Search the frequently asked questions

Search the help desk archives and other help pages

January 30

At the Middle East Media Research Institute article, there was a dispute about whether a particular paragraph belonged. I thought it did, and did some re-arranging to make it fit in better, to my thinking. There were, certainly, people who thought it should be out entirely.

Then, after I'd been away for a while, I found that the article had been protected from editing just five minutes after a reversion, and this after the article had remained untouched for almost 3 and a half hours. I looked for some request for protection from the person who made the last reversion, but found none. I told the person who locked down the article that I thought the timing was suspicious, and I asked him if he could explain it. Instead, he claimed, on no clear basis, "If I hadn't protected it you'd now find yourself with a 24h block, so be grateful," with the edit comment "I find your comment offensive." [1]

How do I file a complaint against this person, who has been so rude and who may have used his power to lock an article unscrupulously?This Page is Useless, has no meaning for existance

Thanks, and my apologies for the nature of the question.

Beelzebarn 00:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment (look for the section on users) or Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, but not both. However, I personally advise you to let this one drop; attributing a coincidence to malevolence and then demanding an explanation is not assuming good faith, which is required by Wikipedia policy, so it's understandable that the user in question was a bit snappy in response. -- SCZenz 00:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advice. However, I did and do find the timing suspicious. I would think it more productive among adults to give the person in question the opportunity to explain what actually happened, rather than for me to carry an unspoken suspicion about him. I think almost anyone in my position would find the timing suspicious, and had Mr. Connolley assumed good faith of me, he might have realized this as well. Instead, he chose to threaten and belittle me. I'll give him another chance to amend his behavior before I file the complaint. Beelzebarn 00:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, I would also clarify that his mention of the block was based on the following logic: if the page were not protected, you might have change it to your preferred version, and thereby violated the three revert rule (resulting in a 24-hour block). Mr. Connolley was indeed brief in his response, but it does look to me like you're pushing that rule as it is; accusing people of secret conspiracies on top of that, based on one coincidence, is not likely to result in much support for your position. -- SCZenz 00:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A perusal of the article's edit history makes it appear, superficially at least, that Beelzebarn had already violated 3RR, so I don't think that logic will wash. In any case, it's no excuse for violating WP:CIVIL in turn, especially if you're an admin. --Tkynerd 00:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The key word is "superficial," Tyknerd. In fact, while I thought for awhile that I actually had violated the 3RR rule when Isarig filed the complaint against me (I wasn't really aware of the rule before his complaint), when I looked at the rule and at my edits, it was clear that one of them was not a revert, and I noted this on the 3RR complaint page: I only had 3 reverts.

SCZenz, I have to say I don't like the logic you described: I MIGHT have violated 3RR had he not protected the article??? Isn't that a bit like locking your car in the garage permanently because it might get scratched if you drive it?

Beelzebarn 01:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I made you aware of the rule by way of posting a warning on your user Talk page prior to filing the report against you, so please don't misrepresent things by claiming that 'I wasn't really aware of the rule before his complaint'. A diff of the warning is included in the report I filed, for all (including you) to see. Second, you most clearly violated 3RR prior to the page being blocked, hence Mr. Connolley's comment that had the page not been protected, you would have been blocked. And finally, 3RR is not an entitlement. People can and do get blocked for edit warring when they make less than 4 edits. You have begun your WP career by edit warring, then violating 3RR, then wikistalking, then soliciting another editor to participate in your edit war in violation of WP:CANVAS, and now baselessly accusing a respected long-time administrator of colluding with other editors who conspire against you - in a blatant violation of WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. I suggest you take a break from editing for a couple of days while you review the relevant WP policies you have been flagrantly violating. Isarig 04:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A.1. You left your warning on my talk page at 15:33 yesterday, creating the talk page, the possibility of the existence of which I was only vaguely aware of at that time.[2]

A.2. Sixteen minutes later, you made the false complaint against me.[3] In the interim, I made one edit to the Middle East Media Research Institute article[4] and one edit to that article's talk page.[5] I did not in fact see your warning about 3RR until after I had seen your false complaint, which I came across after looking at your contribution history.

B. I most clearly did not violate 3RR prior to the page being blocked, and you are rather asinine to continue to insist that I did rather than apologizing for falsely accusing me of a rule violation. Look at your own evidence, Isarig: you have counted an edit where I did nothing but change "Persian" to the more correct "Farsi" as a revert![6] That Mr. Connolley made his comment proves nothing except that he was reckless in hurling threats and belittlement at me, which is a proveable assertion rather than a baseless accusation.

C. I am not inclined to be receptive to lectures from you about behavior, having seen how you tried to pass off an IDF announcement's claims as BBC findings, in addition to your own unrepentent edit-warring.

Beelzebarn 16:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you aloud creating a new Wikiproject on a topic (like Wikipedia:WikiProject Paranormal)? Kamope · talk · contributions 01:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. See Wikipedia:WikiProject and the links leading off of there (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Guide being a good one). -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Sure you're "allowed". Don't do it "aloud", though. Other people might want to work in silence. ;) - Mgm|^(talk) 09:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• The key is whether you are allowed to create one. The key is, "are there enough people interested in working on it?" WikiProjects are fundamentally social constructs as well, and by definition, they are groups of users committed to improving certain areas of Wikipedia. If there's not enough people, then they become lonely places, and they are eventually abandoned. The WikiProject Council Guide is an excellent place to start, though, so you should definitely read it. Titoxd^(?!?) 05:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Only the first two paragraphs of the article I wrote appears online, even though when I retrieve it to edit it, the rest of the article is there in the text "work space." Since I'm a first-time user, I assume I've missed something.

Thank you for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neutralw (talk • contribs)

For the record, the article is Computious Also please remember to sign your messages with ~~~~. Xiner (talk, email) 02:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed it; the references were done incorrectly. I think WP:CITE says how to do it correctly. -Amark moo! 02:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can one trust any information in Wikipedia when anyone can edit or change text at anytime?

                                          Don Russell

Please see Wikipedia:Replies to common objections. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:26, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's why you should check the sources in the articles you read. Xiner (talk, email) 02:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, when I'm doing research, I use Wikipedia solely for the external links. .V. _[Talk|Email] 02:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also see Reliability of Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia.--24.20.69.240 03:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded an image licensed under Creative Commons (Image:Maserati MC12 Corsa.jpg) and I want to use it in an infobox. Unfortunately it's taller than it is wide so it makes the infobox look terrible. What I want to do is crop the image (which the license allows me to do so). Should I crop the image and upload it as a new version of the same file or upload the cropped version under a different file-name? Thanks, James086^Talk 03:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should upload it to the same filename with a descriptive summary stating that you cropped the image. Best of luck, Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 06:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. This is a JPEG. Cropping it and saving it again is going to degrade the whole quality of the file. It should be saved as a PNG instead, because Portable Network Graphics is a lossless format, while JPEG is lossy compression. You can leave the old file sitting where it is and just replace the usage of it with usage of the new PNG. And since these are creative commons files here, it's really best to put them on the Commons: instead of Wikipedia, so that everyone can use them. — coelacan talk — 06:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was away from Wikipedia for a month, and in that time, two of the pages on my watchlist were deleted. I searched for the AfD/VfD discussion pages, but could not find them. The two pages were 1936: Horror and Mersienne Medieval Fantasy Campaign.

Assistance in this will be much appreciated. The Bearded One 06:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first was deleted by prod. The second one was deleted here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mersienne_Medieval_Fantasy_Campaign. Viridae^Talk 06:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the quick response. I read the cited discussion and found it illuminating. What does "prod" mean, and where can I see that discussion? The Bearded One 06:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict) When you click on a redlink, toward the bottom of the text right before the box where you can write in, there is a link that says "deletion log". This will usually have useful information about what happened to any older articles that were once there. In this case, I found Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mersienne Medieval Fantasy Campaign and also found that the 1936 horror article was a prod that was deleted by the admin User:Mailer diablo. See this link for details. Mailer diablo might undelete it for you, or another admin might. Talking to that admin should be your first action. Remember that admins are people too, so be kind. =) — coelacan talk — 06:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Prod" is detailed at WP:PROD. It stands for "proposed deletion" and there is no discussion, just a five-day timeframe in which someone can contest the prod and stop it from happening. No one was watching to contest this, so it was deleted. Mailer diablo might help. — coelacan talk — 06:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A prod can be undeleted by any admin on request. JUst drop me a line on my talk page if you want that to happen. Viridae^Talk 06:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have pinged Viridae on his talk page for the article's undeletion. Thank you all for your quick help. The Bearded One 07:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to create a page about Tasso sausage. Unfortunately, I tried to do it through a disambiguation page, but it keeps taking me to the Torquato Tasso (poet) page, instead of taking to me to a fresh page that needs to be started. If you could help me start the page, or simply start it yourself so I can edit in needed information, it would be much appreciated. Thank you.

Click on this link: Tasso (sausage). That will get you started. Dismas|^(talk) 07:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The doctors say my friend suffers from electric discharge

Hello people from this fantastic site. First of all let me tell you that I have solved a lot of problems reading different articles on this site and want to thank you for all the information and time put in here.

I wanted to discuss something for which I cannot find an answer.

The doctors say my friend suffers from electric discharge. Let me explain what he feels often. All of a sudden he feels very tired, he cannot stand on his feet and his heart beats faster. His pressure usually goes very high and later it comes back to normal. Sometimes it even goes low and then back to normal.

Sometime back his potassium level had gone down and also suffered from diarrhoea for a long time.

Let me explain his work habits. He has very stressful days and he is on the computer for long hours, has 8 monitors and 2 CPU's which are on, almost 18 hours a day. While he goes out to work the computers are left on and he also sleeps in the same room. He eats too very very fast and just swallows the food.

I think I have given enough explaination. I was wondering if there is any connection with his lifestyle or if you'll you understand where his problem lies. Please do help me. Thanks in advance and hope to receive a reply. Stella202.177.244.78 07:55, 30 January 2007 (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's the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. — coelacan talk — 08:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HOW DO I EDIT

• Please don't write in all capital letters. It's considered rude. See Wikipedia:How to edit a page. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Where does it say that writing in all cpital letters is rude? Crazy 29 13:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - The article on Heeling needs some help - someone added unrelated content (and perhaps non-notable content?). I think it needs a disambiguation page, but I don't think I have the wikiskills to do this yet. Anyone want to help? Thanks --bmk

Sure you do, have confidence, see Wikipedia:Disambiguation. Dismas|^(talk) 09:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have an article for which the references are kinda taking over, I already made them small, but putting them in columns to close some whitespace might help too. Unfortunately, my attempts so far to make it work from copying code I found on Google searches of ref desk questions failed. Can someone point me to the page that lists all formatting possibilities for references? =- Mgm|^(talk) 09:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template talk:Reflist mentions most of them. I can't find a page summarizing all the reference templates generally (it's possible they've never been documented except on their own pages). BTW, {{reflist}} is quite possibly the template you're looking for. --ais523 10:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• I was looking for div styles, but these might work too. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

can you translate in tagalog version

• Translate what? - Mgm|^(talk) 10:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you looking for the Tagalog language Wikipedia? --24.20.69.240 10:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I subscribe to an article on Wikipedia? I.e. to get e-mail alerts when a change is made to a specific article... Thanks a lot. Michael (wiki username: Upior) Upior 12:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so; there was suggestion of implementing a feature like that, but people were worried it would be too popular and lead to Wikipedia being blacklisted for being a spammer (not to mention the load on the servers). You can place such an article on your watchlist, which provides a method of keeping track of articles you're interested on (but you would have to be viewing Wikipedia to be able to use it), and there are also RSS feeds available for changes to a particular article (click on the 'history' tab on the article, then on 'RSS' in the toolbox over the left of the screen). --ais523 12:26, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that many well-written articles in English are only "references" or "midgets" in Bulgarian. My question is whether Wikipedia.org agrees with translation of the articles from En.wikipedia.org to Bg.wikipedia.org and, in case this does not contradict with any policy, could you please guide me as to which articles to start translating from (probably there is some list of "perfect articles.") I would really be honored to contribute to the development of Bg.wikipedia.org and would be very proud to help enrich its pages, although at this stage I do not feel confident enough to offer anything different from my translation and edditing skills.
Please inform me in case I can help in this way.
Thank you in advance.
Vesi.kracheva 12:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
e-mail: (email removed to prevent spam)

Yes, translation by hand of an article is perfectly acceptable and encouraged, especially if the article is only a stub on the Bulgarian Wikipedia. You might want to translate one of the English Wikipedia's featured articles or good articles, or look to see whether all the vital articles have yet been translated (or new versions created). You may also want to look at interlanguage links, so you can fill in the 'in other languages' box in the articles. Note that you need to register your username separately in each language in which you edit, if you haven't already done so. --ais523 12:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

thanx a lot!
Vesi.kracheva 12:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• It's also a good idea to mention it's a translation from the English article when you post it to the Bulgarian Wikipedia. Don't forget to copy along the sources/references or find Bulgarian ones to back up the info included in the article. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's not just a good idea; it's probably required to satisfy the WP:GFDL. Titoxd^(?!?) 05:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added a category page for Development Studies and then realized there is already one for Development studies. I could not delete the first page so I gave a redirect command to the second. Now on the second one, it lists the first one as a Subcategory, i.e. Development Studies is shown as a subcat of Development studies. How do I remove the other category page or correct the subcat?Garryjacobs 12:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just tag the mistakenly created category for deletion as a mistakenly created page (you could use {{db-author}}; I have done so for you, using {{db-authora}}). --ais523 13:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

We've been buying it as 100 Atorvastatin (Generic Lipitor) Ta 20 mg. Our last shipment was noted as 30924/0 6 jul06. We are fast approaching the need for another shipment. Your help is appreciated. Timothy Shea

• You must be mistaking. We don't ship medical supplies. We're an encyclopedia. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• That is one of the strangest questions I have yet seen at the Help Desk... Adrian M. H. 15:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen some pages (which I now can't find!) that have lists of citations ranged in columns. What's the code for creating columns, please? --MichaelMaggs 14:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - I've just seen that exactly the same question was answered above. --MichaelMaggs 14:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When will there be a mobile version of Wikipaedia?132.246.2.25 14:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can try Wapedia, a mirror of Wikipedia. Titoxd^(?!?) 05:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I entered a new page for David Gomberg and it was flagged as being non-neutral and having a commercial bent, and no references. So, I've rewritten it, removed any website reference, and provided references for all info. How does one request a re-evaluation of the content? - Thanks!

The easiest way is to put the article up for peer review here Wikipedia:Peer review or if the article falls within the realm of a particularly WikiProject you could also request a review on that projects peer review for a complete list please see Category:WikiProject_peer_reviews .— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 15:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Be bold and remove any of the tags if you feel the concerns were fixed. Although looking at David Gomberg shows it still needs a lot of fixing to conform the WP:MOS, this includes adding proper footnotes and proper image captions. You should also neutralize the point of view of the article by removing terms like "well-known" and "world's largest" to avoid the article reading like an advertisment. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, but when I look at other entries, e.g. Carl Sagan, I see terms like "highly popular" and "world famous" with no neutrality question. While he has passed on, his estate continues to sell books, and the article could be construed as an advertisement in the same light. In the global kiting industry and community, there is no one more well-known worldwide than David Gomberg, and so I'm going to leave that in. I will continue to provide additional unbiased info and sourcing, but will now "boldly" remove the comments. Thanks for the advice!

The impression that he is well-known or famous should be recieved from reading the article itself, see characterizing opinions of people's work. I've made a lot of changes to the article recently, which include wikifying, point of view, and removal of unverifiable sources. You may review the changes here. Michaelas10 (Talk) 16:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how con I get a copy of age of sials and gae empears III?

Is there a text-only (or "fit for smaller screens") version of Wikipedia, for use from a cell phone browser or Blackberry device or handheld PC, for example?

What information there is about this is at Wikipedia:Browser notes#PDA & cell phone browsers (and the pages it references). -- Rick Block (talk) 02:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a problem and need help! I was editing a page and spent a very long time making changes. I then pressed the escape key and my changes went away! I did not even know that this was an undo hotkey. Please tell me there is a redo hotkey so that I can get my changes back. :)

Thanks.

-Ben

Hi, under normal circumstances you could hit ctrl-z if your using windows and it would undo what you just did, but since you have made other changes since then like adding a comment to this pagey you'll probably never going to see it again, sorry but at least you know for next time.— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 15:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TIP. If I'm making a lot changes or doing a major re-write, I often copy the current revision to an external editor (Notepad is sufficient) and work there. Though I would not necessarily advise this if you work on high-traffic articles that are subject to frequent edits. Works well for new pages, too. Adrian M. H. 15:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a preferred format for links to other sections of a given article? Is the "#" meant to be visible to warn the reader that this link is to a section within the article?

Personally I think the hash makes the link look unattractive; and one of the Help pages describes a piped link such as [[Another article#Section13|another article]] as "stylish", presumably because the hash isn't rendered.

Is this purely a matter of taste? --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 15:38, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't often find myself linking to anchor links, but I have always piped the link. Primarily because you're usually restricted by your chosen text, which wouldn't necessarily reflect the article name anyway. Adrian M. H. 15:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks: I think you've half answered my question. What I really want to know is how to link to another section of the article currently being edited. I've seen several cases of unpiped links (eg "This is discussed in the [[#Introduction]]"), so I wondered if this was preferred. The MoS doesn't seem to treat this case. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 18:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question re: owner's responsibility for repairs and maintainance 15:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)15:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)~

You should place your question on the miscellaneous section of the Reference Desk. As it says at the top, the Help Desk is for questions about using Wikipedia. Adrian M. H. 16:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created a wikipedia account just so i can make pages and Not edit articles. I wanna make my own page that people can read about my favorite celebs. It is just not working and I fell like a total loser and I can tottaly use some help.Hermione1234 16:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC) Menna[reply]

Well anyone can create a Userpage to display information about themselves but you may want to read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not to get an overview.

More specifically, I recommend perusing Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#What your user page is not. --Tkynerd 16:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

16:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)16:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)~~ The encyclopedia and textbooks are impressive

Now third, can we now have `wiki politics' where many people can propose ideas for political party platforms, new strategies and a `more open politics" and more open political dialog? It should of course be global (UN etc) politics and not only the politics of particular states.

(From Parker Rossman, my bio is on the web page of my 3 volume- now also being published in China -- electronic experimental text book, regularly update, on hnow to use the Internet to bring education to everyone in the world: <http://ecolecon.missouri.edu/globalresearch>.

12.216.237.168 16:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)Parker Rossman[reply]

Feel free to start your own wiki! See here for the software. -- Kesh 01:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After first looking through some lists of existing wikis for one that does what you want, e.g.:

• Wiki#Wiki_communities
• WikiIndex

WikiIndex lists several wikis relating to politics. --Teratornis 21:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what emergancy services can you obtain by dialing 999 82.29.68.34 16:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For a comprehensive list you should check out 999 (emergency telephone number).— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 16:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Britain, you ask for Fire, Police or Ambulance! Hugo999 13:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created a page an hour or two ago, and it only shows up when I'm logged in and checking my contributions. How long does it take a new page to show up on the site? Thanks!

MAJ

What's the article? They are added instantly but may not show up in a search if you don't capitalize the title the same way when you search. The search takes a few weeks to update the database. If you were signed in when you posted your question, we could have found the article by looking at your contributions. Dismas|^(talk) 17:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that - I'm new at this. Problem solved!ProMarketing 18:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although it needs some polish, the page is there at Collectors' Information Bureau (CIB). You may want to remove the external links to that all go to the same page so it doesn't appear to be advertising. You may also want to read WP:CORP which deals with the notability standards for companies to have articles here. Dismas|^(talk) 18:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestions. Thank you. ProMarketing 19:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I Register a Neutrality Dispute? 70.107.104.75 17:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One thing to try is to ask for a Request for comment (Article) - see WP:RFC - though there may be other places Cheers Lethaniol 17:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, how do I put a 'neutrality dispute' graphic/template on the article. What occurs after said item is placed at the beginning of the article? Nothing? Is the a process to address the neutrality dispute? 70.107.104.75 21:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once you put the template up, nothing happens by itself. However, it will hopefully encourage people to edit the article to be more neutral. When the template is placed on the article, you should also post to the Talk page explaining why you believe the article is not neutral, and what should be edited to make it more neutral. Or, be bold and edit it directly. If someone reverts your changes, then a discussion would need to take place to reach consensus.

As for placing the template, just put {{POV}} at the top of the page when you edit, and it will display the proper template.

If, and only if, no one can agree on how to change the article to be more neutral, you can file the Request for Comment. Before that, try to reach an understanding with the other editors on that article. -- Kesh 01:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recently created an account on wikipedia, I made it on the English wikipedia. The thing is I am Belgian and I noticed that I also have to make an account on the Dutch wikipedia seperatly. I wondered why the different wikipedia's aren't linked. (OR did I do something wrong?)

Bardac 17:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't do anything wrong. They aren't linked. For each Wikipedia you have to have a seperate account. I don't recall why though, maybe someone else can better answer that part of your question... Dismas|^(talk) 17:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, each wiki requires a seperate account, though there are plans to have a single login for all WIkipedia wiki have been discussed for quite a while. See meta:Help:Unified login.I don`t know when that will happen, though.Hope this helps.--24.20.69.240 06:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK thank you, this helped. Bardac 11:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A recent article edited by IP 219.73.8.223 has phrased a comment that could be considered as been life threatening. It may be a bit alarmist but it’s using Wikipedia in a manner that can be disconcerting to a living individual (Bob Cole) who may be concerned with this latest edit. What is Wikipedia’s policy and procedure to handle and report such comments and point-of-views? --HJKeats 18:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was blantant vandalism, which has already been reverted. Whenever you see vandalism such as that please try to revert it and warn the user that vandalized the page with the approprate warning. You can check out Wikipedia:Vandalism for more information.— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 18:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the help ticket please and thank you

I have to get going but I was wondering if someone could watch this vandal... They have two warnings in the last 10 minutes thus far... User talk:Robotchicken1886. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 18:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After more vandalism, I've reported user to AIV, but it's got an uncharacteristically long backlog at the moment. Xiner (talk, email) 19:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm anticipating being busy, and there are a few articles I watch that get vandalized regularly (but not extremely regularly) that are generally only reverted by me, as nobody else seems to be watching them. I don't want the vandalism to persist and build up over several days while I'm gone. Isn't there a procedure that I can follow in order to ask other editors to watch these articles? I'm pretty sure I saw a policy page about this somewhere, but I just can't find it. Thanks. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 19:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to list them here, and WP:IRC has some vandalism-specific channels you may get help from as well. Xiner (talk, email) 19:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm mainly thinking of Werecat (which frequently collects inappropriate fiction additions, especially ones that are written so badly they sound like gibberish), and two articles about the publishing industry: Self-publishing and Print on demand (both of which constantly collect linkspam and other advertisement-related misinformation, especially from self-published authors and vanity publishers). Lately, I'm usually the only one reverting vandalism on these pages, especially Werecat. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 20:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I have seen some images for which the reason for use in Wiki seems incorrect or questionable, what to do? Is there a place to report or some such, with my reasoning, to see if it is correct, or the image[s] are fine?? --Dumarest 19:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to check out Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Fair use#Policy, and Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images/Media to get a better understanding. — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 19:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• If you come across a questionable image, you can report it at WP:IFD. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Children's March

Birmingham, Alabama 1963

Google for The Childrens March
Google Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, Alabama
here are some resourses — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 21:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And Children's Crusade (civil rights). Garion96 (talk) 21:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to locate copyright information for an image shown on a Wikipedia page. Unfortunately, the page is only found by linking to it using the Quickseek search engine. I am not certain of the status of the Wikipedia page but it may be an older file that was cached by Quickseek. Is there any way to find out its status?

The image in question is of an American alligator. It appears on this page: http://alligatoridae.quickseek.com/

The above web page is identified as a Wikipedia page for alligatoridae. However, the page linked to by Quickseek is different from alligatoridae page that is accessed directly through Wikipedia here: Alligatoridae

Can Wikipedia provide any information on the page linked to by Quickseek?

Thank you very much. 160.36.47.16 21:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it this image Commons:Image:Alligator.jpg? If so, the copyright information is on that page. Garion96 (talk) 21:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cant get a userbox to appear on my page can somebody help me please.

I just added a userbox to your userpage so you may want to take a look at how I did it. Also take a look at your talk page I added a link to some suggestions for userboxes.— WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 21:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I received an email with the following info. This request did not come from me. I removed the new password, of course. Is the following legitimate, and what precautions should I take, other than changing my email and Wikipedia passwords to something new:

Someone from the IP address 65.30.70.101 requested that we send you a new login password for the English Wikipedia.

The new password for the user account "CoolGuy" is "XXXXXXXXXX". You can now log in to Wikipedia using that password.

If it was you who requested this new password, then you should log in to Wikipedia and change it to your desired password by clicking "My Preferences" at the top right of any page, or by visiting the following URL:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences

If someone else made this request, or if you have remembered your password and you no longer wish to change it, you may safely ignore this message. Your old/existing password will continue to work despite this new password being created for you.

~Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org

There's no reason you need to change your email or password. Someone has requested a new password for your account but it has only been sent to you. This could have been done by someone trying to annoy you or simply by someone who thought they had registered your username but couldn't log in. Your password/email isn't any less secure than it was (other than being sent in an email to you.) --Cherry blossom tree 22:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The generated password isn't permanent either. It probably expired by now, and doesn't affect your current password in any way or form. They're stored separately in the user table of the database. Titoxd^(?!?) 05:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

January 31

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hi,

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

Thanks,

69.159.108.202 04:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The template was deleted[7] as part of the "Userbox Migration" (see WP:UM). The category is fine. You can still add yourself to it by copying and pasting the category code as that page instructs. Did you also want the userbox to display? — coelacan talk — 07:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

• Anyone have an answer to the above?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

a {text-decoration:underline !important}

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SmithBlue 16:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hello,

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

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

where can i find your bibliography

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

74.135.137.115 18:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

I appreciate the help you gave. Thanks.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Interlaker 23:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

TomeBrown 23.24  331 Jan 2007

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

Yes that's working fine now - thanks.

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

February 1

What's the right way to propose deletion of a talk page (such as Talk:Kamxik) that has no associated article? I was about to use {{prod}}, but it explicitly says it's only for articles, user pages, and user talk pages. --Steve Summit (talk) 03:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{db-talk}}. So tagged. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 03:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone please explain to me Why are some links in red and when I clicked on them I found nothing?

If a link's in red (like this one), it means that there isn't an article at the destination of the link. If you think that the other end of the link would make an appropriate article, you can write it yourself (by clicking on the link) or request it; if you don't think it would make an appropriate article, you should turn the link back into ordinary text by editing the article it's in. --ais523 09:10, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

That was my question I didn't know how to add my name. Thank you for the explanation. Balikem

I want to help a friend learn pronunciation of Russian words. A lot of, but not all of, your articles that define Russian words have links to audio files. Is there a list of these articles? Can I download all the audio files at once?

Here are some links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babushka http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NKVD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KGB

They are listed at commons:Category:Russian pronunciation. --Cherry blossom tree 10:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is perfect, thank you!

pLEASE CAN YOU LET ME KNOW IF IT IS OK TO ENTER THE SITE AND LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT A DVD IS AVAILABLE AND NOT MENTION ACORN MEDIA UK LIMITED.

REGARDS

VIVIENNE GREENWELL —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vivienne greenwell (talk • contribs) 09:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You'll have to ask on the talk page of the article or discuss it with the editor(s) who initially removed the text. No-one on this page can make binding decisions across many articles. --Cherry blossom tree 10:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more specific when asking questions here, as we are not omnipotent super-beings, just volunteers :)

And also, in that same vein, please do not type in ALL CAPS, as it is very hard on the eyes. Thank you. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 17:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am having difficulty with Categories. I want to: Create a new: Category:Tram transport by country|New Zealand & Category:Tram transport by country|India

& Replace Category:Trams by country|Switzerland with new: Category:Tram transport by country|Switzerland

so that India, New Zealand and Switzerland all appear on the Tram Transport by Country page as a Subcategory [+] (with Switzerland as subcategory Tram transport not Trams)

But I gather I do not create new pages eg: Tram transport by country|Switzerland

How is it done please?? Hugo999 10:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've done most of what you wanted. The relevant help page is at Wikipedia:Categorization. In order to create the New Zealand category copy "[[Category:Tram transport in New Zealand]]" into the categories of the articles you would like to include. This will create a red link to Category:Tram transport in New Zealand with the other categories. Click on this to create that category and include "[[Category:Tram transport by country]]" and "[[Category:Rail transport in New Zealand]]" in the edit box to make it a subcategory. If you have trouble with this then just ask again. Hope this helps. --Cherry blossom tree 10:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that you will need to add something in the edit box when trying to save a new category, so if you don't have any sub-categories to add, just enter an HTML comment using <!-- (text is optional) -->. Adrian M. H. 15:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to you both - will look at help page again before trying! Hugo999 13:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I go about changing the name of this article from St. Patrick Street to St. Patrick's Street? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.43.67.204 (talk) 10:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You'll need to move the page. However, you must be logged in to be able to do this. Trebor 10:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict) To change the title of an article is called "moving" the article (see Help:Moving a page). Only registered users who have had an account for at least four days can do this (a tab labelled "move" will appear at the top of the article, next to "history"). I'll move this page for you. — QuantumEleven 10:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

please help me59.93.118.170 12:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• You want the reference desk. This page is for questions about Wikipedia. - 131.211.210.11 13:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"You have new messages." I know. I clicked on the link. I saw the messages. I even edited the page and got rid of the messages. But throughout it all I still have new messages, according to the orange box. I can't seem to get the system to trigger that I have read the messages and stop bugging me about it. Is there a way to manually reset that trigger? (Yes, I know I could register and log in, but I'd rather not at the moment, and that doesn't actually fix the problem.) Thank you! --24.147.86.187 13:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All I can think of is a caching problem. See Wikipedia:Bypass your cache for more details on how to fix this, but it's probably pressing control and reload/refresh. --Cherry blossom tree 16:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It could be a server cache issue too. Try purging it as well. Titoxd^(?!?) 05:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try editing your talk page to make it render a different version. If that doesn't work, you might want to bypass your cache (control-shift-R in FireFox and control-F5 in Internet Explorer). And if that will still not get it to work, you might want to try something drastic and delete your entire cache. And for that matter, your cookies. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 17:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...with no volitional change on my part. Up until that time any Wikipedia webpage I accessed rendered in a perfectly readable, SIMPLE, courier-like font; then one day--for no apparent reason--the default font was (and remains) a scrunchy BOLD font that's very difficult to read.

I've been able to correct this by changing "My preferences...Skin" to "Simple"--but now it's necessary for me to log in each time I access Wikipedia in order for this preference to be applied.

Q1: Has something changed on Wikipedia's end to alter the appearance of the default font in which the website renders?

Q2: Aren't my Wiki preferences saved in a cookie? (Apparently not.)

Q3: Is there ANY WAY for me to fix this so I don't have to log in every time I access the website, which I do multiple times a day?

Thanks!

Sam Lowry 13:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Steve[reply]

• Q1: No, nothing changed on Wikipedia. When I am not logged in the font is still the same as it was before December 2006 and the entire year for that matter. Q2: Yes, your prefs are saved in a cookie, but the cookie is only activated when you log in. Q3: You probably changed the preferred font on your browser by accident (or had some other program do it), check your browser options to see if something about the font changed. If you access Wikipedia multiple times a day, then why don't you log in for the entire time? - Mgm|^(talk) 13:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Another possible option is that the font file you were using got corrupted on your local computer. If you know the name of the font, try using it in a word processor file, to at least discard that possibility. Then, do as MacGyverMagic says and check your browser's settings. If nothing else works, purge the server's cache, then bypass your browser's cache. Titoxd^(?!?) 05:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes, if you're using a browser rigged a certain way, the font size will change when you press the COntrol key and scroll the mouse wheel. It's quite easy to acidentally do this, and sometimes the font size will change so radically that it may indeed seem like a different font. I hope that helps. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 17:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how did this get on my pc and how do i get rid of it

• You'll have to be more specific. What is it that got on your PC? If it's Wikipedia, you should simply surf away from our domain if you don't want to visit. We're an only encyclopedia and can probably give you an answer, but the 'this' you're talking about is probably not Wikipedia-related. - Mgm|^(talk) 18:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • You can ask questions about your computer (a virus, ads popping up, etc.) at Wikipedia:Reference desk. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 15:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It got on your PC because you downloaded it... .V. _[Talk|Email] 17:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been suggested that the article Norton Radstock should be split into 2 articles one on Midsomer Norton & the other on Radstock. This is not because of the length (as described at: Wikipedia:How to break up a page) but because they are separate settlements & the name Norton Radstock is not in common usage (apart from as an administrative council) - the separate terms are redirects to this page. I've put a note on the talk page but is there an appropriate notice/box similar to the merge one on Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages which could be added to the talk page for a period of time to let other know that the split is proposed & enabling them to comment?— Rod ^talk 13:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I am aware of, no. I think the talk page comment is probably the best approach. Adrian M. H. 15:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A new article Chris Bennetts was apparently written by the author about the author. Does Wikipedia have a policy about this? I thought so, but couldn't seem to find anything spelled out. SmartGuy 14:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly does. Wikipedia:Autobiography, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and best of all Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion! Adrian M. H. 15:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, I tagged it at it was gone literally in 30 seconds. Nice speedy work admins! SmartGuy 17:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have created graphs to submit to Wikipedia, providing empirical evidence to support one side of a current debate regarding a scientific fact.

The graphs utilize data downloaded from SI.com & LeTour.com but I do not need or intend to reproduce the actual data tables. However, 1. To give proper credit were it is due & 2. To establish the credibility and verifiability of my conclusions, I plan to cite the sources.

Both sources do reserve all rights.

Since I will not actually reproduce the sources' material do I still need to obtain their permissions because I am referencing it? Xofer2 15:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think you're okay there. Otherwise, it would be a lot harder to find and cite sources. I would think that their copyright claim would not apply to the facts themselves, but only to how they are presented. Might be wise to wait for a second opinion, though. Adrian M. H. 16:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian: Thanks. Following your advice.Xperp 17:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please (re)read Wikipedia's policy on No original research. If the argument that you are presenting is novel (unpublished), it can't be used. (It sounds like you're okay here, but just in case ... ) -- John Broughton (☎☎) 15:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found a page with this header:

This article or section is in need of attention from an expert on the subject.

I know an expert in the field who is interested in giving that attention. How does he go about becoming the expert for that page? RandomSF 16:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, he needs to just sign up for a login with Wikipedia and introduce himself on the Talk page. People can then see his credentials for themselves and he can provide his input on the facts of the article. -- Kesh 16:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. I'll pass this information along. Thanks. RandomSF 19:10, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And do keep in mind that no one "owns" an article, or is "the" expert for the article, per WP:OWN, as much as we want and appreciate experts volunteering to help out. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 15:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently writing an artical for a parent organization, the Becket Chimney Corners YMCA, but there already exists an artical for Camp Becket (part of the BCCYMCA). The artical for Becket is a hodgepodge of ideas with some other aspects of the larger organization tacked on. For this reason, I dont want to simply link it to my new artical. Is it "anti wiki" to just re write that Becket artical entirely under my new heading for the parent organization? Dont want to offend anyone. Thanks Vzmetzger 16:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would be best to write your article as its own page, then suggest on the Talk page for Camp Becket that it be merged into your new article. If no one objects (give it a week), then the information there can be merged into your new article and the Camp Becket article could be deleted by an admin. -- Kesh 16:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what are the rules in playind keno

This page is for questions about Wikipedia itself. You should probably look at Keno or ask on the Reference desk -- Kesh 16:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added a new article today, but need to change the capitalization in the title. I can't seem to find the place to do this on the edit page. Help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwinninger (talk • contribs)

You can change the name of the article by moving it to another page with the title you want, see WP:MOVE – PeaceNT 16:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you're referring to the article on Thought equity motion? I've gone ahead and changed the title for you (since your account needs to be at least four days old to be able to move/rename pages). And, may I suggest that you take a look at neutral point of view, the Wikipedia policy on how articles should be written? The article you wrote sounds bit too much like an advertisement... — QuantumEleven 09:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to have been randomly tagged in the category of WikiProject Sikhism, with no ability to edit/remove myself from said category. I did not request to join this project nor in any way did I sign up, and frankly, until I discovered the category on my own userpage this morning, I hadn't even known it existed. While I mean no offense to anyone, I am not Sikh and in fact know very little about Sikhism, and certainly have no intention of working on related pages. So would anyone be able to explain how on earth I ended up in this category? And could I please, for my sanity, be removed from it? I must admit I'm frustrated. HamatoKameko 16:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is weird. This edit seems to have done it, but I can't see how! Xiner (talk, email) 17:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, but like you say, I don't see how it could have possibly done it either. It makes no sense, and I'm a tad annoyed at being pegged as something I'm not. :/ HamatoKameko 17:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's this template Template:User Wikipedia which did the trick. Kind of a weird userbox btw. Garion96 (talk) 17:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed: [8] I assume the category got there by accident, in the first place, since templates are often created by "stealing the code" from other templates. // habj 17:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I should have figured that one out myself. I thought it had some weird purpose since it was a new template. Garion96 (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help, I very much appreciate it. HamatoKameko 17:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how do i get adoptedPjg12 17:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User, that should give you all the information you need. -- Natalya 17:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• If you're talking about adoption outside of Wikipedia, try asking at the reference desk. - Mgm|^(talk) 17:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had not even thought of that as an interpretation of the question - I think that means I spend to much time on Wikipedia, when someone asks about adoption and I think only of WP:ADOPT. Well done Mac and Good luck either way Pjg12. Cheers Lethaniol 17:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, i have a few major questions:

1. Do you belive pedophiles is members of WIKI?
2. If not, would ya allow it?
3. Has wiki ever had a child porn image posted?
4. Can i say anything in my wiki area?
5. Out of all USERS you have encounter who has been in the most trouble?
6. Has law enforcement ever been involve in an event caused by a users stupity?--SAIKANO!!! 18:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. Yes, they are.
2. Answered above.
3. If that has ever happened, it has been deleted immediately.
4. Unless it constitutes a personal attack, or is not related to Wikipedia, yes.
5. Difficult to say. Read through the WP:RfAR archives.
6. Not yet. It's a matter of time though. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To expand a bit more...

1. Yes. There are pedophiles everywhere, why wouldn't be any on Wikipedia?
2. I don't think Wikipedia has any policies against a specific group of users. Our policies are about the content they provide.
3. Maybe, since anyone can upload pictures to Wikipedia if they have an account (which is free). And if it happened, I'm sure it'd get deleted on sight. Also, unless I'm mistaken, any website under US law (like Wikipedia) has to report such users to authorities.
4. Please see Wikipedia:User page.

Can't say anything about the rest. — Kieff | Talk 20:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• about question 4: users know we can trace them. Posting child porn is the same as telling the police where you are. Even pedophiles are smarter than that. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for the userpage question, there's some latitude. Generally, if it's mostly about Wikipedia and editing Wikipedia, then it's acceptable. .V. _[Talk|Email] 17:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. I would suppose, but for the most part they don't actively engage in sexual solicitation because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social network.
2. I would allow it because Wikipedia is not a social network like Myspace, where that would matter. If you're a pedophile, and you're contributing useful information, great. If you tried to sexually solicit someone (pedophile or not), then that would earn you a block.
3. Again, we can only speculate. The answer is most likely yes, because of Wikpedia's loose policies regarding uploading images. However, it would be swiftly deleted from the database forever if it were ever to be uploaded, since many people monitor new images.
4. For the most part, yes. But if you use it to say offensive/illegal things (this user thinks so-and-so sucks) or solely as a webhosting service, it would be baleeted.
5. The most trouble from any one user is hard to say. WP:LTA has some of the big ones, but most vandalism comes from shared IPs and one-time vandals. It's not like everything's OK and there's one lone figure destroying everything.
6. I don't know whether law enforcement has been involved by a user's stupidity, but that depends on what yuor definition of "stupidity". Usually, destructive acts (blanking pages, vandalism, etc) aren't illegal per se. Death threats aren't usually serious and are usually dealt with by blocking the user who made death threats. Child porn would be deleted and reported to the FBI promptly, but it's not like Wikipedia has a record of things like that.

~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 18:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dev920/Sandbox#Quilt. Is it possible to give each square its own individual heading, and if so, how? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's possible; you can either use ====ordinary heading marks==== in each square (which is probably inappropriate for that quilt as they'd be too large), or to fake one using HTML:

Heading Cell1

Another heading Cell2

--ais523 18:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I added my name to one, and it kinda works, but how do I get it to stay at the top of the square, rather than joining the rest of the patch? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean that you want the text to start at the top of each cell, you just need to add valign=top to each cell. I have edited your sandbox to provide an example of how to arrange that. Adrian M. H. 20:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, is there a RSS feed available for Wikipedia? Something that would mention new articles published/modified?

Thanks in advance for your answer.

G.

RSS feeds are available: for all changes in Wikipedia (not particularly useful, because there are so many and so many of them are small), for newly created pages (many of which are quickly deleted again), for an article (using Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace, today's Featured Article, as an example), and for a watchlist (only available to people with an account, while they're logged in). I hope that helps. --ais523 18:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

It does help. Thanks! Guilhem

Im thinking about moving my images to wikipedia commons. But i dont understand the licenses. I want to license them for wikipedia use only and want to be notified if used elsewhere, not public domain but i am copyright owner of them? is there a license close to this? Fethroesforia 19:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is such a license on the Commons. There is a license called "Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike", which you can see here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ It means that anyone who ever uses your image will have to credit you as the author, but it does not demand that they inform you of use of your image. That is the closest license that I know of on the Commons: that is similar to what you're asking. Also, there are zero licenses on the Commons that are for Wikimedia use only. All free licenses, including the GFDL under which you currently license your text input on Wikipedia, mean that others can use your work according to the stipulations of the license. — coelacan talk — 20:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just set-up a page for VCU Adcenter but the capitalization of the header/title is wrong. How do i fix it?

It is currently: Vcu adcenter It should be: VCU Adcenter

Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stinkeyguy (talk • contribs) 19:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

On the line of tabs that says "edit this page" and "history" there is one that says "move". This is the one you use. Please follow the instructions at WP:MOVE. — coelacan talk — 20:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was browsing around and I happened to come across some replaceable fair use photographs uploaded by User:Sahafan. I marked one image as such, and I thought I'd go through the user's uploads and inform him of any other RFU images.

But looking at the user's uploads, there are entire teams worth of player photograph. Further complicating the matter, the user has uploaded a bunch of record covers, and I assume they fall under fair use. So what is the right course of action, short of going through all images one by one?

Thanks. Ytny 20:16, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• They might be fair use, if a fair use rationale is provided. See for example the images I posted to Louis R. Vitullo and Hoover (seal). - Mgm|^(talk) 20:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but the images in question are photographs of footballers who are still alive and active. They are replaceable no matter the rationale because, by the nature of their profession, it is not unreasonably difficult to create free photographs showing what they look like. What I wanted to know was whether there was a system of pointing the appropriate admin to the set of uploads rather than tagging each picture one by one (and they do appear to have been uploaded in good faith). --Ytny 21:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• You want someone who has access to WP:AWB. I think Quadell is reasonably well-versed in handling RFU images. - 131.211.210.14 08:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to specify complex search terms with an interwiki link to google:? For example, if I want to search Google for a word and a phrase:

robots "kinetic energy"

the obvious interwiki link is not the same as a URL link:

• google:robots "kinetic energy" yields:
• http://www.google.com/search?q=robots_%22kinetic_energy%22
  • Your search - robots_"kinetic_energy" - did not match any documents.

Searching with the search box in Google yields:

• http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=robots+%22kinetic+energy%22&btnG=Search
  • Results 1 - 10 of about 178,000 for robots "kinetic energy".

The problem appears to be that MediaWiki's interwiki link code converts spaces to underscores. I tried substituting other punctuation characters for the spaces (+, ., %20) and nothing I tried works right. Is there a clean way to specify a multi-word Google search with an interwiki link, or should I just use a URL link? --Teratornis 22:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't figure it out either. I suggest that for now, you use plainlinks (Help:Link#Arrow icon), like this: search google and also copypaste your problem to WP:VPT where someone might be more likely to be able to help. I've never seen this problem before and it looks like MediaWiki might need a new feature added, in which case the better venue might be WP:VPP. — coelacan talk — 22:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Replacing the space with ALT+0160 (no breaking space) works: google:robots "kinetic energy" — Kieff | Talk 00:07, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that adding google searches to the External links section of an article, or using them as support for a statement, is unacceptable (fails WP:RS and WP:EL.) Google searches are not stable over time; and having dozens or hundreds or thousands of results doesn't lead the reader to the best page for further information or proof of a fact. (Links to google searches on talk pages or XfDs, however, sometimes can be useful, on the other hand.) -- John Broughton (☎☎) 15:45, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I had in mind, to use Google searches on talk page discussions. Obviously a Google search does not constitute a suitable article reference for the reasons you mention. To revisit the original problem, it seems the google: "interwiki" link prefix is something of a misuse of the interwiki link feature. The authors of the interwiki link code must have assumed the linked-to site replaces spaces with underscores when converting page titles to URLs, as MediaWiki does. Interwiki links work like wiki links this way, and the assumption fails when linking to external sites that do not follow the spaces-to-underscores convention. Evidently there should be some other kind of inter-site link prefix mechanism when the linked-to site is not a MediaWiki wiki. Thanks to all who helped, especially for the no breaking space trick. I'll have to make a note of that one. I will also check on Meta to see if anyone discussed the problem there. --Teratornis 18:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• How do I get some thing to link directly to some ones user page?

Template:Pt-userpage

• All it needs is a user page link.
• --D.H. • (A)•(E)•(I)•(O)•(U)•(Y) 21:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You would use something like [[User:Coelacan|userpagelink]] which produces userpagelink but you need to be aware that linking directly from an article to a user page is forbidden, and these links will be removed. — coelacan talk — 22:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean an auto-link to someone's userpage, Special:Mypage and Special:Mytalk are what yuo're looking for. If those aren't enough, see Help:Magic words. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 18:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sir Greetings from India

... Our page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekhar_Gurera is showing You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|January 2007|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.
message again & again. Can you pl help us while specifying a few point at which we should concentrate to improve the article. ... We at our end tried our best to do it. Your tips according to our article will definately be helpful. We'll expect your early response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.94.96.230 (talk • contribs)

Thanks & Regards

There is a short message about it at Talk:Shekhar Gurera. At first look, the article doesn't really seem to flow too well, or may need to be written in slightly more fluent English. If you want detailed information as to why the tag was added, you can contact the user who added the tag, User:Cuchullain, though that editor did post the message on the talk page already. -- Natalya 22:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might also take a look at Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles. -- Natalya 22:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict) Hi. We are not all "sirs". Anyway, you have a lot of "peacock terms" in that article, for one thing. Read wp:peacock to see what I mean. You don't need to say "famous", and other things like that. Another specific problem is the list of awards. That should be converted to a paragraph, and smaller accomplishments should be left out. Also, as a general guide, read Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles which should help you in many ways. And keep in mind that it's not "your" article; as no one owns or controls a wikipedia article. Read WP:OURS to see what I'm talking about. — coelacan talk — 22:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its syntax, spelling and punctuation are all well below standard, which means that it requires copy-editing. Adrian M. H. 00:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the backlog for articles and media for speedy deletion is getting rather big. Any helpwill be greatly appreciated as i have many images needingspeedy deletion soon Fethroesforia 22:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The backlog has been noted on the Category:Candidates for speedy deletion page; and it will be handled. Don't worry. If you really feel that the backlog needs more immediate attention, you can make a note at WP:AN but I don't think this is necessary. Admins are already working on clearing it out. — coelacan talk — 22:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The user Akradecki has been abusing his right as a user to make false accusations about myself Signaleer There are a number of articles in which this user has caused a disruption and has attempted to slander my name.

References:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Petraeus&diff=104757171&oldid=104692525

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jack_Bethune#WASP_Edit_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:P-51_Mustang#Dark_BW_lead_pics

I strongly feel that this "game" that he is playing has gone on long enough and it needs immediate attention.

Furthermore, this user has made threats towards me:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Signaleer#Vandalism_warning

-Signaleer 23:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• See:WP:AN D.H. • (A)•(E)•(I)•(O)•(U)•(Y) 23:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're in the wrong place. First, this is already an open discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Signaleer -- disruptive editing and sockpuppetry, and second, warning you for vandalism for apparently disregarding consensus is not "threatening" you. Sorry. Take it to your already-open case on WP:ANI. — coelacan talk — 23:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For your information, this is a different matter--I suggest you read the case and listen to my plea.-Signaleer 23:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly doesn't look different to me, but if it is, I suggest you make use of Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, because this help desk is only for questions on how to use Wikipedia. — coelacan talk — 23:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This indeed not the place for debate, so I have commented on your talk page. Adrian M. H. 00:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I hack into the system and retrieve my password for an old acount? --D.H. • (TextMe)•(MyPage)•(MyWork)•(Escape) 23:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't make jokes about hacking into Wikipedia. And if you dind't give an email address for the old account, then you can't retrieve a password. Sorry. — coelacan talk — 00:01, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the official word: Wikipedia:Contact us/login problems. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 15:39, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It might be considered disruptive if you start hacking Wikipedia boxen. You're best off just following the instructions provided above. .V. _[Talk|Email] 17:18, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 2

I have been trying to update the photo of the big Trout at Adaminaby, nsw. I uploaded the new photo but can't seem to change the old photo.I have spent 2 days going back and forth from the help section but it is not easy!!!Help

See Help:Image. Specifically, you would change [[Image:Adaminaby_big_trout.jpg|thumb|left|130px|The Big Trout, Adaminaby's tribute to the fishing in Lake Eucumbene]] into [[Image:DSC02692.JPG|thumb|left|The Big Trout, Adaminaby's tribute to the fishing in Lake Eucumbene]] but you also need to add a license to the image. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#For image creators for information on this. If you don't add a license, or compatible copyright information, the image will be deleted. — coelacan talk — 00:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does the English Wikipedia make use of this div class? I noticed on Olympische_Sommerspiele_2008/Fu%C3%9Fball that the German Wikipedia uses this neat div class function to merge templates together. Now, I'm not sure if Wikipedia has this. It translates to BoxMerging so I tried that in EN but it didn't work. Could someone help, or suggest this function, because it looks very interesting and it would definitely be useful for the Olympics context. _└^Jared_┘^┌_talk^┐  00:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of any such function here. You can request it at WP:VPP. It's a good idea. — coelacan talk — 00:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• A translation would sound a lot like boxmelting... - 131.211.210.14 08:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:NavFrame describes some techniques using related CSS styles. The styles are defined in MediaWiki:Common.css and include a style named "Boxmerge". These were added by user:Karl Dickman. If you have questions about them, I'd suggest asking him or at Wikipedia talk:NavFrame. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see Wikipedia is free, do I suscribe to anything?

Nope. No need to subscribe. If you're thinking about creating an account here, see Wikipedia:Why create an account? — coelacan talk — 00:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to load the photo to a new page I created for the pilot but I am unsure of the photos status for use on Wikipedia. I have seen the photo on various websites, I am just unsure how to label the image to get it uploaded properly in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjb3000 (talk • contribs)

I have removed the photo from the new page. I just wondered how far I might have to pursue copywrite approval on the image, or whether it is considered public domain at this point due to its age.

See Wikipedia:Uploading images. And yes, being a 1916 photo the copyright, I believe, has expired. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 02:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• You could try reading public domain too. In the US material published before 1923 is in the public domain. Otherwise the creator (photographer) has to be dead for I think 70 years (double-check that). Mileage may vary per country. - 131.211.210.14 08:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would have been very helpful if you had mentioned what article (Otto Kissenberth) and what image (Image:Kissenberth.jpg) you were talking about. Now, this is Sanke postcard #595. It was published as a postcard by the Postkartenvertrieb Willi Sanke in Germany before 1920 (Sanke went out of business around then). That makes the image {{PD-US}}. Unfortunately, there is no mention of the photographer on that postcard, so we don't know whether he died more than 70 years ago. So we cannot upload this to the commons as PD-old.

I have uploaded a much better version of that image and tagged it appropriately. Lupo 08:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The entire process is so difficult to understand I just took off the image. I have no idea how to label the image in order to upload it. Perhaps its a simple process, but certainly not for a new user.

Thanks for uploading the new image.

Mjb3000

i read the frequently asked questions section and still don't find the steps for writing a new article---not in a 'sanbox,' an actual article. it feels like there is a deterrent maze in place even for asking help-related questions. please provide the list for writing a new article. thank you.

Wikipedia:Your first article would be what you are looking for. Cheers! Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 02:11, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way to request for an article to be written? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.98.222.10 (talk • contribs)

Yep! You can take a look at Wikipedia:Requested articles. -- Natalya 02:56, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to the two-hybrid screening article, you'll see I'm having trouble with the references (big red writing at the top). If you could check it and tell me what I'm doing wrong, I'd be grateful. Please don't touch anything else because it's in a delicate state of transition. --Seans Potato Business 04:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The ref system is horribly clumsy, heh. :p Not sure if I can properly explain what the problem was, so I went ahead and fixed it for you to see. In short, the various "cite x" templates weren't originally there, they were added later to make things easier. As far as the server's concerned, it'll just take whatever's between <ref> and </ref> and shove it down to the bottom of the page, template, text, or otherwise. The other common problem people have -- if you use a reference multiple times, a closing slash is key, as in <ref name="joung"/> (otherwise it looks for a closing ref tag, and gets veeeery confused). Hope that makes enough sense to be helpful. Luna Santin 04:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help and tip Luna. I've got another related question. In the same article, reference 3 provides a link to only the abstract (the full article requires the payment of a considerable sum) whereas the others link to full articles). How can I add comments to the references to the effect of 'free abstract only' and 'free full article'? --Seans Potato Business 05:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• If the article is available in a free full version, you don't need to add anything to the reference. If only the abstract is free, you can add a comment that is within the "ref" tags but outside of the template; that is, something like this, at the end of the reference/footnote that includes the journal cite:

... journal cite stuff inside template, blah, blah, ... }} (abstract is free; full-text version is not) </ref> 

I've put parentheses around "abstract ... ", but that's not required - it just sepearates the comment a bit from the cite. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 15:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} When you print out the Wikipedia page on Saudi Arabia, some racist/hateful text appears before the section marked "Cities." Who can I talk to about this? How can this be changed?? Please help! Rememberfeb 05:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like vandalism. I can't see it now, most likely not there anymore. See WP:REVERT for information on removing vandalism. Most vandalism is removed incredibly fast. — Deon555^talk_desk^{sign here!} 05:37, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia community, I already have an account here. I am considering participating in the Wikimedia Commons. The problem is that I don't own a camera, so I will not be able to load images directly to Commons. I can upload images that I modify using an image editor like Adobe Photoshop of course. I can do a lot of translation as I am a native speaker of the Arabic language. I can revert vandalism. So, what I am asking here is: Do you recommend that I should participate in Wikimedia Commons although that I don't own a camera or not? Thank you. --196.202.92.134 08:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The commons can use translators too, but it's not only for photographs and images. If you have a microphone you can record sounds and record articles for an Arabic version of Wikipedia:Spoken Wikipedia. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:24, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • As for I can upload images that I modify using an image editor like Adobe Photoshop of course - if the image is copyrighted, then modifying it with a software program doesn't change its copyright status. More to the point, I think Wikipedia needs people to do translations much more than it needs people to take and upload pictures - it would be great if you could help add (translate) articles (or information) from one language version of Wikipedia to another. You might look at Wikipedia:Translation, and you might want to register for an account (see Wikipedia:Why create an account?) and then list yourself as a translator, per Wikipedia:Babel. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 15:24, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia Community, there is a question here that I would like to ask: When a certain IP address edits Wikipedia and other users send messages to him/her on his talk page, after a period of time the page becomes old when the IP address stops editing Wikipedia. I have noticed that there is a special bot that blanks old IP addresses talk pages but unfortunately I don't remember his name now. What happens after this? My question is: Does administrators here delete old IP addresses talk pages or not? Thank you. --196.202.92.134 09:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia community, I have registered a nick name on the Wikipedia IRC channel but now I can't log in. The problem is that I don't know how to log in. Can anyone here tell me the method? What is exactly the command that I should write in order to log in? I am using ChatZilla 0.9.77 with Mozilla Firefox under Windows XP. Thank you. --196.202.92.134 09:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know what sever the channel runs on but the generally accepted syntax is "/msg nickserv identify *password*" or alterintively try "/msg nickerv@whateverserverthechannelison help" or "/msg nickserv help". I am only used to DALnet and Undernet and it has been a long time since I was on either of them, but try them. Viridae^Talk 11:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming you mean freenode.irc. The syntax on freenode.irc is the first option Veridiae provided: /msg nickserv identify password. If you still can't find it, try going into #freenode and asking for a staffer to help out. .V. _[Talk|Email] 17:21, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia community, I have known that it was suggested that the Main Page would be moved to Portal:Main Page. I have an account here. Where should I go to vote? Could anyone give me the link, please? Thank you.--196.202.92.134 11:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may find the discussion here. Michaelas10 (Talk) 11:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia community, I would like to report the usage of Wikipedia as a reference by the writer Ahmed Khaled Towfik as he stated in his latest book. I have the details. Where should I go to report this? Thank you. --196.202.92.134 11:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's probably here. Trebor 11:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia community, I suspect that a certain behavior shown in one of the foreign languages editions of Wikipedia violate the Neutral point of view policy but this policy is a global policy that should be followed in all editions of Wikipedia. Could anyone please give me the link in the meta to:

1. Ask whether this behavior really violates the neutral point of view policy or not?
2. Make an official complain?

Thank you. --196.202.92.134 11:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• On the left at WP:NPOV there's interwiki links to the policy page in a whole bunch of languages. It's probably the best idea to contact local administrators and inform them of the issue citing the local policy, whatever the language is. - 131.211.210.10 12:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The page at meta that explains the applicability of NPOV to all languages of Wikipedia is m:NPOV. --ais523 13:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

The best way to resolve POV issues is to be bold and remove the POV text. If it's reinstated, then cooly discuss the issue on the talk page. See if you can reach consensus amicably with all parties involved. If this absolutely cannot be done, you should get a third opinion by using an RfC (request for comment). .V. _[Talk|Email] 17:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have already addressed local administrators. They say that this kind of behavior is optional but (in my opinion) this behavior should not be permitted. --196.202.92.134 18:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean to say local administrators are saying neutral point of view is optional? --WikiSlasher 00:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. They are saying that this kind of behavior is optional. The meant Wikipedia is the Arabic Wikipedia. It contains 23 000 articles, 48 000 users and 14 administrators. I have addressed 2 administrators and left a note at the Village Pump of the Arabic Wikipedia. I understand that there are some differences between different editions of Wikipedia but not the Neutral Point of View Policy because without this policy Wikipedia would be transformed into a blog website for personal opinions. --196.202.92.134 04:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ,

can any one please explain me how to create an external link that opens up in new window.

many thanks in advance, krishna

If you want to make a link open in a new window then right click on it and select the 'open in new window' option. It is not possible to force a link in Wikipedia into a new window. We prefer to give readers the choice. --Cherry blossom tree 15:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I want to add an image to wikipedia, But I am unsuer what copyright information to put down. It is a box shot of the Video game Mad Maestro!. Could someone tell me what copyright information is most likely to be correct. Thanks in advance Mattyatty 15:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{Gamecover}}, probably. --Cherry blossom tree 16:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I was just wondering if there is a list or a member directory available for all users to view or see? -Lindsay

Not as such, but check out Category:Wikipedians and maybe even click on What links here on the left when you're at a userbox you like. Xiner (talk, email) 17:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is also special:listusers. It may not be terribly helpful, though, since it lists well over a million users. --Cherry blossom tree 17:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And the first 500 or so are sock/disruptive accounts... :/ .V. _[Talk|Email] 17:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the replay, this helps.

AnonMoos is deleting every edit i make, who is he with what authority to follow my work around from topic to topic. I edited a section calle Bible chronology because it was al WatchTower concept. It too was returned to its original despite the fact that there was no Gregorian calendar in 29 AD you wasted my time in correcting it. And AnonMoos sends dispicable evil remarks to me calling stuff nonsence and ocultistic. I have copies of it all and i will make a public scene sending mass copies of it to DearAbbey and Oprah and Britanica and alot of public to show what your site permits controllers to do in the name of FREE EDITING ENCYCLOPEDIA

like hell if you think my thousands of dollars of charity is going to any volunteer org that allows assholes erto do that to me in words or wastemy time erasing all i write or correct 69.76.46.169 17:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an idea. Rather than mouthing off anonymously here (which is not the place for such matters), why not make use of the proper channels for complaints and disputes. Though I would advise you to calm down a bit first and refrain from making overblown melodramatic threats. Keep your cool, argue your case in a mature and reasonable manner, and everyone else will be on your side if there is a genuine cause for complaint. Adrian M. H. 17:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The best place to start this discussion is the article's talk page. People who understand the subject will participate there, and hopefully you can come to a consensus on the best way to include factual and verifiable information. While AnonMoos did delete your edits, I think he/she/it was acting in good faith. Mishatx 05:30, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Wikipedia page I created was tagged by your editors as not having sources listed (Sarah Dash page). I did research and added sources, but I cannot figure out how to remove the paragraph that that says there are no sources (that box is not in an editable portion of the page). Please help!

Thanks, MikeMike 17:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Please make sure that you include a heading when you create a new question. I have added a line break to distinguish your comment from the one above it. I'll have a look at the article for you and report back here shortly. Adrian M. H. 17:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(and I changed your line break to a section header). You can remove this tag from an article by looking for a line saying {{unref}}, {{unreferenced}}, or the like; in this case, the tag is the first line of the article. Deleting that line will remove the tag. --ais523 17:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I have had a look at the page in question - Sarah Dash - and it is still not sourced. Adding sources at the bottom is simply not enough. Each notable statement needs to be cited. See WP:CITE. The tag will have to stay until the citations are in place, but can be removed easily - use the Edit this page tab. Let me know if you would like further advice with citations. Adrian M. H. 18:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're wrong; just because a page doesn't have inline references doesn't mean it isn't sourced (sources at the bottom are enough). There has been a tendency towards inline-references-for-every-statement for Featured Articles recently, but sources at the bottom of an article are still sources, and sufficient reason to remove {{unref}} in my opinion. (Sources, which are used to write the article, differ from external links, which merely have similar content). --ais523 18:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

The editors who have instructed me about sources must be wrong. I can only state what I have been told. In my own judgement, I would not describe that article as well-sourced if I were reading it as an outsider. Adrian M. H. 18:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is some dispute as to whether sources or external links are enough to remove the tag. Personally, given the number of articles with absolutely no sources of any kind, I'd support removing the tag so that the other articles stand out a bit more. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 02:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've found an image on Wikipedia that I would like to use and under the image it says that because it was taken by a government official, the image is "public domain". However, right under that it says that the image is still "subject to disclaimers". What are the disclaimers and how can I find that information?

Thank you,

Katie Kuyper personal info deleted

The disclaimers will be from whichever government department took the image. The image should have a source given, which may give you the website of the relevant department, and you should be able to find the disclamers on there. I am not a lawyer, but I suspect that the disclaimers will be to try to protect the department from getting into trouble due to any misuse their work might be subjected to rather than to limit use of the work. If you let us know which image it is, I may be able to give a more specific answer. --ais523 18:24, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I've uploaded an image (Image:SOPA logo.jpg), and I'm trying to decide what copyright tag to use.

Here is the story. It is the logo of the Socialist Party of Azania (SOPA) in South Africa. This past year I was in South Africa working with SOPA. The Party president, Lybon Mabasa, gave me an election poster and asked me to scan this logo and create a high-resolution digital image for use on stationery, literature, the (still as yet) unpublished website, and for other appropriate publicity purposes. He has also told me that any internet use that would enhance the public profile of the organization would be fine with him. He is the responsible, constitutional officer who has the right to make such decisions.

But the more I read about these copyright tags, the more confused I become. The logo is currently tagged (by the Wikipedia system) for deletion.

Could someone please advise me how to resolve this?

cargohook 18:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that 'enhancing the public profile' is too much of a condition to place on an image used as free use on Wikipedia; Wikipedia's image use conditions are very strict. Wikipedia's sister project Commons, a repository of images, has a good description of what counts as free use. So the picture would have to be fair use. Tag the article with {{fairusein|the name of the article you want to use it in}}, and accompany the picture with an explanation of where the picture is from, and how it meets each of the fair use criteria (this is known as a fair-use rationale), to explain how it meets those criteria. If you decide that it doesn't meet the criteria, you can request the image's deletion by tagging it with {{db-author}} instead. I hope that helps! --ais523 18:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Someone has entered innapropriate content under "Events" in the year 1825.

• I didn't find anything wrong under the section, can you please point out the content you found inappropriate? The latest vandalism reversion to the page was made on December 29, 2006. Michaelas10 (Talk) 19:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Be Bold and fix it if you think something is wrong. Ideally, if you make a good faith edit that is not right, we won't bite. Mishatx 05:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need an admin on there. I have someimages irequire speedy deleting but they take ages for admins to speedy delete. any admins here who are admins there I would very much appreciate help. Thanks Fethroesforia 19:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:AN. 19:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

function addlilink(node, href, text, id, tooltip, accesskey) {
        // the code below is mostly copied from addPortletLink()

        var link = document.createElement( "a" );
        link.appendChild( document.createTextNode( text ) );
        link.href = href;

        var item = document.createElement( "li" );
        item.appendChild( link );
        if ( id ) item.id = id;

        if ( accesskey ) {
                link.setAttribute( "accesskey", accesskey );
                tooltip += " ["+accesskey+"]";
        }
        if ( tooltip ) {
                link.setAttribute( "title", tooltip );
        }
        updateTooltipAccessKeys( new Array( link ) );

        node.appendChild( item );

        return item;
}

// 

if(location.href.indexOf('User:TomasBat') != -1 && location.href.indexOf('action=edit') != -1 && location.href.indexOf('blank=1') != -1) {
        addOnloadHook(function() {
                var box = document.getElementById('wpTextbox1');
                var txt = box.value;
                var newtext = ''
                box.value = newtext;
                document.getElementById('wpSummary').value = 'blanking my sandbox';
                document.getElementById('wpMinoredit').checked = true;
                document.getElementById('wpWatchthis').checked = true;
                document.getElementById('wpSave').click();
        });
}

if(location.href.indexOf('User:TomasBat') != -1 ) {
        addOnloadHook(function() {
                var tbs = document.getElementById('p-cactions').getElementsByTagName('ul')[0];
                var editpage = "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:" + wgTitle + "&action=edit&blank=1"
                addlilink(tbs, editpage, "Blank", 'ca-blank', 'This will automatically blank this userpage');
        });
}

If you don't get an answer here, I suggest posting this question again to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User scripts and/or Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). -- John Broughton (☎☎) 02:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems safe to me. The main thing that would be a red flag is automatically loading another .js or .html file. This code adds some links only when editing a particular user page. CMummert · talk 18:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am only a reader, not an editor. I noticed what I believe to be vandalism and wish to report it. In the article on Nephthys, at the end of the second paragraph is the phrase "I like pootang". It is a sad day when vandals can't even spell dirty words correctly.

Please route this to the appropriate editor.

Thanks - Phillip

I'll take a look in a moment. You can also make use of two messageboards: admin intervention against vandalism, and the more general admin noticeboard. Cheers! Luna Santin 21:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has already been removed.See WP:REVERT for how you can remove vandalism in the future.Cheers!24.20.69.240 21:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do you cancel an account? I want my account removed from the data base.

Thank you!

User name: Overflowingministries

Well on thing is you can't "remove all the data from the database", but also you only have two edits. IF you really want your "userpage" to be deleted just place {{db-userreq}} and an admin will take care of the deletion. ~ Arjun 22:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could also read the information here [9]

Recently, someone edited Raul Julia-Levy's article by including unfounded information about him. Attribution was missing from the additions and the information added was filled with lies. As his publicist, I am asking how the article can be blocked from editing, where the only individuals allowed to edit the article ones authorized by us. We look forward to donating to wikipedia so the cite can improve. I look forward to your prompt response. L.H. Vaughnes ~~otooledupree 02February 2007

Of course any unsourced negative info about people can be promptly removed no questions asked. But I'm afraid we can't let you "take control" of the article on that way. However if you put a request at WP:RFPP for it to be semi-protected and it succeeds then anonymous and newly-registered users (<4 days) will not be able to edit it. --WikiSlasher 00:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 3

I've been really into correcting pages lately and found out that I could mark pages for speedy deletion (the ones that need it that is) and I'm trying to work my way up to be an admin sometime in the future. Not too long ago I received a message that says "Please do not add speedy deletion tags to articles that clearly do not warrant them. Doing so can be considered vandalism." and then the person edited it and said "Oops, my bad, the page was vandalized previously. Do try to check the history before adding such tags though.". I marked the page with db-nonsense because it was. When I went to the page, it had no tag to be deleted. I didn't check history because there wasn't one at the top. Did I actually do something wrong? It's making me paranoid.

There should be a history tab. Did you ask the person who messaged you? Xiner (talk, email) 01:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There always is a history tab, even for a fully protected article, and even if only one person has ever edited a page.

As I hope is clear, you should never put a db-nonsense or other speedy delete tag on a page without checking the history, because what you're looking at might be a vandalized page. (Consider: a vandal goes to George Washington and replaces the entire article with "GO GEORGE!!!" and fifteen seconds later you put a speedy delete on it because at that point it's nonsense - do you see the problem with that?)

If you want to specify the article name here, someone else would probably take a look. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 01:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Usually articles that truly are complete nonsense are marked for speedy deletion within a few minutes of their creation by anti-vandal users and user that check Special:NewPages, so you usually don't have to worry about established articles being nonsense. Mr.Z-mantalk 18:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i am a journalist and want to add a page about me as i think i need it, i need people to know about me, that what i am, how i came in this field, what are the resons etc etc, can i create a page for me, please?

Not a good idea. Probably we will delete this article as a violation of our WP:COI policy. I would suggest instead that you make a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles and if someone thinks you pass our WP:Notability requirements, they will make an article about you. — coelacan talk — 04:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please also read Wikipedia:Autobiography.--24.20.69.240 04:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have multiple accounts on wikipedia. I was wondering whether it is possible to move my contributions into one account so that I can merge all my accounts.

Sorry, no. Wikipedia:Changing usernames allows you to chane a username, but only to an account that has not been created yet (not to merge accounts that have edits). You can, of course, note your other accounts on each of your userpages.--24.20.69.240 04:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a Wikipedian with a particular interest in the "Devil May Cry" video game series. While researching online for more information about an upcoming release, I found text from the Devil May Cry 4 article reproduced (in edited form) on PSU.com (http://www.psu.com/node/7343). I can assure you that the content on the Wikipedia page is the original as much of what PSU.com is using has been on the Wikipedia page for weeks or months, and I wrote some of it myself. I've looked for guidelines on handling a situation like this, but haven't found anything that tells a Wikipedian what to do when this sort of thing is noticed. I defer to your judgment. --Boradis 02:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The license Wikipedia uses grants free access to our content in the same sense as free software is licensed freely. This principle is known as copyleft. That is to say, Wikipedia content can be copied, modified, and redistributed so long as the new version grants the same freedoms to others and acknowledges the authors of the Wikipedia article used (a direct link back to the article satisfies our author credit requirement). Wikipedia articles therefore will remain free forever and can be used by anybody subject to certain restrictions, most of which serve to ensure that freedom. For more information please see:Wikipedia:Copyrights. Cheers — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 03:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More specifically, check out WP:MIRROR and WP:MIRROR#Non-compliance_process. --Wooty Woot? contribs 04:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I didn't mention this (thought I had), but they DO NOT acknowledge the Wikipedia author credit. If you check the link I supplied, you'll see that's the case. --Boradis 08:09, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, actually I did mention their lack of attribution, meaning they do not satisfy our author credit requiement, in the header for this section. --Boradis 08:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have been adding infoboxes to articles that need them. I came across a certain article and the infobox is not showing up properly. The article is Side 2 Side. What did I do wrong?

I fixed it for you. There were a couple of issues. One, you didn't close the second set of braces. Two, your nowiki code wasn't around the # mark. Three, there were two carriage returns in the chart section that didn't need to be there, and four, you didn't start the braces for the second template in the correct place. Hope that helps. — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 03:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, that's four issues, not a "couple" ;) Mishatx 05:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's good to undersell, and it worked for Douglas Adams who wrote a "trilogy" of five books. But we digress. --Teratornis 08:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sorry to ask you this question, but I have not been able to find instructions on naming a page/article the first time it is created.

I have used Intellipedia to create a page in my "user" space, but am trying to ensure that it is named so that it appears in the wikipedia space, not just my user space.

Please send me the instructions for naming a page the correct way.

Thanks, Jason

Help:Starting a new page is a good start. I like to just put in my intended title in the search box, then choose the link to add the page. Mishatx 05:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to be careful with your capitalisation. Otherwise, the page will need to be moved. Adrian M. H. 13:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can I get my text to appear as a list? I don't necessarily want to use bullets but I do want a list format. I typed my list this way but after I saved it, the items scrolled together in paragraph form. (See list of churches in my article, Robersonville,NC)

RobersonvilleHistoryBuff 07:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are several ways to do it. You could either create a table or if you simply want the names to appear in separate lines, use </br> at the end of the name — Lost^(talk) 07:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you say you don't "necessarily" want to use bullets - are they an option for you at all? For they'd probably be the easiest solution... Just put an asterisk ( * ) at the front of the line, then (as typed)

* Robersonville, North Carolina

* Churches in Robersonville, North Carolina

* etc.

... appears as...

• Robersonville, North Carolina
• Churches in Robersonville, North Carolina
• etc.

Otherwise, the </br> (or <br>) option seems most user friendly... --Ibn Battuta 07:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Break tags should really be self closed. <br/> That meets with Wikipedia's use of XHTML 1.0. Adrian M. H. 13:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add my two cents: a table could be created with

Title
Row 1
Row 2
Row 3

the code for this is

{|class="wikitable"
! Title
|-
| Row 1
|-
| Row 2
|-
| Row 3
|}

See Help:Table for more info. Bulleted lists are recommended (but not required); see Wikipedia:List guideline#List styles for more information. Finally, are you sure that you want a list? Prose might be better; see Wikipedia:Embedded list. Happy editing! Gracenotes^T § 07:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can generate a list with no bullets with the HTML tag: <ol style="list-style-type:none">. See: Help:HTML in wikitext#Permitted HTML and Ordered list. Let's try an ugly example right here:

1. a first item
2. a second item
3. Wow, it works

Whether you should "go bulletless" would depend on the situation, I suppose, and of course anyone else can come along later and change your style choice. So I wouldn't expend great effort tweaking the style of a page, unless it's your user page, which by convention other people should not edit. Or maybe if you're part of a WikiProject and a significant group of editors have agreed on a standard style for some pages. --Teratornis 08:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering if the Image:Bank.JPG (currently used on Bank of America Plaza (Atlanta)) has sufficient copyright information. The user who uploaded it doesn't seem to be very active anymore (1 contribution in the year of 2006): I wrote onto his page, but I'm afraid I won't get a response any time soon. It's also made me somewhat suspicious to see that other images that the user uploaded have already been deleted for copyright reasons. (see here)... What do you recommend? What's the regular procedure for images? --Ibn Battuta 07:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does need to state the creator to have full copyright information. You can ask for specialist input at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. --Cherry blossom tree 13:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why can I not look for words in Wikipedia using wild cards "?" and "*" ?

Our search engine isn't that fancy. You can search Wikipedia in Google by including 'site:en.wikipedia.org' in your search. --Cherry blossom tree 13:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More details at Help:Searching. --Teratornis 07:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add a video to a page? i try Media:Example but, when i try to upload it doesn't work. Is there a certain extention that i have to have to upload it? Adammw 09:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia uses Ogg Theora, because it is a free format. See Wikipedia:Media for help on creating such files. --Cherry blossom tree 13:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I finally got my image uploaded to Socialist Party of Azania with proper copyright tags. But now I'm trying to place it as a thumbnail to float on the right of the text. I followed the instructions in the Picture tutorial, and used the tag Image:SOPA_logo.png|thumb|right|Logo of the Socialist Party of Azania, but to no avail. The image is framed with the caption, but it keeps appearing at the bottom right of the page, instead of inline with the top of the text. Please help.

I have fixed the image position for you. The image appeared at the bottom right since it was placed after {{Politics of South Africa}} template. Moving the image code above the template code fixed the position of the image. Cheers, S.D. ¿п? § 13:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A clear case of vandalism. The [Brian Krause] article where user: "NeilEvans" is harrasing user: "TrueFuzz" by reverting, reporting vandalism. I Studied the page history and found that "NeilEvans" first delted 90% of the page, it was restored and now he is delteing small parts. //Thanks

Actually, to me, Neil Evans's edits seems to be in good faith. Instead of reverting each other, please use Neil's talk page or the article's talk page to discuss his edits. S.D. ¿п? § 13:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An admin is needed, I could dowith somepictures of mine currently incorrectly named on speedy delete on wikimedia commons. They are now orphaned and have a replacement. Many thanks Fethroesforia 12:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See commons:Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. You need to add the {{badname|good file name}} template to the image description pages. --Cherry blossom tree 13:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Theres 62 files in that category now..lol..some have been there days!Fethroesforia 13:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I goofed - did not carefully proofread. Just started an item on Wilburforce Colony, which is a misspelling, and should be deleted. --Dumarest 12:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've redirected it to the correct spelling for you. --Cherry blossom tree 13:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference, in case that happens to you again or you spot a similarly affected article, you just need to move it via the Move tab. See Requested moves and WP:MOVE for policy advice. Adrian M. H. 13:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shortly after I posted this question, I realized the 'Move' option would be the solution. --Dumarest 15:48, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need to upload an image that i have onto a page, how do i go about it?

See Wikipedia:Uploading images. --Cherry blossom tree 13:39, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might find this guide helpful too. -- Anas ^Talk? 14:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

if i use my 6 month trial aol disk and my ip splits from the other 2 computers mine is networked with will i receve seprate emails to my computer and only my computer and not to the other 2 that are networked with mine?--Crocadog 14:09, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IP addresses have nothing to do with emails. For more info, please consult the reference desk. Xiner (talk, email) 15:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am about to create an article on an album that will be released on May 1, but already has a tracklist and things like that. Where can I find the template to put on the top that signifies it is unreleased? Thanks! NIRVANA2764 15:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add {{future album}} to the top. GhostPirate 17:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do you get on users list? 70.110.185.71 16:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have to create a user account. Click on the thing at the top right that says "Sign in/create account" and follow the instructions there. GhostPirate 17:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Contents/Getting started for more details about creating an account. --Teratornis 07:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can speedy tags be removed by other editors who disagree with them? Wendy's has been tagged for speedy deletion, and it seems to be a bad faith or vandalism nom. Anchoress 16:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has already taken it off. Usually speedy delete tags are only put on new articles, so if you see an obviously misapplied tag on an established article, you probably can remove it, as it was most likely added by someone who didn't know what they were doing. GhostPirate 17:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

I just registered today and new to actively doing things on Wiki although I have been here for months.

Lately I see more and more cases where in the printable versions of topics that the lines of sentences start to overlap.

How do I start going about to correct this?

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks

PS: How do I leave a note saying that there was a satisfactory response to my question? Twilght's End 16:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)Twilight's End[reply]

Hi Twilght's End. Welcome to Wikipedia! Can you give an example article where the lines of sentences overlap? It would help us to understand the problem you are referring to. As for your other question, you can post a reply by editing this page. This is similar to editing an actual article. You can do this by clicking on "edit this page" at the top of the page (or here). Alternatively, click on "Edit" to the right-hand side of a specific section header on a page, if you only want to edit a specific section of an article or talk page. The latter is probably best, as you will only see and be able to edit the text pertaining to that section—in this case, your own question on this help page and any responses. See the tutorial for a general introduction to editing on Wikipedia. Also, please remember to sign your posts by typing four tildes, like so: ~~~~. Hope this helps! —Xhantar^Talk 07:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying back. A key example is the Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations article. The printable version exhibits this problem. Not every sentence overlaps but overlapping is present enough to be noticeable. In the sentences that overlap, (let's describe them consecutively as sentence 1 and sentence 2)sentence 1 runs over sentence 2 in the default "view" of the printable version. However when you highlight the two sentences, I think sentence 2 then runs over sentence 1. I will go back and check on this. Twilght's End 10:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see your user talk page for a response. —Xhantar^Talk 19:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, On some tennis players pages on Wikipidea, such as Serena Williams, there is an information box on the right side of the page, detailing residence, singles titles, doubles titles, ranking, etc. I was wondering how you put one of those boxes on a tennis players' page that doesnt already have one? Also, how do you update someones box? I couldn't find an "edit" button to edit the information. Thanks

Tennisacejt88 17:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)Josh[reply]

I find the easiest thing is to copy and paste from another tennis player's page. I know there will be a template somewhere for it, but this is far easier, unless you know where the template actually is. Asics talk 17:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In more detail, if you edit Serena Williams, there's a section at the top starting with "{{Infobox Tennis player" and ending with "}}" that generates the information box (it does this by "invoking" template:Infobox Tennis player). All of the data presented in the information box is here. To add a box like this to another player's page, one way is to copy these lines from Serena's article and paste them into the other player's page (changing the data as appropriate). -- Rick Block (talk) 18:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are editing tennis articles, see (and perhaps join) WikiProject Tennis. If you are unfamiliar with WikiProjects, see WP:PROJGUIDE. For more information on infoboxes, see Help:Infobox. --Teratornis 07:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is Simone Clarke notable enoug to be on wikipedia? I think she is not but i would like some disintrested opinions first before i decide what to do. The reasons i think she is not notable is because she is purly an individual who joined a political party that was reported for a couple of days in the newspaper which exposed her (on dubious legality) and the pressure group UAF. I think The BBC may have done one small bit on her in an article on some protests as well but that is it. I also do not think that wikipedia should have article on private individuals membership of a political party (unless its on polaticians who are public members of a political party)--Lucy-marie 09:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can nominate it for deletion and see what happens but I expect given the sources (especially her giving an interview to the Mail) that it would be kept. --Cherry blossom tree 13:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Principle ballerina dancers in an internationally known ballet are notable, but the article probably needs some other material to off-set the controversy/investigation story. - 87.209.70.231 15:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can guarntee If i were to nominate for dleetion certian people would get nasty and spiteful. So what is the opinion here first before i do anything.--Lucy-marie 16:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing I would like a disintersted persons views on the section concerning her on the British National Party page [10].--Lucy-marie 16:46, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have never editted a comment on wikipedia before. I made an addition to "erotic art" by adding my domain as an example? It is relevant. If this is a problem, please remove my comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.103.111.244 (talk • contribs)

Thank you for your contribution! Unfortunately, your additions were reverted by Evb-wiki because it was seen as a form of spam and, as such, should not be included. If, however, you don't agree with this, feel free to discuss the issue on the article's talk page. Welcome to Wikipedia! —Xhantar^Talk 06:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, now I'm having a similar problem to the one I had before. I just uploaded a new image to Socialist Party of Azania, an election poster. So now it has two images, the poster and the party logo. The poster is in the correct position now, but I want the logo to float on the right side of the text, inline with the bottom of the article. But the Politics of South Africa chart is interfering with this. Please help. —cargohook 17:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've kind of solved this problem myself, by making an infobox. But now I'm not pleased with the way the new infobox and the Politics of South Africa infobox stack on each other.... Any advice would certainly still be appreciated. —cargohook 21:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing you mean you are not pleased with the height of {{Politics of South Africa}}, which makes it extend past the bottom of the article text due to the height of your infobox above it. In a short article you may be better off with a navigation footer template (short and wide) instead of a navigation infobox-style template (tall and narrow). See if you can find, or create if none already exists, a navigation footer template similar to {{Politics of South Africa}}. Start looking here: WP:NAV. I don't see that any WikiProject has tagged your article; if there was a WikiProject for South Africa, they might have alternative navigation templates suitable for articles of different sizes. --Teratornis 08:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my User Page has done something that I don't understand... The first and second section have a big gap between them, is there any way of removing this? So that they all flow neatly with the userboxes still on the right? (They can be moved elsewhere if necessary). Asics talk 17:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the gap you mention, but I do see some overlap between your columns in User:Asics#Pages I Have Created and your userboxes. The overlap goes away when I widen my browser to 1200 pixels. I doubt this helps. --Teratornis 08:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so I know how to upload images and all that stuff, but I don't know what to do after that. People explain, and i still don't get it.

I WANT TO ADD MY UPLOADED PICTURE TO AN ARTICLE

Thank you for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XAvengedSevenfoldX (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia:Images or simply add [[Image name.foo|(alignment right left or center)|thumb|frame|(image caption here)]]. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 19:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What were the first edits, pages, and accounts ever made on Wikipedia? ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 19:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for articles, the first page was UuU; see Wikipedia:Wikipedia's oldest articles for others. Dar-Ape 19:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cant find children department preschool — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.203.80.14 (talk • contribs)

Are you referring to a specific article that you are unable to find? Please try to be more specific. —Xhantar^Talk 06:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I submitted (with the authors permission) an article on a writer named Thomas Clough. It posted fine, but I neglected to capitalize his last name. I asked how to fix this and I don't think I got a response. Now the article is completely gone.

Please advise.

Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by Texmike (talk • contribs)

This article was deleted because of "A7" which refers to a non-notable biography (see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, scroll down to CSD A7}. Make sure a writer is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article before creating it. Also, if you look at your talk page, you will see that the user who deleted the article, NawlinWiki, left you a message pertaining to this. In regards to capitalization, you may move an article to a new name after creating it. Dar-Ape 19:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to put the current time in a userbox? - Patricknoddy (talk · contribs) 2:57pm, February 3, 2007

Yes. See the examples at meta:ParserFunctions Or below: —Dgies^t c 20:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

June 6 2024, 4:34:20am

I have forgotten my user name. When I created my account I gave my email address. But I have forgotten what my user name is. Is there any way to retrieve it? Thanks!

Ekk. I don't think so, however do you remember any articles you created, or at least tell us some articles that you edited. However if you only have about 2 or 3 edits, you may just want to "create a new account". ~ Arjun 21:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Presumably you didnt make many edits using that username, in which case I advise you get a new username and edit using that. In case you did make substantial edits, look at the history of the article edited, and you should remember your username — Lost^(talk) 21:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know how to add pictures to the pages. I have lots for Philmont and would like to add them

You just use [[Image:(Image title)]] Remember to put .jpg or .gif or whatever suffix applies Crazy 29 20:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can find the name of possible images to include in the article at Wikimedia Commons, and then add them as Crazy 29 described. If you'd like to include your own images, you will need to upload them first, but please be aware of copyright restrictions; see the image use policy. —Xhantar^Talk 06:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason, I cannot login to my Wikipedia account. When I type in my username and password, it directs me to a page that says "Login Successful", but if I try to click on another link, it automatically logs me out. I've tried everything in the VFAQ, but none of it seems to work. (I am using Internet Explorer v7.0, and windows XP w/ service pack 2) Help!

Did you try checking the "remember me" button? ~ Arjun 21:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I tried the remember me button, the cookie settings, security settings, and even requesting a new password. (Forgive me if I'm not replying to this correctly)

See below for the secure login link. Hope that works! -- Kesh 23:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! The only problem is that every time I change the page, it comes up with a message that says "there are secure and nonsecure items on this page". This is annoying, so if anyone knows how to turn this off, it would be nice. If not, thanks anyway!

I keep getting logged out when my session is inactive for some time (about 30 min or so). Is there a way to stop this or some place where I can specify the time after which I can be logged out. -Myth (Talk) 22:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tick the "remember me" box when you log in. It logs out when cache is cleared or when you select log out. Asics talk 22:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any other way ? I use multiple terminals (at different times) and usually do not ask the browser to remember my login info. btw I do not log out (from Wikipedia) before I am told to sign in again. I do not even close the Wikipedia tab. I am just browsing some other webpages in other tabs. -Myth (Talk) 23:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you using a satellite (or other poor-latency) connection? If so, try the secure login. It's slower, but more stable. -- Kesh 23:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. I have a broadband connection. but I will give that a try and see if it makes any difference. Thank you. -Myth (Talk) 23:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried the secure login, but that also doesn't work. I still get logged out after a time. -Myth (Talk) 03:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a bug, it's a feature. Logins expire after about 30 minutes on purpose. --cesarb 07:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know that and my question is whether there is a way to make my login session be longer ? I am careful about logging out but at time I am browsing other websites or doing something else and since I am inactive I get logged out. This happens quite often and I find it troublesome. There should be an option in the my preferences page to set the inactive time before a user gets logged out. Just wanted to make sure that there is no other way to do this. -Myth (Talk) 07:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my indoor bamboo plant is dieing (i luv flamin ot spearmints) can anyone elp 86.139.1.122 22:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what your question is, but wouldn't this be a question for the Reference Desk?

Is there an external program that assists in adding infoboxes to articles with out an infobox.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 22:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I have ever seen, and I would imagine that would be quite difficult since each articles infobox would be different from the next.Cheers — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 22:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I clicked on "Create account" and waited. The page was taking too long to open, so I clicked again. And again. Then I just decided to wait. So I waited.. and waited.....and waited. The progress bar wasn't even halfway there, so I left the room, came back, opened other pages, surfed for 10 minutes, then checked again, and the download was only halfway there. I waited 10 more minutes, for a total of 25 minutes of waiting, then gave up.

If it doesn't work after you restart your computer, try WP:CACHE. Xiner (talk, email) 00:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If that does not work, we can e-mail you an account if you give us an e-mail address. However, it is possible that you will not be able to log in with that account, any more then you could create it. If you would like me to try this, send an e-mail to Prodego [at] gmail.com with the following information:

1. The name of the account you want created (make sure it doesn't already exist)
2. The email address you want your password sent to, if it is different then the one that you sent me the message from. I will not see the password, and you will be able to change it later. Prodego ^talk 02:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Did this problem occur with any other page?
• Did you add an email address to the account? (No need to reveal it, just asking, as it can help solve the problem)
• Did the creation of the account get through? (Try looking at Special:Listusers)
  • If it did get through, can you log in? (Go to Special:Userlogin and enter the name of the account, and the password)
  • If it doesn't let you log in, and you created a password, does it send you a reminder password? (You can click on "I forgot my password" on the login form, and it will send you a computer-generated password. Do this only once, though, because if you do so several times, only the newest generated password works)

Tell us how it goes. Titoxd^(?!?) 05:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 4

Why does the table in Chess Engines rating lists show down at the bottom of the article instead of where it is intended to go? It is that way in both IE and Firefox. How can it be told to go where we want it to go? Bubba73 (talk), 01:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. The problem was that you have |-} at the bottom of the table instead of |} which probably caused it to do something weird. _└^Jared_┘^┌_talk^┐  01:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The other editor did that, and I didn't catch it. Thanks for the fix. Bubba73 (talk), 01:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It may be that user User:Bill_Clark is engaging in spamming on behalf of "Northland Communications." Where would I go to report this to an admin, and have that admin see his Bill Clark's contribs for the past several days to investigate? Spamreporter1 02:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COI can help deal with this. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 02:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Spam if you want assistance from other editors who put some effort into fighting spam. -- Siobhan Hansa 03:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ack! This is like the third or fourth place I've had to reply to this.  :) Anyway, I've stopped editing city pages for now and am focusing on creating wanted/missing articles for US cable companies, instead. As discussed here, here, here, and here, my focus is on US cable companies in general, and Northland was just first on my list. I'm trying to build some consensus in some of those discussions as to how best to proceed with future edits. --Bill Clark 18:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If i put my aol disk in my computer and install aol and than take it out will aol be uninstalled?will i be able to change the logo on my main page on my computer computer for aol. will the logo be hidden?will i have to put it back in to make it run?Crocadog 02:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it won't be uninstalled after removing the disk. And this is not the place to discuss AOL. Please contact AOL for those questions. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 02:43, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been suggested that I abandon [current AfD proposal] and resubmit the websites individually. How do I go about stopping the process and resubmitting the new AfD? Nposs 02:48, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Easiest is to use Strikethrough tags on your nom, comment directly under it that you are withdrawing the nom to resubmit articles individually. An admin will close it for you. Or, if you're comforable, you can close it yourself (since you're withdrawing your own nom). Then go do the submissions. -- Kesh 05:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strikethrough - put <s> at the beginning of the text and </s> at the end. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 02:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that I've seen a guideline stating that a Wikipedia article cannot cite another Wikipedia article as a reliable source. Is this correct? If it is, which guideline says this? I can't find it in WP:RS. Thanks. Tanaats 03:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am unaware of policy on this but that is true as the pages can so easily be changed incorret infromation may be added to pages unknowingly. This is why schools and university generally do not accept wikipedia as a source that is reliable.--Lucy-marie 03:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could only find this. In general, I'd argue against citing any encyclopedia as a source. Xiner (talk, email) 04:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't be done. Wikipedia articles should cite reliable sources. If one article makes a claim then it should be backed up with a citation. If a second article needs to make the same claim then it can cite the original source, not the Wikipedia article. Otherwise we could end up with loops of articles all citing each other which is obviously not reliable at all. --Cherry blossom tree 12:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right. It's called a Walled garden, and can be the source of major problems. Plus, Wikis are tertiary sources, and Wikipedai wants secondary sources for citations. So, citing Wikipedia itself doesn't help prove any claims in a verifiable manner. -- Kesh 20:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 02:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did we use to hide part of anon's IP addresses before? Take a look at Sri Lanka's early history. Note all the IPs of the format 123.456.xxx. Prodego ^talk 04:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it's a registered account made to look like an IP. Xiner (talk, email) 04:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, because I noticed it on the early history of some other pages (United States for example) as well. Also, they aren't in the userlist. Prodego ^talk 04:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the person was reverted 13 times on that page. If someone had warned/reported the vandalism, we might not have to wonder today. Xiner (talk, email) 04:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• No need to worry. Those were edits done on Phase 1 of the software, which was actually UseModWiki. Back then, the full IP addresses were not recorded; I'm not sure if they began being recorded in Phase 3 (MediaWiki) or earlier (Magnus Manske's script). Either way, it is perfectly normal. Titoxd^(?!?) 04:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• So UseMod didn't record full IPs. I knew that UseMod was used before the wonder that is Mediawiki ;-) (goodbye CamelCase), but I didn't know it didn't record. That's the answer. Prodego ^talk 05:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tried to log in and told password not valid. Clicked on send new password and advised it would be sent by e-mail to me. No sign of it within 24 hours. Tried this several times and still no e-mailed password. Please help..........Gerard222.152.200.231 04:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from Wikipedia:Reference Desk/Miscellaneous. V-Man737 04:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I suspect your spamfilter or your email provider is blocking the emails. What email service are you using? - Mgm|^(talk) 11:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia community, Could anyone here tell me how can an ordinary Wikipedian make a bot? I mean by an ordinary Wikipedia someone who doesn't know any programming language and does not know HTML. I know that in this case you should download Python from here then download the files from here then what are the following steps? I would really appreciate it if someone here can help me. Thank you very much. --196.202.92.134 05:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It really depends on the purpose of the bot. Can you detail the purpose a bit? My bot runs on WP:AWB for which there is no programming knowledge required at all. — Lost^(talk) 05:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

all wikipedia pages in work offline status are not working under Internet explorer 7 What is the soultion to this problem — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyas Hajeh (talk • contribs)

The "work offline" option is meant for viewing previously cached pages (copies of pages temporarily stored on your computer) without actually having to be online (i.e., having an active connection to the Internet) at that time. I believe this should work fine for most Wikipedia pages, but only if they are currently cached. Whether they've been cached or not will depend on a few things such as how long ago you viewed the page; how large your cache size is set to; whether the page could be cached in the first place; etc. As such, you'll probably end up with some pages cached (and thus viewable in offline mode), and others not. I hope this is what you meant. If not, in Internet Explorer, click on File, and then on "Work offline" to remove the tick mark next to it. Then press Ctrl+F5 and the page should display again. Hope this helps. —Xhantar^Talk 07:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it's not so much a question as a statement. In your article about selena it says that people did a hwole issue on her, but what you don't note is that due to the popularity of that issue, people magazine started people en esponol. please add that in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosekath (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is a collaboratively edited online encyclopedia. Many different people contribute towards its content and articles can be changed by anyone. As such, the Selena article is actually "yours" as much as it is "ours"—you are welcome to edit the article and make any changes (or add any content) you deem fit—be bold! Note: Please remember to sign your posts by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~ —Xhantar^Talk 07:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created a biographical article for Jesse Ceci. The heading that currently appears is "Jesse ceci", not "Jesse Ceci" as it should appear. Why isn't the last name not appropriately capitalized and how do I get it corrected? --Tamburellom 07:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because you didn't type it that way when you created it, see Help:Moving pages. --WikiSlasher 07:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A reply on my talk page would be greatly appreciated, thanks.100110100 10:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replying on user's talk. Luna Santin 10:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I mean if theres a user and you like what he writes on talk pages too, is it alright to regularly check thru the contributions and basically keep reading up on him? Totally as a lurker without ever contributing anything. Or is this somehow wrong?Gantpupo 11:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's not stalking. If you like a user and want to see what else he edits, you can look at his contributions and talkpage as much as you want. Most wikifriends do. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at other ppl's contributes is perfectly fine. That's why they (and all those logs) are publically visible. "stalking" people's edits only becomes bad if you start harrassing them (i.e. say if you have a grudge against another editor or sth). You may want to take a read at Wikipedia:Harassment and see the section on wikistalking. --`/aksha 11:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. I am trying to get an overview of Wikipedia by reading sytematically through the various entries about it.

2. But I found it difficult to do this: Is there any list of the articles about Wikipedia that I could access - for that matter, is there any kind of accessible classified list of the articles?

3. Maybe that is asking for too much but a nice systematic and available list of the articles about Wikipedia would be nice.

4. And could I also comment that I found it difficult to know how to post or send this comment - the latter seems to be impossible.

Alan Bill — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.108.95.89 (talk • contribs)

Well, the article Wikipedia has a lot about the history and operations of Wikipedia. We also recommend that new users read these pages to get an idea of how things work here:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

These pages will give you more information on how to use and edit Wikipedia. If you are looking for some specific articles to get a sense of how articles are written, Wikipedia:Featured articles lists some of the best articles on Wikipedia. If you have any more questions, feel free to leave a comment on my talk page. GhostPirate 14:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought of something else. Here is the page of Wikipedia's Policies and Guidelines, the "rules" of Wikipedia, and you may also be interested in Wikipedia:Essays, a group of unofficial essays some users have written to try to establish certain guidelines and general ideas about editing.. Some of them have strange names, such as Wikipedia:No angry mastodons and Wikipedia:How many legs does a horse have?. --GhostPirate 14:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To address question 2: is there any kind of accessible classified list of the articles?, Wikipedia has at least two mechanisms to classify articles (about all subjects, not just Wikipedia itself): portals and categories (see: Wikipedia:Categorical index). There are also many list articles which cover individual topic areas. To address question 4, on MediaWiki wikis (Wikipedia is the largest example), the primary method of communication between users is the talk page. Alan Bill, if you are reading this, perhaps you could tell us more about your goals for Wikipedia: for example, do you want to edit articles within a certain topic area? If so, there may be a WikiProject you could join. If you merely want to read articles within a certain topic area, the corresponding WikiProject may have enthusiasts who could guide you. Above all, you can see that Wikipedia is extremely complex. This is the largest wiki in the world, with more than one million articles, and more than three million registered users, of whom several tens of thousands are serious editors. Getting a solid idea of what's going on here is a big job, like trying to comprehend any other large organization---and you're doing it solely through your computer. If you want to find some actual humans in your locale who know about Wikipedia, you could try Category:Wikipedians by location. Before Wikipedia, there had probably never been any system of remote, voluntary collaboration on Wikipedia's scale. Therefore, Wikipedians have had to invent new methods of management and coordination. Depending on how busy you are otherwise, you may need weeks or months of calendar time to poke around, read lots of articles, dabble with editing, and so on, to get a handle on the subset of Wikipedia relevant to your interests. --Teratornis 17:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: to learn something interesting about Wikipedia every day, bookmark this: Tip of the day. --Teratornis 20:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another one more thing: The Wikipedia Department Directory has a nicely laid-out page with lots and lots of links to information about using Wikipedia. —Xhantar^Talk 20:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working for the last couple of months on an index - you'll find it here. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 02:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

iam unable to read the different books or a disclosure of swami vivakananda

Wikisource hosts books. Xiner (talk, email) 18:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just created a page in the last 24 hours and a redirect message was erroneously created due to a misspelling. Is there a way to delete the entire article and recreate it as a new one to eliminate the redirect message at top? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tamburellom (talk • contribs).

If you've just created the article, just copy the contents from the wrong location and paste it into the correct one, then set up a WP:REDIRECT from the wrong location. Xiner (talk, email) 18:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't copy and paste. Any issue of this kind can be cleanly fixed by moves and deletes (if necessary). Looking at your contributions I assume you're talking about Jesse Ceci, but what's the problem? -- Rick Block (talk) 18:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. That's quite an amateurish answer. WP:MOVE specifically discourages it. Xiner (talk, email) 18:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at your history, and seeing that you had already (and correctly) moved the article before asking this question, I think what you were concerned about is the message at the top of the page "redirected from Jesse Ceci/Violinist" and there is no issue at all here about copying and pasting or moving. If that's the case, note that a person will only see the redirection note at the top of an article when the article is attempted to be accessed by typing the name of the redirect into the search field. Anyone just typing the name of the article will never see that note. So, for example if you click on artistic or searched for that article, which is a redirect to art, you will see at the top of the article art: "redirected from artistic". But if you click on or search for art directly, you don't see that note. So the existence of the redirect makes no appearance change in the article except when it's accessed and serving its intended function.--Fuhghettaboutit 18:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a counter-vandalism user, I put warning messages on the talk pages of IP users, but I was wondering, do IP's get the same "You have new talk" messages as logged in users, or are we all just wasting our time with unnesessary warnings that won't get read? Mr.Z-mantalk 18:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they do, and no, there's no way to avoid it. Otherwise vandals would have loads of excuses for why they shouldn't be blocked. Xiner (talk, email) 18:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I go about requesting that an article be semiprotected? WP:SEMI makes no mention of how to do this, and Joe E. Newsome High School DESPERATELY needs to be semiprotected (see history). Thanks. Steevven1 ^{(Talk) (Contribs) (Gallery)} 19:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Garion96 (talk) 19:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i messed up the article when i created it. Does anyone know how to fix it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_Synthesizer --Falcon866 22:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean the dotted box around the text and image? That's created whenever you start a line with a space,

like this.

I've fixed the page... if that's what you meant... Dismas|^(talk) 22:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the Domination Page.. there is the statement which dosen't seem to belong.

"Domination

• when a creature called Ralphjoice decided to sit right next to you you in turn become frieghtend, but there is no hope of escape. You become in time... owned...dominated "

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.218.220.17 (talk • contribs)
That was just vandalism, if it hasn't been reverted, I'll fix it. | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 23:08, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like vandalism. I've reverted the page to its previous version. In future, be bold and edit the page yourself! See the Tutorial for an introduction on how to edit pages on Wikipedia. Let me know if you need any help. I've posted a warning to the user's talk page. —Xhantar^Talk 23:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I create a Wiki? I didn't see it in the VFAQs.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Binaryaudio (talk • contribs)

Please see How can I build a Wiki of my own. Note: Please remember to sign your posts by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Thanks! —Xhantar^Talk 23:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

edit this provides a free wiki creation sevice. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 01:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest reading: b:Wiki Science/How to start a Wiki for some useful introduction. If you just want to make a personal wiki to experiment with, it's pretty easy to install MediaWiki under XAMPP or one of the other WAMPs (similar packages are available for all major operating systems, e.g., LAMP (software bundle)), assuming you have some system administrator skills. Otherwise you'll need to use one of the pre-packaged hosted wiki options. Of course there are many wiki software packages to choose from. If you start your own public wiki, you're a long way from making it as impressive as Wikipedia. The biggest problem is attracting enough users who will make quality edits. You have to compete with thousands of existing wikis for the capable and willing wiki editors, or recruit and educate a group of your own. Expect to sink many hours into development and editing, or find others who will, if you want to end up with decent wiki. You might want to spend a few months editing on Wikipedia or another established wiki before striking out on your own. Wikipedia is analogous to a developed country, with all the services, infrastructure, and civilization you need to be productive and comfortable. Starting your own wiki is like getting dropped onto an uninhabited island with lots of raw materials, and you must make them into something. And not to be too harsh about it, but if you have to ask how to start your own wiki, that may mean you aren't quite ready to make a good show of it yet. After a few months of editing on Wikipedia, reading the help pages, seeing how things work, and learning things such as the importance of signing your talk page comments, then you are in a better position to consider starting your own wiki---and you will know where to find the instructions. --Teratornis 05:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I discovered that Ileana, a fairly common given name redirects to a specific actress which doesn't make sense. How do I go about rectifying this or even discussing its rectification as the talk page redirects to the actress' talk page. Thanks Goodnightmush 23:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you click on Ileana, you'll be redirected to Ileana D'Cruz. At the top of that page, you'll see a link: (Redirected from Ileana). Click on that to go to the redirect page, which you can then edit normally. See also: Wikipedia:Redirect. Cheers. --Plek 23:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. Another way to visit (and edit) the actual redirect page itself, is to append &redirect=no to the end of the page's URL—in this case, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ileana&redirect=no.[11] The correct talk page for discussing the redirect would still be Talk:Ileana D'Cruz. When a page is redirected, its talk page is redirected as well. Hope this helps. —Xhantar^Talk 23:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I used to visit the Wikipedia page for the band "The WBC" very regularly. I tried to visit it today however, and it seems to have disappeared. /the_wbc now directs straight to the World Boxing Council, and the WBC band webpage is now listed as not existing. Where can I look to see if the page has been purposely or inadvertantly deleted? As now the history for "The WBC" site has disappeared also. Confuzzledoifo 01:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The WBC. It was nominated for deletion on the 2nd of January. At this point, per Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?, you can either appeal the deletion, or get a copy of the article to work on in your userspace, as a subpage (for example, as User:Confuzzledoifo/The WBC). If you do the later see, Wikipedia:Your first article for advice. -- John Broughton (☎☎) 02:13, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I create an account? I don't seem to find the link or instructions on your home page.

Dr. Sylvia Kahan City University of New York <email address deleted by Kyra_~(talk)>

Here is the direct link to the account creation page. Simply enter the information requested and then you will be able to log in and begin editing. I hope you have a most wonderful day! Kyra_~(talk) 02:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To log in at other times, you click "Sign in/create an account" at the top righthand corner of a page. To log out, you can click "log out" right in the same spot. Kamope · talk · contributions 12:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find policy regarding which terms to use racially, as obviously some terms can be offensive to some, and harmless to others, and such, or terms could be correct in one situation but incorrect in another. -- feb^talk 04:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Content_disclaimer may be helpful. Xiner (talk, email) 04:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

in keyboard why the alphabet key not in sequance ,why thats keys not in proper sequance as a,b,c,d-------

That's actually a question for the Reference Desk since it's not a question about using Wikipedia. But, I think you should take a look at QWERTY since it answers your question well. —Keakealani·?·!·@ 07:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I find either the "Wikipedia:Best User Pages" or the list of who has the best user page in Wikipedia, by vote? Or does anyone know of anyone with super excellent user pages? --Sadi Carnot 10:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's a such thing as Wikipedia:Best User Pages. Kamope · talk · contributions 11:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I got an Esperanza Userpage Award right before Esperanza and the project both got deleted. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check out User Page Design and, more specifically, the User Page Hall of Fame. —Xhantar^Talk 16:39, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Hall of Fame is interesting. I think, however, there should exist a way for there to be a page on something like "Wikipedia:Top 100 Best User Pages", or Wikipedia:Featured user pages (analogous to Wikipedia:Featured articles), or something along these lines? In this manner, it would be a kind of fun stimulator for Wikipedians who what to see how their pages stack up to others, and also, possibly a way to sort out the best of the best? Anybody interested in starting something like this? --Sadi Carnot 18:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• In what way would that lead to the improvement of the encyclopaedia that is Wikipedia ? --Plek 19:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let’s see … first, user pages are the backbone of Wikipedia; hence, if the backbone is strong, well-organized, visually-appealing, connectable, well-guiding, easy-to-use, etc., then the organism of Wikipedia will naturally be healthier and easier to use. Second, such a project may very well help new users adapt faster to Wikipedia; from my own experience, the first half-year is kind of a “lost at sea” learning experience. Thus, if new users could be directed to “good examples” right off the bat, we could all save ourselves a lot of time. Third, a synergism may potentially develop in which “new ideas”, “new designs”, new linking methods, etc., may begin to naturally carry over into the articles in a positive way. In short, this would result in a positive feedback effect. Certainly the list of positives is longer than this. --Sadi Carnot 19:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• More work for editors, to distract from writing articles, and no endresult improvement to readers of Wiki articles - waste of editor time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Ideogram 19:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to make contact with the Thanet Amateur boxing clubs. Can you provide Secretary's contact names and phone numbers also address' of where each club trains and on which night of the week they have theit training nights. Thanks

Des Porter

I think your thinking of another website. This has nothing to do with Wikipedia. Kamope · talk · contributions 11:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have grey boxes in place of areas where equations and photos should be. What is wrong?

Is this on one article or many? If just one, which one? Dismas|^(talk) 11:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have noted a behaviour of the wiki technology that I do not understand.

The example that currently demonstrates this is "Biological Warfare" here the is some recent vandalism in the first paragraph. If I click on the page tab the vandalism and a recent edit disappear only to return if I click again. When I tried to edit this page the vandalism is not present on the page that appears in the edit window. I have looked around for an explanation but this volatility of the text is a little diconcerting. RomansHorn 14:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent vandalism I see to Biological warfare was reverted within 15 minutes on February 2.[12] Try reloading the page; see e.g. Wikipedia:Bypass your cache. PrimeHunter 15:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the page on Helen Keller. Someone posted profanity.

Thanks for notifying. Vandalism to Helen Keller was reverted earlier today within 2 minutes.[13] I guess you refer to the previous revision. Most vandalism is quickly removed. You are also welcome to do it yourself; see Help:Reverting. PrimeHunter 15:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a problem with the entire paragraph - Actual Usagein your IMETS article. I read both the reference documents and could not find information to support the claims in this paragraph. What/Who is the source for the following verbiage: [edit] Actual usage In recent deployments to Iraq, IMETS usage has not lived up to its intended purpose. Most of the information needed for forecasting can be gathered from other sources, such as AFWA’s Joint Air Force and Army Weather Information Network (JAAWIN), making IMETS unnecessary. More realistically, IMETS is used as a locker, and computer parts are scrapped for usage by SWO. I am asking because I am a Deputy Project Director for IMETS and have evidence to the contrary. Thanks

(contact details removed; Helpdesk questions are replied to on this page)

If you find an inaccuracy in Wikipedia's articles, you can fix it yourself by using the 'edit' button. If you think a substantial part of the article is incorrect, you should give a source to prove your point, as this reduces the chance of the article being changed back. If you are associated with the subject of the article, it's also worth reading the conflict of interest guidelines; in such cases, you have to try hard to stay neutral. You can also try making your concerns known on the article's discussion page (Talk:IMETS). If the text there doesn't have a source, given its negative view, it's quite possible that it's wrong and at least needs sourcing, so you could also put {{TotallyDisputed}} (or one of the other cleanup templates) on the section to dispute its neutrality and factual accuracy; if you do this, you should make your point on the talk page. --ais523 17:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

How can you go about splitting an article. In the page about EOKA somebody added a section about EOKA B, a separate organisationl. The majority of contributors in the talk page believe the article should be split. Can you please tell me how this can be done? Larisv 17:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Create a new article with the name that you want to split to, using the text from the relevant parts of the old article (you can copy it from the edit window), make sure you mention in your edit summary that you're splitting the article, and what article you're splitting it from. Then blank (remove) the parts, or most of the parts, that you've moved over, making it clear in the edit summary what you're doing and where the information moved to. --ais523 17:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I have just finished a full article on Wilberforce Colony. One of the persons mentioned there has a page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Seward. When I go to that page, the topic mentioned, Wilberforce Colony. is a link - TO MY just done page. In the history for that page, the latest revision is 18 October 2006, well before I did the current page. Did I overwrite - screw up - or such another page that used to exist??? --Dumarest 19:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear wikipedia-

I love this website. As a biologist, so far I am yet to see an articte which I did not feel that it was very well written.

I teach a single intro bio class for non majors. I was a bit embushed with having to pick a textbook on a spot and the one I picked has very little on the next few lectures which I am about to give. Wikipedia has extremely good information on a number of these, albeit a bit more than I would want the students to learn. Since they paid a lot of money for a textbook already I would like to find a way so that they did not have to buy something new, too. If I could quote some sections from wikipedia and put it on the university's server "blackboard" it would be a tremendous help. I guess I could just post the links and go around the copyright issue (or am I wrong about that?), but if I quote, I could take out and simplify easily the issues. Would I need to ask for permission for every single item, or could perhaps I get a blank one for the duration of the course?

Your help is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely, Charlie szekeres

Hi, first I would like to tell you that it took quite a time until I came to this page so I can write you my question. I think the HELP page(s) should be improved cause sometimes they're not very helpful. Now, my problem is, I want to write or and translate some articles in my language(Albanian-Shqip), because I think it would be useful to Albanians to have some articles in Albanian. But I just can't do that,I tried many links, but it looks impossible. There are some articles in many languages, like the article about submarines, and when I saw the link for Shqip(Albanian) on the left, I added some more information, but when there is nothing writen in Albanian about a topic, I just can't find out how to do that. I hope you understood me. Please, please give me an answer.

Thanks Mic

Wikipedia, On 16 January, 2007, a user named XfairgameX (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Xfairgamex) modified the Wikipedia sites of my employer, American Apparel, and it's founder Dov Charney. They added a link marked "American Apparel Online Store" which directed to the URL: http://www.americanapparelonlinestore.com

This is not the real American Apparel online store, which may be found here: http://www.americanapparelstore.com

Rather, this URL is a fake site which has copied the American Apparel store graphics and architecture. We are trying to get to the bottom of what this fake domain is trying to accomplish, but Wikipedia should be aware that this user is linking to a fake online shopping URL, and it would be prudent to assume that there is some sort of fraud being committed. XfairgameX should be blocked from editing in the future. I will modify the American Apparel and Dov Charney Wikipedia entries to point to the appropriate URL. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Spencer Windes American Apparel Web Communications Coordinator