it; then put {{db-author}} on the redirect that is left behind. JohnCD (talk) 17:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification John! Also be sure to nix the talk page of that userspace; I put the same question there. Arakunem^Talk 17:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks, I forgot that. JohnCD (talk) 17:40, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lost login ID and Password i know which Email i made it from ...

I have forgotten my login ID as well as my Password but i Remember which Email ID i made it from what can i do .. or are multiple accounts allowed from the same email. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.3.77.201 (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you remember the names of any articles that you edited under that user name? If so, then go to that article and use the "View history" tab to see the names of the contributors. Maybe that will jog your memory, and then you can ask for a new password. Otherwise I think you will have to start again with a new user name - as far as I know, there is no restriction on two accounts having the same registered email address. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Your username cannot be recovered from the e-mail address. Search your inbox for a confirmation mail from wikimedia.org mentioning the user name. If you cannot find the username there or at Special:ListUsers or in the page history of a page you have edited while logged in then you have to create a new account. If you find the username then use the "E-mail new password" button at the login screen – assuming you can still receive e-mail there. Otherwise you have to create a new account anyway. More than one account with the same e-mail address is allowed. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:58, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Tri Shakthi

Dear Sir, The page Tri Shakthi which was created has been deleted, is it possible to include because it is a charitable trust with objectives and a promising one for the future.Please revert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sreenivasan.biju (talk • contribs) 15:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to your user talk page, it was deleted because it gave no indication of why the organization was important. Pages can be deleted speedily (as this one was) if they are missing that information. Even with it, they may still be deleted if they do not cite substantial coverage in reliable sources to demonstrate that the article meets our notability inclusion criteria. I suggest reading up on these blue links, and the guide to writing your first article, for more information. It's also worth noting that being a charity is not in itself grounds for having an article. Gonzonoir (talk) 15:39, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Signing my post

Look, maybe I'm dense but I just did not get all that tedious junk about the four tildes and the five tildes and the three tildes and the IP addresses and whatnot. You had lots of real nice examples of what folks ought not to do but nothing that was real clear about this is what you are supposed to do. Is this correct and all I need to do? ...or is there something more that I'm not getting? Melitota (talk) 15:30, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer - you did it right. Longer answer - I think the process is unnecessarily conplicated, but my proposal to fix it was shot down. oh well, we move on.--SPhilbrick T 15:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you can't remember what you did to make it work, five tildes will give you this 15:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC) four tildes will give you this Addi hockey 10 15:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC) and three tildes will give you this Addi hockey 10. Have a nice day! :D --Addi hockey 10 15:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

False Usernames

Hello,

I have read the "Wikipedia:Username policy". I have also been able to confirm that a recent edit to the following page was made under an assumed name:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmony,_Florida

According to the "Wikipedia:Username policy":

"Explicit use of a name or url of a company, group or product as a username is not permitted. Your username should represent you. Accounts that represent an entire group or company are not permitted"

In this case, the user name "GarnetKeeler" is not only a company name, but it is also a company name which was appropriated falsely. That is, an authorized representative of the company claims that no one associated with the company has ever made an edit to the above page.

I think that I know the individual who made the change. On that basis I am convinced that the change as well as the use of a misleading user name was done in bad faith (i.e. not just a mistake). Thus it would appear that this is a clear example of a company name being intentionally misused as a user name. And in this case, the content of the edit can also be proven to be false.

Other than undoing the false edit, what recourse do I have against the individual who made this deceptive edit? Can you reveal the IP address of this individual since the post was in reality made anonymously (i.e. with a bogus account)?

Any feedback that you can offer will be appreciated.

Thanks, Geo

George Schiro 15:44, 1 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by GeorgeSchiro (talk • contribs)

You can report abusive usernames at Usernames for administrator attention, where those that contravene policy can be blocked. Either a promotional username or a misleading (impersonation) username can lead to a block; the promotional case is easier to prove. Gonzonoir (talk) 15:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The edit has already been removed. I suspect that the person who removed it is in the process of filing for a block of the user name - if that isn't the case, I'll do it, so you shouldn't have to do anything. You can check to see that the change at Harmony, Florida has already been removed.--SPhilbrick T 16:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the edit (which was a personal attack). I have also blocked the user, although they can request a change of name if they are willing to indicate that they will not edit on behalf of the Marketing Communication company's clients. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:05, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incidently, we cannot reveal details of accounts - even if we wanted to, there are very few people (34) who have access to the IP addresses associated with an account, and I don't think even they have access to the associated email address (although I may be wrong on that last bit!) There is no evidence that the person using this account is impersonating anyone else, or that they are not connected with the company - so even if I was a CheckUser (who can see the IPs associated with accounts), I would not look into this further - the block is enough - and even if they change their user name, this can be linked to their old name, and any edits the new account makes which go against the conflict of interest guidelines may cause the renamed account to be indefinitely blocked. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"There is no evidence that the person using this account is impersonating anyone else, or that they are not connected with the company" - actually there is. I have documentation from the company that supports this.--George Schiro 16:45, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

"I have removed the edit (which was a personal attack)", yes but you did not remove the edit which still makes the new content false. I assume that I will need to do this. Thanks.--George Schiro 16:45, 1 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by GeorgeSchiro (talk • contribs)

Drive-By Downloads on the site! found by Norton Safe Web

Hello My Norton 360 has been found a Drive-By Downloads in the location:

http://ml.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B4%9C%E0%B4%BF%E0%B4%A6%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%A6&v=NTZlOTk3NDRhYWUwMDg4NGQwZjA0NzZkMTJiOGM2YmUJMQlnb2xkZW4tcG9ydGFsLnVzNGI5MDM2ZWVhMjdlYzkuNTU5NDQxNjMJZ29sZGVuLXBvcnRhbC51czRiZjkwYjljMzFlNmE3LjM2MDc3NTUzCTEyNzQ2MTI2MzYJd3NfMTFfMw==&l=MQlBRFMJOTUxZWMyMGViN2EzNWM3MTZhNzg3MGEzNzY0OThhNDMJMAkwCTEzCTEJMzEJNgk0CTIJZmZiNGU0MTQ5ZDJjYjczODM1ODQwYTY2NDRmNDJhMzcJbWwud2lraXBlZGlhLm9yZwk5NzIzMjQ0MwlzCTM4MzgxMjYJMwluZXcgbW9vbgkyMgkxMQk1CTU5CTEyNzQ2MTI2MzYJMAlOCTAJMAkxCQkwCQkJCQkwCWdvbGRlbi1wb3J0YWwudXM0YjkwMzZlZWEyN2VjOS41NTk0NDE2MwkwCTEJNDMxODg5CTI1OAkxMTA4

I have unlinked the above hyperlink to a posing security threat, so noone by accident catches a bug. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 17:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

link to the report: http://safeweb.norton.com/report/show?url=http:%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fw%2Findex.php%3Ftitle=Wikipedia:Help_desk%26action=edit%26section=new%26editintro=Wikipedia:Help_Desk%2Feditintro —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.74.111.178 (talk) 16:51, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You'd need to raise that with the Malayalam wikipedia; each Wikipedia is different (this one is en.wikipedia.org, the one you have issues with is ml.wikipedia.org). TFOWR^{idle vapourings of a mind diseased} 16:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

However, see the thread two below this one, and note in particular that another editor has raised this at the Village pump (technical). TFOWR^{idle vapourings of a mind diseased} 18:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RSS Feeds

How do I get RSS feeds from Wikipedia. Please let me know the best possible way for the same —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmtindia (talk • contribs) 17:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are several RSS feeds available, see WP:Syndication. – ukexpat (talk) 20:10, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Computer threat from wikipedia.org

Where do I turn to when Norton AntiVirus finds a security threat at wikipedia.org? This is a page describing the threat, and the location is on ml.wikipedia.org - even though I was accessing via en.wikipedia.org. I am now on secure login and do not get this warning. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 17:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You'd need to raise that with the Malayalam wikipedia; each Wikipedia is different (this one is en.wikipedia.org, the one you have issues with is ml.wikipedia.org). (See two items above). JohnCD (talk) 17:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You obviously do not understand that I get the warning when accessing en.wikipedia.org, so someone has bugged the servers with something uploaded to the ml.wikipedia.org website. By the way, I get the same warning when accessing other languages as well. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 18:02, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has raised this at the Village pump (technical). TFOWR^{idle vapourings of a mind diseased} 18:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will follow that thread as well. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 18:30, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Biography deleted

A biography that I have created for an Executive Producer has been deleted twice now, what do I need to do for you guys to keep it up on Wikipedia? The article clearly stated the film/music video/ and commercial projects created by this producer as well as company information, please let me know what I need to do to keep this article up.

Lrolfo (talk) 18:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you simply changed an existing article, in this case a disambiguation page. One of the comments left by another editor suggests you should create the article at Jeremy Barrett (producer) instead (click on the red link, and create the article). You can see your original article via "history", so you can use that to create the new article. TFOWR^{idle vapourings of a mind diseased} 18:45, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would strongly recommend that you create your new article in your user space first, rather than straight in the encyclopaedia. Looking at the content you added previously, it has a number of issues that mean it would probably be proposed for deletion if it was recreated in that form. You can use the WP:Article wizard to do this, and choose to save to a user sandbox space when offered the option to do so. Take a look at WP:BIO for the criteria you need to meet in an article about an individual person. Once you feel it's ready, list your article at WP:RFF to get feedback from other users before the article goes live. Doing it this way will give your article a much better chance of "sticking" without deletion. Ka renjc 18:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit in infobox doesn't show

I edited erroneous information in a infobox and I can't understand what I did wrong, but the second line (the one that I edited, with DSM-IV) doesn't show up in the article. Why not?? Lova Falk talk 19:23, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The template {{DiseaseDisorder infobox}} has no |DSM-IV = parameter. It will need to be edited directly to support one before you can use |DSM-IV = in the template's transclusions. Moreover, there is no template {{DSM-IV}} either. Intelligentsium 19:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can pages be blocked from people editing?

I'm doing a page for a pharmaceutical company on a specific drug. This is going to be full of approved info by the FDA about the drug including usage, side effect, etc. We don't want just anyone to be able to add or delete anything on this page. Is there a way we can block this function?

Thanks! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.126.7.94 (talk) 20:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, via this page, however... if you're working for or with the company you should read this and this first. Remember, too, that other editors can and will edit the article - neither you nor the company own the article. TFOWR^{idle vapourings of a mind diseased} 20:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And also please read WP:PRODUCT and WP:SPAM. Also note that pages are only protected from editing if they are the subject of current and heavy vandalism. Requests for protection on other grounds will be rejected. – ukexpat (talk) 20:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above, and I would like to emphasis strongly that if, as appears, you want a page for your product which you will control, Wikipedia is not the place for you. At the bottom of every edit screen is the warning: "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.." JohnCD (talk) 20:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article claimed to be vandalism

I have been working for a long time to write a entry on my religious view/belief, many people share this with me and I hoped that a wiki article would help spread word and understanding. I have posted a early version of it twice but both times I have been insulted by it being claimed as Vandalism and a Hoax. I hope that this can be fixed somehow as it bothers me that people would think of it this way.

The article was called Burtology, my village has lived using it's principles for years and want to spread the best rules it teaches. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burtology (talk • contribs) 20:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not for spreading the word about new things that are not already established and the subject of independent comment. To have an article about your religion you would need to establish that it was notable by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." As the article claimed that it was "a common religion that was founded in Brazil and has now spread throughout the world", but searches in Google and Google News show no trace of it, editors who checked it decided that it was a hoax, and it was deleted under speedy deletion clause G3 which covers hoaxes as well as vandalism. Read Wikipedia is not for things made up one day for more advice. JohnCD (talk) 21:20, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Burtology, thank you for your question. In order for any topic to qualify for inclusion in Wikipedia, it must meet certain criteria:

Verifiability - The material in the article must be attributable to a reliable published source to show that it is not original research. In other words, if you can't cite a reliable, third party source that covers the topic, then it is not verifiable.
Notability - The article topic must be notable, or "worthy of notice." You can read more about how Wikipedia defines notability in the notability guidelines.

It appears that the article Burtology failed to meet the Verifiability requirements, and may have also failed the Notability requirements. Although Wikipeida uses the terms Hoax and Vandalism, please keep in mind that these are not intended to be attacks or insults to the editor(s) who created the article; the use of these terms is merely part of Wikipedia's procedure for handling articles that do not meet the standards for inclusion.

You might also find it helpful to review the list of what Wikipedia is not; in particular, the following seem to apply in this case:

Thanks! Davnor (talk) 21:43, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After looking at things like Google's cahced version and the page preview, it also appears to not meet the NPOV policy, as it contains unneeded, promoting words. Fix this, find some good sources, and you're good to go! A p3rson ‽ 22:46, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Although Wikipeida uses the terms Hoax and Vandalism, please keep in mind that these are not intended to be attacks or insults to the editor(s) who created the article". Uuuh ... sure ... 86.184.26.25 (talk) 02:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]

how about "they are not always intended to be..." ;-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 23:11, June 1, 2010 (talk • contribs) Active Banana

Yes, contributor from 86.184.26.25, these terms really are not intended, by Wikipedia policy, to be construed as insulting; it is the article or the edit that is being labeled, not the editor. Is it possible that the contributor might feel insulted anyway? Sure. Is it possible that the person who tagged the article as vandalism wants the contributor to feel insulted? Certainly. But that is not the intent of the policy. The goal is to be nice, even if we can't always live up to that ideal. Cheers! Davnor (talk) 14:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Created article

Hi! I created an article on Wikipedia. Please look and tell me if it is relevant. Thanks! Dr. OS (talk) 20:39, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be an attempt at translating the lead of the German WP article. I'll try to clean up and wikify the translation and add some sources. Deor (talk) 22:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Danke schön! – ukexpat (talk) 15:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page tagged with template not showing up in category

I recently created a template that would tag pages with a category. On the first page I tagged, the category is shown at the bottom as if the page is in it – yet the category page still shows no pages. It's been more than enough time for database lag to pass, if that were the case.

I was able to find one other similar question that was asked here, but it didn't really help me solve the problem. Any ideas, anyone?
-Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 23:05, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it hasn't been enough time for database lag to pass. You added it today. It can take much longer. I made a null edit to Talk:Longview, Texas and then it showed up in the category. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the template had added the category at the time the article was last edited then the category would have been updated right away. But at the time [1] there was 4 minutes until it added the category.[2] Then you had to wait for the job queue to implement changes caused by the template edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ok, I thought a few hours would be plenty of time for it to get processed. Thanks for the explanation and help!
-Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 01:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]