Terpene

thcscience_admin
Welcome to the Wikipedia Help desk
  • This page is only for questions about how to use Wikipedia. Are you in the right place?
  • For factual and other kinds of questions, use the search box or the Reference desk.
  • For your own security, please do not provide your email address or other contact details. Answers will be provided on this page; we are unable to provide answers via email.
  • Please keep in mind that we are all volunteers, and sometimes a reply may take a little time. Your patience is appreciated.
Search or read Frequently Asked Questions
Search the help desk archives
Skip to today's questions · Skip to the bottom · Special help services · Archived discussions · How to answer


Shortcuts:
WP:HELPDESK
WP:HD
WP:Y

Contents


[edit] March 29

[edit] Template: {{db-r3}} not working on redirects?

Resolved: Immediate issue solved through manual deletion; bug filed to fix the actual issue longer-term  Chzz  ►  13:18, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I placed a {{db-r3}} template on a redirect yesterday and noticed that nothing happened (the template didn't appear). I thought this was because the redirect was actually a Commons redirect, so I undid my edit. But today, when I place the CSD template on the File:Doris_Day7.jpg redirect, I'm still not getting the template to appear. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 20:19, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I just re-added a {{db-r2}} template to the Bierstadt redirect, and in the preview, it worked fine. When I completed the edit, no template appears. :( – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 20:21, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


I don't see the template either. Maybe the template coding doesn't work on file redirects? – ukexpat (talk) 20:42, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Probably because the redirect is on Commons, but your template is on Wikipedia. —teb728 t c 20:45, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
I just received filemover status and I've had no problems tagging both redirects and redirects-from-Commons recently, up until yesterday. It should be working! – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 20:53, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
The only way it could have worked in the past would be like if when you tried to edit File:Bierstadt Albert Lower Yellowstone Falls.jpg it automatically routed you to Commons:File:Bierstadt Albert Lower Yellowstone Falls.jpg. Once you created the local page the effort was doomed, for admins on Commons don’t see the local page. BTW, someone should delete the local page. —teb728 t c 21:20, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm not following. Like i said, I've never had a problem with this before. I'm tagging the redirect, I'm not being routed to the file and tagging the file. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 22:16, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Its a bug - bugzilla:28299. Note, the template is still on the page, its just not visible because its being overriden by the redirect. (but any categories it add should be added, and the page should still appear on whatlinkshere for the template). Bawolff (talk) 22:08, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
So what you're saying is to proceed as normal, tag the redirects, but that I should add the Category:Candidates for speedy deletion category manually? I will do this to the two redirects in question. Thanks! – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 22:16, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Actually, the category doesn't show up on the redirect either: [1]. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 22:20, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
That bug report does not show the symptoms here, for the redirect page has no older version. If there is a bug here, it is that the local content does not show in addition to (or instead of) the Commons page. —teb728 t c 23:06, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

It's a bug. Our lovely devs will fix it ASAP. Meanwhile, I suggest you tag those specific pages with something like this; STRUCK see below  Chzz  ►  00:04, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

{{db|1=Please delete this, per R3; there is a weird glitch preventing me from just tagging this page in the normal way - see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28299. See also [[Wikipedia:Help_desk##.7B.7Bdb-r3.7D.7D_not_working_on_redirects.3F]]. Thank you.}}</s> STRUCK - see below  Chzz  ►  00:04, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
That looks about right to me; [2]

- you could copy-paste that (and amend it as you wish). Or, speak directly to a clued-up admin and keep pestering them with the requests. The bug will be fixed "in due course". Meanwhile, I hope that will suffice. Maybe we should codify it as {{db|G13#Chzz said so}} :p  Chzz  ►  23:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Neither of those db’s works either. It works in your User space test case because it is not in File space with a redirect in Commons with the same name. —teb728 t c 23:37, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Ooh, evil. Thanks for noticing that, TEB728.
OK, so; Keraunoscopia, I suggest you just put this, on your own User talk page;
{{adminhelp}} Please delete [[<NAME OF PAGE>]] per G3; I can't tag it in the normal way - see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28299. See also [[Wikipedia:Help_desk##.7B.7Bdb-r3.7D.7D_not_working_on_redirects.3F]] ~~~~

That should work?  Chzz  ►  00:04, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Will do, thanks all of you for your help. I altered the section title because I think I'm having trouble navigating automatically to it. We'll see. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 00:25, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] save from sandbox

how do i save editing from sandbox ?

where is the save button when i am editing in the sandbox?


eustaciavie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eustaciavie (talk • contribs) 00:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what you are asking because the sandbox has the same "save page" button on the bottom of the page as this page did when you asked your question (didn't it? Do you actually see something different there?). If you're asking how to retrieve edits from the sandbox, you can always do so by going to the sandbox's page's history. Edits are removed quickly from there because it is, after all, a sandbox for testing. A few other things, I think you might get some benefit from trying out the Wikipedia:Tutorial. Also, it's a good practice to sign your posts at discussion pages such as this one (but never in articles) by typing four tildes after your posts (~~~~) which automatically formats as your signature with a timestamp when you save a page (try it out in the sandbox). Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:52, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] What is the copyright status of my image?

File:AwesomeBlue.png

I can't seem to find the copyright status of My Own Image! James1011R (talk, contribs, log, boxes) 00:48, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Since you say you created it, the status right now is that you own the copyright. You have two essential choices. You can release the photograph into the public domain, taking it entirely out of copyright, or you can freely license the image under various free license compatible with Wikipedia's free licenses. This means that you still own the copyright, but you are allowing free use of it (including for commercial uses). Whichever one you wish to do, you would place the licensing tag on the image. For PD, you could use {{PD-self}}. For free licenses, see Category:Creative commons copyright templates (I suggest {{CC-by-3.0-Works}}). So go to the image, edit it to add the appropriate template. Of course, you can simply retain the full copyright. However, that means we can't allow the image to be used here (except under special circumstances not useful to explore), and it will be deleted. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.

But I really want a CC-by-nc 3.0 license. James1011R (talk, contribs, log, boxes) 01:20, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, no-can-do. Wikipedia's license require that our users be able to have use of our content with very limited restrictions, which includes not limiting commercial use. See Wikipedia:Non-free content.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Possibility of giving WP email addresses to select users?

What are the chances of something like this happening? By select users, I mean people like admins, possibly CVU members, etc, STRICTLY for en.wiki business, for things like contacting companies, network admins, etc. Also it could be something only (?) accessible from the website, and could easily be shut off at anytime. This would allow wikipedia users to contact (suspicious, possibly) companies and others without sacrificing our inboxes. Any ideas? Yay/nay?  A p3rson ‽ 02:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

It's an interesting idea, but would proabably require adding another layer of functionality to Mediawiki. Also, I would be concerned that it could be abused, especially if given out too freely - bad behaviour from people with "official" Wiki(m/p)edia addresses would not be good for our reputation. I think some people (Foundation? OTRS volunteers?) have access to @wiki(m/p)edia.org email addresses, but I doubt it would be more freely distributed, especially as it's quite easy to obtain a free email address to use on Wikipedia. I could be wrong, though! Some more discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_64#Email_client_built_into_the_MediaWiki_software.--Kateshortforbob talk 09:37, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I was meaning something for like CVU volunteers (maybe just CVU@en.wikipedia.org for CVU, etc.), and also something that was able to be given and retracted at any time with admin/ArbCom/etc. permissions, but I will look at that.  A p3rson ‽

[edit] Adding categories

Hi, I have written my article on Simon Gales (artist) and added the relevant subcategories for him at the bottom and his name was entered under G for Gales in the lists for those categories. But a few days later when I added a further category "People from Suffolk" it seemed to shift his name from the G lists to the S lists of names for all the subcategories I entered for him. Will this self correct over time?

I don't really want to purge my page ththough not knowing what I am doing.

With thanks Selag (talk) 03:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Bearcat fixed various problems with the article with this edit, which you overwrote, possibly mistakenly. I have placed back the defaultsort template, which categorized the article by last name, and made a number of other edits.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:57, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] The page is deleted on Yowlink

Hello, the page is deleted on topic YOWLINK. Not sure what the expectation is but I thought I wrote a great article. Who is reviewing the articles. I'm not a wikipedia expert but I've stolen ideas from other pages (hope that's allowed) in terms of the formatting-related characters, etc.

How do I change it to get Yowlink listed? Yowlink is no different from other social networks like Facebook, Twitter, Linked-In, MySpace, and so on. Those are listed.

Please help. I tried the help-chat but there's nowhere on that page to type anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yowlink (talk • contribs) 05:09, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The article was deleted due to Wikipedia:CSD#A7. In other words, there was no notability shown to support keeping the article. Like you say, there are articles for Facebook, Twitter, etc. because they are notable, i.e. many people have written about them in magazines, newspapers, etc. A major motion picture was even made about the creation of Facebook. If an article about a web site such as Yowlink is to remain, you much show how it is notable per the requirements at WP:WEB.
Also, since your username, Yowlink, is the same as the article title, you represent a conflict of interest. See WP:COI for more on this. Dismas|(talk) 05:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
(e/c)Have multiple, independent, third party reliable sources written substantively about Yowlink? Can you point out where Yowlink has been a subject of focus in published books, television, magazines, newspapers, etc? That is the relevant inquiry because the subjects of Wikipedia articles must be notable (which is evidenced by such coverage) and the information included in the article must be verifiable (which can only come from such coverage). I can tell you that Facebook, Twitter, Linked-In and MySpace meet these standards.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:19, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Advertising warning - I have made changes to ensure neutral tone. What do I do Next?

Dear Editors

I've received some helpful advice from orange Mike and made changes to the page for Elif Shafak to ensure neutral tone. I looked at various other author and artist pages to check that it is in keeping with theirs.

Please could you let me know if there is anything else I need to do? I need to work out how to get the 'advertisement' warning taken off.

Many thanks in advance

Annabel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annabelr (talk • contribs) 09:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I've linked the article name in your question. This is helpful for other editors who try to answer your questions here. This way they don't have to bother doing a search. They can just click on the link.
And as for your question, when you feel that the tag no longer applies to the article, you can take it off yourself. There isn't anyone assigned to check your edits or anything like that. To remove the tag, simply edit the article and remove the template at the top. In this case, it's just below the infobox code where it says {{Advert}}. Dismas|(talk) 10:39, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I've removed the tag, made a few minor adjustments and added a [citation needed] tag to one fact I think you need to cite, per WP:BLP. If it's not cited, I feel the sentence should be removed. Regards, CaptRik (talk) 12:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] What is the raw span class="history-deleted"?

Using the template Redacted example - (Redacted) what is the styles used in the span class"history-deleted"v and how do you find it ?

- 193.61.111.53 (talk) 09:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Example of deleted revisions in a page history.
That CSS class is defined in http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/shared.css as;
/*
 * rev_deleted [
 */
li span.deleted, span.history-deleted {
        text-decoration: line-through;
        color: #888;
        font-style: italic;
}
It is used on the "crossed-out" deleted revisions in the 'History' of a page, giving this appearance: The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.
I found it by googling, and poking around. There are so many places that these things can be defined, it's not so easy to pin them down, unfortunately.

 Chzz  ►  12:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Google reformatting Wikipedia for mobiles

Wikipedia displays very well on my Sony Ericsson mobile phone (which is not a smartphone). This applies to both en.wikipedia.org and mobile.wikipedia.org.

Unfortunately, when I open a Wikipedia page on my phone by selecting a link to Wikipedia from a page of Google search results, Google re-formats the Wikipedia page before displaying it, supposedly to make it easier to view on a mobile device. It actually makes the Wikipedia page less easy to read, and misses out content and graphics unnecessarily.

I understand that webmasters are invited to contact Google if they do not want Google to re-format their pages for mobile devies. Would you consider doing this, given that in my experience Wikipedia is already ideally formatted for mobile devices?

Many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.198.164.141 (talk) 13:13, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Electronic Readers

How would you define the electronics that are used only to read books? There are so many new devices out, it is confusing. Besides the technical name, can you tell me some background info. on these readers? I am doing a research paper, so I would really appreciate your input. You could include topics like benefits, why electronic and not hard-cover books, etc. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.112.22 (talk) 13:31, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Symbol move vote.svg Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. – ukexpat (talk) 13:37, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Wikitable aesthetic issue, maybe advice

Hello, I'm working on Scream (film series) and its largely fine but I've had a reader complain that the wikitable near the top of the page (Directly below the TOC and to the left of hte Infobox) is pushed down for them, like so:

http://img857.imageshack.us/img857/3222/scream.gif

Though he admits that he is using a PC with a reduced working space thus resulting in a less than optimal browser window size.

The table at current is set to an 80% width and it appears fine for me and otherwise I've had no complaints and I'd prefer to keep it where it is as it seems the most suitable and logical place for the table to go. But I don't want to increase it to 100% width as it just creates a large gap between the 'section header' and the table. The culprit seems to be the infobox due to its fixed width but I don't think there is anything to be done about that.

This is what I see: http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/9140/wikitable.gif

So I'm curious what I can do here. Is there a coding option, should I move the table or should the user just live with it as a result of using a smaller interface (Basically seeing what I do if I shrink my browser)?

As I've said, I would prefer to keep the table where it is if possible.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 14:22, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I see lots of white space in the table. Try removing the "width=80%", and the browser should work out whether the table can fit in the space left by the infobox. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:50, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I tried that, it works but then it returns to an aesthetic issue as it leaves a big gap to the right of the table and leaves no space around the text. Aesthetics aren't a HUGE deal but it doesn't look too good that way. If its an unsolvable problem though your suggestion might be a workable solution. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:06, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Article not visible

I cannot find the biography I wrote when I search for it. Has it been published?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/to_do&oldid=413614704 Judika39 (talk) 14:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Your edits were reverted because the location you placed them was not where they belonged. I moved your draft article into your userspace at User:Judika39/Nzedegwu Robert Olisa. If you click on the link you can continue to work on it there. Then when it is ready it can be moved into the mainspace. GB fan (talk) 15:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Inline Citations

Simon Gales (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

I am so sorry to bother you again concerning the Simon Gales Biography; I would like to refer the first reference "Who's Who" as an in line citation at the end of the second sentence which ends in "....Christies the following year. " Could I ask you please to do this first one for me as I have tried a number of times and made a mess of it. I will by your example know where I have gone wrong and will be able to continue from there. I am so grateful for your help and advice so far. Selag (talk) 15:06, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

YesY Done. But please note that you had reverted my previous edits to the article where I had corrected a number of typos. So I fixed those first, then added the ref. The problem you were having with the reference was the ref name, which I shortened. I also addedd {{Reflist}} to the references section to display the cited reference. – ukexpat (talk) 15:27, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Age Restriction

Hi, My 9-year old daughter is starting to get general knowledge questions at school that require her to search online for the answers. I would like to know if it is possible for me to restrict her access on wikipedia to age appropriate content only, and if possible, how to do it. Thanks and regards. Horecrazy (talk) 15:08, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

You may want to see this page for advice for parents. Regards Kayau Voting IS evil 15:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] How do I place a table of contents?

I have created a new page, and want to place the table of contents. By default it seems to be at the top. How do I do this? I have looked at other pages and can't find a tag or similar...

This is the page in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Army_Order_of_Battle_-_September_1939 Thanks! Heywoodg 16:18, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

If you want your table of contents to be after the lede paragraph, type the lede paragraph before your first section header. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
That is great, thanks a lot! Heywoodg 16:41, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
You can also control the table of contents by putting a __TOC__ wherever you want the it.--v/r - TP 17:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Double underlining of some words in articles

When a double-underlined word is clicked, a commercial window pops up. Is this a new feature of Wikipedia or an uninvited commercial intrusion? Wayne Roberson, Austin, Texas (talk) 16:47, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Could you please give us a link to an example of such an article? - David Biddulph (talk) 16:50, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
It's likily a spam/adware addon in your browser.--v/r - TP 17:06, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I've seen this on a mirror site - Is Wayne using http://en.wikipedia.org ? Arjayay (talk) 17:15, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Editing articles in other languages

The pages for Giorgio Battistelli in the English, German and French Wikipedias have all been derived (closely) from the Italian Wikipedia page (itself a copy of the biography page on his publisher's website). There are a few small errors in the work lists on each of these WP pages. When I get a clean list of his works and their premiere dates and locations, I would like to clean all four languages. Can I do this without setting up a separate account for each language (specifically, can I have a single, unified watchlist)? (I have enough knowledge of all four languages to add meaningful comments to the change logs). Thanks. Scarabocchio (talk) 16:56, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

You should check out Luxo's Gwatch.--ukexpat (talk) 17:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
that sort of works ... though not elegantly. Is there any way to get around the four accounts requirement (apart from anonymous editing, that is)? Scarabocchio (talk) 17:31, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Not that I know of. You may get some more ideas from the essay at Wikipedia:Integrated, interwiki, global watchlists. – ukexpat (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll try that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scarabocchio (talk • contribs) 17:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
FYI: Multiple accounts seem well handled with the Unified Login Help:Unified_login. I've used the same username, Scaraboccio, in the new French and German accounts, and the Unified Login has tied the three language accounts together (and reserved that username across the rest of the Wikimedia universe). The help page also gives me the info about how to usurp the (lapsed) Italian language user. Scarabocchio (talk) 19:44, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I know it is not what you asked about, but as you describe the article in the Italian Wikipedia, it would not be permissible in the English Wikipedia as it would almost certainly be a copyright violation. I'm no expert, but I would have thought that a direct translation of a copyvio would itself be a copyvio. Better to write a fresh article from the information in it.wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 20:11, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I was already thinking about that. I wasn't paying a huge amount of close attention to the degree of paraphrasing, as I was merely trying to get a comprehensive and accurate set of data from any language version. I'll look more closely once I get my accounts sorted out. Scarabocchio (talk) 20:21, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Moving content from articles

Hello. I am working on creating a new Tsunami barrier article. Currently it is in my userspace at User:TParis/Tsunami_barrier. There is some content at Tsunami#Mitigation and Tsunami#Natural_barriers that I would like to split into this article. How to I keep attribution? Do I put it in the edit history?--v/r - TP 17:05, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Have you read WP:SPLIT? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:16, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't know why I didn't. For some reason I got it in my head that this was a "move" and not a "split" since I was moving it to an article I've already started writing. Silly me. Thanks.--v/r - TP 17:21, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Table issues

Hello, I seem to have some issues with tables again. In the article List of colleges affiliated to Visvesvaraya Technological University, which I am expanding completely, the table goes out of the normal page width. I've experimented by removing some sections, but it still doesn't seem right. Would be grateful for any help. Regards, Yes Michael? •Talk 17:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Why not switch the axis? Put the schools along the top row and the degree programs on the left column.--v/r - TP 17:19, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
The thing is, I plan to expand the table to include all of the colleges (only a few are done as of now), and I'm sure that the way you suggested would not be suitable there. Yes Michael? •Talk 17:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

What is that first column, "S.No"? Do you really need that?

You could use a smaller font.

In the below, I've used 86% text size, I've removed the "S.No", and I've split the word "Telecommunication" - and, it just fits on my 1024 display. This uses, {| class="wikitable sortable" style="font-size: 86%;".

College Name Electronics and Communication Computer Science Mechanical Engineering Electrical and Electronics Civil Engineering Chemical Instrumentation Technology Industrial Engineering and Management Telecomm-
unication		 Information Science Biotechnology Other(If Any)
R.V. College of Engineering, Bangalore Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
P.E.S. Institute of Technology, Bangalore Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes No

Apart from that...you could maybe use some "key" - heading columns as "Elect+Comm", "Comp Sci", and so forth - and elaborate the full names in a little key table. Try to keep it simple though; Wikipedia isn't great at such things, because it isn't supposed to be (WP:NOTDIR)  Chzz  ►  12:55, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! Will experiment with it and modify accordingly. Regards, Yes Michael? •Talk 13:08, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Looking for editor assistance on C-SPAN rewrite

I'm trying to gain consensus to overhaul an article I have a potential conflict with, about the U.S. television network C-SPAN. Recently, I had written a new draft of the article and posted a request for assistance on the article's Talk page. After asking for help in a few places, I finally received some useful comments from two uninvolved editors. They had some different ideas about how to make it better, and I followed their guidance as much as possible (see: many changes since initial posting). I believe there was just one outstanding issue remaining when, unfortunately, one editor was temporarily blocked over a separate issue and the other just seemed to lose interest. I've been unable to get them (or anybody else who had initially shown interest in the C-SPAN article) to pick up the discussion (all of it so far occurring on my Talk page), let alone move it into the mainspace or give me a thumbs up to do so. I am very confident that my new article is a substantial improvement on the existing one, but I'm also wary of acting without first gaining consensus. I'd be very grateful to anyone who could help me take this to the finish line. Thanks in advance, WWB Too (talk) 18:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Complete replacement is seldom a good idea. This discussion should all have been going on on the talk page of the article itself, not on your talk page. To what extent have you discussed it on Talk:C-SPAN? --Orange Mike | Talk 18:11, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
That's actually where I opened discussion first, but the conversation came to me on my Talk page, so I continued it there. I posted an update on the C-SPAN Talk page to let editors know that a discussion was occurring on my Talk page, but so far no one has yet followed it up. Also, I generally agree that complete replacement is often not a great idea. But when I started researching and writing in January, I began with the one currently in the article, improving it offline and then posting that new draft in my userspace. I've also incorporated the few (helpful) edits made to the existing C-SPAN article thereafter, to make sure I incorporated that material. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 18:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] how can i advertise on wikipedia

I am interested in purchasing as many US and International popunders per day with a 1/24 frequency cap using JavaScript tags only. Who should I contact? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.41.89.157 (talk) 19:52, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Nobody related to Wikipedia. No advertising is allowed here. -- kainaw™ 19:55, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Nobody. We don't permit advertising here, and probably never will. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:59, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Also, please reconsider your advertising strategy. As an internet user, I find popunders a definite disincentive to buy anything from someone who uses such methods to advertise their products. Astronaut (talk) 11:28, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] seperated,but not divorced

i have been seperated for over 7 years and i do not know the where abouts of my husband.I really would like to change my driving licence back to my maiden name,could you please inform me of how i can do this ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.123.202.232 (talk) 20:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

P question.svg This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Miscellaneous reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. CTJF83 20:44, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Actually, belay that advice. This is a legal question and we cannot give legal advice. You need to consult a lawyer. – ukexpat (talk) 20:48, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
In some countries it is a simple administrative procedure - no lawyers or courts involved at all - so maybe it isn't "Legal advice". Roger (talk) 11:34, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Alexandra Powers

Should Alexandra Powers be in the category Coverts to Buddhism? Because it says in her article that she was a Buddhist for 6 months. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk)`

(edit conflict, I see you corrected 6 years to 6 months) Alexandra Powers#Personal life says: Powers does not adhere to any religion: "I've sort of looked and searched. I was a Buddhist for about six months.". That doesn't sound serious and shouldn't cause categorization in Category:Converts to Buddhism. Many people who see the category will assume she is currently a buddhist. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] March 30

[edit] shane o' connor from ireland

i would like 2 know if u could help me 2 find a film and how i can get it or buy it , the name is The Dukes of Hazzard: Hazzard in Hollywood was a reunion film based on the American TV series The Dukes of Hazzard, and was aired on CBS television in 2000 i love this film and i have look for it everywhere i can . if u can help me u can email me at <<redacted email>> so i hope u can help me with this , hope 2 hear from u soom

thanks you so must

shane o'connor from ireland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.126.25.135 (talk) 00:10, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Symbol move vote.svg Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. GB fan (talk) 00:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
From the article The Dukes of Hazzard: Hazzard in Hollywood, The film was released on DVD along with The Dukes of Hazzard: Reunion! on June 10, 2008. if that helps. – ukexpat (talk) 00:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] User's pages

Resolved: User has been blocked  Chzz  ►  00:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

User:1000Fast (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

This user made his first edit on Wikipedia on February 12, 2011. Since that time, other than the occasional vandalism and a very little bit of non-vandalism, he seems to be simply playing with his user page, his talk page, and his user subpages. This appears to be contrary to WP:NOTWEBHOST. Assuming I'm right, where should I report it?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:26, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

WP:ANI  Chzz  ►  00:27, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
That was fast, thanks. I was afraid of that. Ah, well, maybe I'll grow some additional skin before I post.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Actually, probably more polite to point the user in the direction of NOTWEBHOST before going to ANI; then if his edits don't improve he can't say he wasn't warned first. BencherliteTalk 00:31, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
LOL. Certainly a good idea in concept, but have you seen his Talk page and earlier versions of it? At one point, he had a graphic on it saying he was blocked. I believe an admin removed it. :-) Still, it never hurts to be optimistic, so I'll follow your suggestion.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:36, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

@Bencherlite [3] [4] [5] [6] [7].  Chzz  ►  00:41, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

While ANI is the appropriate place (and AIV would probably ave handled it too), no need for ANI in this case; I've indef blocked as a vandalism-only account. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Moot point.

Block 2566593 targeting 1000Fast blocked by Floquenbeam for infinity starting at 2011-03-30T00:40:02Z because Vandalism-only account: actually only 95% vandalism, but that's close enough for me Flags: NOCREATE AUTOBLOCK ALLOWUSERTALK [8]  Chzz  ►  00:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

LOL yet again. I had just crafted my carefully worded counsel on the user's Talk page. I then saved it and saw Floquenbeam's block, at which point, while laughing, I undid my edit. Thanks, Floquenbeam, for saving me additional trouble.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:48, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Adding a subcategory

The category Category:Catholics by nationality is missing the subcategory Category:Dutch Roman Catholics. I tried to add it from the editing page, but was not able to do so. Is there another way to do it or must another editor make that type of change?EricWR (talk) 01:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EricWR (talk • contribs) 01:08, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

You would have to edit Category:Dutch Roman Catholics and add [[Category:Catholics by nationality]] to it. See Help:Category. However, Category:Dutch Roman Catholics is already in Category:Roman Catholics by nationality which is a subcategory of Category:Catholics by nationality. The latter doesn't directly contain any subcategories of form "Category:X Roman Catholics", so I don't think you should make the edit without prior discussion. I'm not sure about the distinction between "Catholics" and "Roman Catholics" but maybe Roman Catholic (term) says something relevant. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:34, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Elder Johnny James

Hello!

Is it possible to turn a user page into an article? I believe I have mistakingly made a user page that was meant to be an article.

Please help, Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elder Johnny James (talk • contribs) 01:39, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Done, see Elder Johnny James. Now you should make a new user page for yourself and request speedy deletion of the User:Elder Johnny James page which now redirects to the article. hydnjo (talk) 03:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
However the page was a copyvio and has been deleted.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Oops (:-( -hydnjo (talk) 12:23, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Rescaled fair use-deletion template?

I uploaded a rescaled version of File:SEPTAboot2.jpg after the original uploader classified it as a free file when it is not. What template do I use to get an administrator to delete the old, full resolution version (which as I understand shouldn't be there)? — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 02:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Check the last line of the orange box on the file page - "Once a reduced version of this file has been uploaded, please replace this template with {{Non-free reduced|~~~~~}}." -- John of Reading (talk) 06:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
YesY Done – ukexpat (talk) 14:02, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Citing forewords of a book

Resolved: –Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 21:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The book I would like to cite has two introductions. One is an actual foreword, titled "Foreword: Art in Traffic", and the second is titled "A Biographical Sketch". Both are short essays written by two different authors, and neither are written by the actual author of the book. (There are three names inside this book.) So I was looking at the {{cite book}} template, and I'm kind of stumped as to how to go about doing this. In terms of formatting the references, I want to use footnotes and a bibliography for my article.

If the author is Gerald Carr, and the foreword is by Warren Adelson, and the Sketch is by Lisa Hankin, this is my immediate guess as to how to format the template:

{{cite book |last1=Carr |first1=Gerald |coauthors=Warren Adelson, Lisa Hankin |title=Fooblahtitle}}

But they're not really co-authors. They just wrote two introductions in the book. Should I use the others= parameter in the template instead?

{{cite book |others=Warren Adelson (''Foreword: Art...''), Lisa Hankin (''...Sketch'')}}

Once that's settled, then how do I actually cite the introductions separately from the book? Do I even need to credit either Adelson or Hankin? If I do, how do I go about doing that? In the example below, I just throw their names into parentheses next to the actual page numbers I would be using.

The main text of this book is being cited.<ref name=Carr>Carr, p. 30.</ref> Now the foreword is being cited.<ref name=CarrAdelson>Carr, p. 9 (from ''Foreword: Art...'' by Warren Adelson).</ref> Now the Sketch is being cited.<ref name=CarrHankin>Carr, p. 12 (from ''A Biographical Sketch'' by Lisa Hankin).</ref>

Thanks so much for any suggestions or advice. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 02:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Citation templates are a good tool because they promote consistency of formatting without having to worry about what should be italicized, what order to present the information and so on. However, their use "is neither encouraged nor discouraged." If you have a sui generis citation that doesn't easily fit in the mold they create, you can just create a citation that makes sense—good attribution so that users can clearly tell what is being cited for verifiability purposes is far more important than fitting the cookie cutter. So I would just use three different citations, maybe one might be Adelson, Warren (year). ''Art in Traffic''; essay appearing as foreword to Gerald Carr's ''Name of Book'' (year). Location: Publisher. ISBN 000-000-000-0.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:32, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Hmm. That hadn't occurred to me. If the article were to be taken to GAN (my goal) or even nom'd for FA in the far future, is this something that would be frowned upon by the reviewers? No, of course not, your link obviously states it. Thanks! -Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 06:06, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Take a look at the {{cite book}} documentation, especially the example for "Citing a chapter in a book with different authors for different chapters and an editor." ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 11:48, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
I must've zoomed right past that section! I was completely content with Fuhghettaboutit's suggestion, but this should make it much easier to read. Thanks! – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 21:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] can't log in

i've been trying to log in for...at least a week. probably closer to two.

trying to remember exactly what i've done. go to log in; enter...hmm, email and password? first time. and then username and password. get message that...one or the other isn't correct. make changes; try again. same message. ask for a password confirmation/reset to be sent. it never arrives. i check immediately. i check the next day. i check several days later. yes, i check the spam folder.

i've asked several times now for an email. it never arrives.

okay, i have a few email accounts. 3 "main" ones. i've been checking the 3 regularly. but i've also taken the time to check them ALL. i KNOW what my username is. i can't remember the password. was actually pretty sure i had it right, but apparently not.

this is almost certainly all my fault. i had a bad bike accident awhile back, and got a good blow to the head. my memory's not been so great since then. but i have this annoying habit of writing down all my online info (usernames, passwords, associated email account, security questions, blah-blah) in a notebook just for that. but, for wikipedia, i only wrote down the username. must have been a bad day. i don't know.

but i also see that sometimes accounts get compromised, or hijacked, or whatever. i've only made a few edits out here. i'm fairly new and want to be cautious and not step on any toes. but i've also seen some pretty horrendous errors lately that i'd like to at least comment on and bring to the attention of others, if not actually change the damn things.

should i just start a new account?

oh, yes, i searched the archives and read what was there, but nothing that would help. because, i'm already checking the spam folders, lol. 76.255.21.94 (talk) 07:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

If you're sure you can't access the "password rest" emails, then I'm afraid you'll have to start a new account. The standard advice is here, but I'm sure you've seen that already. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Remember that the account name and password are case sensitive. "Bob Smith" is not the same as "Bob smith". You might want to check the exact user-name in Special:ListUsers (putting the start of your user name in the box, "Display users starting at:"). But failing that...yeah; create a new account - as long as you never use the old one again, and you weren't blocked or anything, that's fine. It'd be nice to say, on your new user page, "I used to use the account < whatever >" - and you could put a {{Former account}} notice on the old one. Chzz  ►  12:34, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] intrebare

cum pot sa las un mesaj pentru a fi scris in ziarul metro in suedia.va las email.pentru ami raspunde. astept raspuns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.73.231.152 (talk) 07:50, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.5 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. You can also try to find information on the Romanian Wikipedia.
Bănuiesc, pe baza întrebarea dumneavoastră, că aţi găsit unul din cele peste 3,5 milioane de articole şi a crezut că am fost afiliat într-un fel cu acel subiect. Vă rugăm să reţineţi că sunteţi la Wikipedia, enciclopedia liberă online care oricine poate edita, şi această pagină este pentru a pune intrebari legate de utilizarea sau care contribuie la Wikipedia în sine. Astfel, nu avem cunoştinţe speciale despre subiectul a întrebării dumneavoastră. Puteţi, totuşi, căutare catalogul nostru vasta de articole prin tastarea unui subiect în câmpul de căutare de pe partea din dreapta sus a ecranului. Dacă nu puteţi găsi ceea ce căutaţi, avem un birou de referinţă, împărţite în diverse domenii, în cazul în care pune întrebări de cunoştinţe este binevenit. Cel mai bun de noroc. Puteţi încerca, de asemenea, pentru a găsi informaţii cu privire la Români Wikipedia.
Avicennasis @ 08:00, 24 Adar II 5771 / 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Fragmentation of pages

Hi - I used to be a long-term editor of wikipedia (20,000+ edits) but got sick of all the bullshit so now restrict myself to do the odd edit from an IP, so I've lost touch with internal wikipidia thinking. However I'm curious about something? Is there no longer a house style to follow in regards to pages? Recently I've encountered pages where:

  • Instead of 'edit' buttons, there are pictures of pencils
  • Articles which have "rank this" on the page and starred scales
  • Articles where there is no edit buttons at all but 'view source' allows you to edit.

There seems to be no rymth or reason to what pages contain those features - is it 'anything goes' now? --87.194.194.250 (talk) 09:03, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Don't know about the pencils, haven't seen those. The "rank this" pages are in a pilot trial, see Category:Article Feedback Pilot. The "view source" pages are ones that you as an IP can't edit i.e. either semi- or full-protected. You would only have seen "view source" before when you were logged in if you went to a fully protected page. BencherliteTalk 09:06, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
(edit conflict)The first point, I haven't seen - can you provide a link to an article with this pencils?
The second point - some pages are in Category:Article Feedback Pilot - Some info on that is on the linked page. Only certain pages fall within this scope.
Thirdly, some pages are Semi-protected, which does not allow unregistered editors (IP editors) to edit the page at all. You can look at the wikicode, but you cannot actually edit it. (If you notice when you click on view source, there is no save button.) Pages are semi-protected as needed due to on-going vandalism, so there is a reason for this.
Hope that helps a little. Avicennasis @ 09:14, 24 Adar II 5771 / 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Well that's what I find odd, recently I've found that when I click on 'view source' I can then edit the page! So I thought they'd simply merged the two. --87.194.194.250 (talk) 09:07, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
How odd. Perhaps your cache was storing an old, protected version of the page? BencherliteTalk 09:11, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
For the "pencil" icon, see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2011-03-14/Technology report
The "View Source" glitch has been mentioned here at Village pump (technical) -- John of Reading (talk) 09:17, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Ah right, thanks for that. --87.194.194.250 (talk) 08:50, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] User pages as articles

What is the proper procedure if it appears that a User Page (or user talk page) is being used as a pseudo-article for a group that appears to fail the notability test. (For example a single university fraternity in the Philippines). I know that if the username also reflects that group then there are other issues, but I think those are likely to be separate...Naraht (talk) 13:04, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

If it falls within a speedy deletion category (G11 for example), I would tag it as such. Otherwise, WP:Mfd. – ukexpat (talk) 13:09, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] ~~~~ not working for sig

Hello, the tildes are not working to automatically produce my signature. this happened yesterday and I got a notice from Sinebot. I thought I had just forgotten, so keeping that in mind I made sure to type the tildes in a post today...and again, it didn't work. Is there something wrong with my signature? (Trying again now) Quinn ☂THUNDER 16:21, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Well crap, it worked that time. Maybe it was just a glitch. Quinn ☂THUNDER 16:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quinn1 (talk • contribs)
I think SineBot checks whether you've linked to the account you're actually using, which you have not. -- zzuuzz (talk) 16:26, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
What do I do to fix this? It keeps happening. When I save a page it shows my signature...but if I go back or refresh the screen, it shows as "unsigned." I recently got bcrat approval to move my user name from user:David Able ---> User:Quinn1 and everything seems to have been moved correctly. Quinn ☂THUNDER 17:45, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
What you need to do is fix your signature, as zzuuzz pointed out above. You are editing as Quinn1, but your signature points to User talk:David Able. Change your signature to point to User talk:Quinn1, and then hopefully SineBot won't need to intervene. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
As a further clarification, did you get permission to move your user name, or to use the two in parallel? - David Biddulph (talk) 18:03, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Can't edit pages

I noticed that the edit tab was missing from an article today. I checked out a few other pages that I have edited in the past, and I can't see the edit tab for them either. It doesn't seem like the pages are protected in any way. I haven't created an account, so I've been editing as an IP. I can see with recent changes that other IP editors aren't having trouble. Any ideas? I'll probably end up making an account, I just haven't had any compelling reason to do it so far. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.129.65.62 (talk) 16:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Looks like it's this problem: Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Pages incorrectly appearing as edit-protected. – ukexpat (talk) 16:54, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Should I be worried about Sinebot?

This is Collin237. I had a problem with signing in a few years ago, but other things came up. So, admittedly lazily, I've been using the low-tech approach of just typing Collin237 at the end of my posts.

This has never been a problem until a day or two ago, when I received a message from Sinebot. Should I ignore it, or should I see about setting up a new login? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.217.232.85 (talk) 17:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

"Signing in" and "signing" are different things. "Signing in" (rare term at Wikipedia) refers to logging in to an account. That is optional but has many benefits. Whether you are logged in or not you should sign your discussion posts with ~~~~. This adds the time, date and a link people can use to find you and your other edits (or edits by your IP address if you are not logged in). PrimeHunter (talk) 17:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning Libya's page on the encyclopedia

Hello there,

We have noticed, since a few months, that Wikipedia starts to accepts all kind of articles without referring back to any sources some of the time. I have grown up along with wikipedia, enjoyed its services and donated indefinite amount of money for its support. However, and as of today, I will not be paying one single penny. I find it very very sad to say so, but I have no other options. Libya, although under heavy dictatorship, has been a unique and a single country with one unique government (and has to say, nothing fair in it) Yet, it is still the recognized "regime" or government by the United Nations. Trying to show that Libya has two governments on your page, is absolutely fake, senseless and open to emotional and soul distress more than being an actual reality and that is sad. Wikipedia shall not enter any arguments about Libya and leave that to its citizens. Modifying the data about a country by self proclaimed council who haven't been elected (yet) is a big injure to your status of a fair encyclopedia. We all wish and hope and work on Gaddafi's leave, but you entering and allowing modification of a country's status is of no ethical and factual data at all. That only disregards your position as a free platform for the world to use.

We do hope that you realize those mistakes and be sure that things are correctly fixed.

Best regards,

Libyans Abroad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.4.45.67 (talk) 17:55, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I think the best place to raise this point is on the discussion page for the article itself. If a consensus emerges to only list one government, then the page can be changed. TNXMan 17:58, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
I hope you won't give up on Wikipedia solely because one article has been edited in a way you disapprove of. Please note that Wikipedia has no editorial board: it is created and managed by ordinary editors like you and me. It is inevitable that sometimes people will have strong disagreements about how a subject should be presented in Wikipedia, and even whether certain views should be included or not. Our challenge as editors is to work, even with people whose views we strongly disagree with, to achieve a consensus. If you have strong views about the current contents of the article, I suggest your take Tnxman's suggestion and start a discussion on the article's talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 19:09, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] What Tags do I need to add to an Image

I have uploaded the image Little-Loonie.gif and I am getting a warning that I have to add copyright information or the image will get deleted. I represent the owner of the logo (it is the Club Logo of the New York Science Fiction Society - the Lunarians) and we own the copyright. I know the creator (Wally Wood) and just need to know what tags to use. I can not find a sample of what to enter.

Thank You.RARPSL (talk) 17:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Please follow the instructions at WP:IOWN to confirm permission to use the logo. Note that you must allow use for all purposes, not just for use on Wikipedia. Otherwise, take a look at WP:LOGO for help using the logo pursuant to our non-free content criteria. – ukexpat (talk) 18:03, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Charts and copyright

If one creates a chart using a proprietary program (e.g. Microsoft Excel), takes a screenshot of the chart only, and uploads it, is it a free image or a fair-use one? The image I am talking about is File:NYC-SubwayFaresWithInflation.png. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 21:10, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

It seems to me that if you created the chart, you hold the copyright, and you can choose to licence it or to release it to the public domain. It doesn't matter what tool you used to create it. IANAL. --ColinFine (talk) 23:33, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Image Rotation Difficulties

File:Sheila Cavanagh.jpg

Hi there,

I have been trying to rotate this image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sheila_Cavanagh.jpg and have been trying to put a rotate tag on it. However, the rotate tag takes me to this dead-end page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Rotate&action=edit&redlink=1. Do I have to move the image to wikimedia commons in order to have access to rotation features? What else could be done to address this? Graduate researcher (talk) 21:12, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I have just uploaded a new, rotated version - so it should be OK now. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  21:24, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks so much! Graduate researcher (talk) 21:31, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
I have moved the image to Commons as it was released under a Commons-appropriate license: commons:File:Sheila Cavanagh.jpg. – ukexpat (talk) 13:18, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Wikopedia filter

Is it possible to filter Wikopedia for expicit sexual material which may be inappropriate for children? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.220.141.18 (talk) 22:42, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

For images, please see Help:Options to not see an image.
Please read Wikipedia:NOTCENSORED.
Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors might also be helpful.  Chzz  ►  22:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
P.S. There is also current, ongoing discussion about possible future improvements in this area - see Mw:Personal image filter.  Chzz  ►  22:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Symbol move vote.svg Wikipedia currently has no method to control content other than manually blocking individual images for logged-in users. There is an ongoing discussion on adding content control features; see meta:2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content: Part Two, especially the section User-Controlled Viewing Options. See also WP:NOTCENSORED, WP:CHILDPROTECT and Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 15:08, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] March 31

[edit] Google listing different to Wikipedia entry

A Google search for Joseph Lelyveld lists the Wikipedia entry first in the results. The short description provided by Google reads as follows:

"Joseph Lelyveld (born April 5, 1937) was executive editor and a renowned racist, of the New York Times from 1994 to 2001, and interim executive editor in ..."

However, when reading the actual Wikipedia entry, there is no such mention of racism whatsoever, especially nothing about Joseph Lelyveld being a "renowned racist".

Why is this occurring and is it a mistake by the Google listing?

cheers, Dylan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.26.122.12 (talk) 00:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Google's short previews are the content of the page whenever their robots last checked the page. If the page happens to have been defaced by someone at that time, the short preview will contain that vandalism until google looks at the page again. It is possible to request they update the search blurb about an article, and I'll go ahead and do that for that article. Prodego talk 00:16, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Looks like it has actually already been updated. Prodego talk 00:17, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
(ec) Updated already CTJF83 00:18, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Are you sure we can request a Google update of a specific Wikipedia page without doing something that problably requires a developer? How would you do it? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
This link has info on what to do. Prodego talk 00:24, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I may try the URL removal tool another time. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:13, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Article@ 1960 in television

Hello. PERRY MASON was running successfuly from 1957 to 1966. Yet it is not mentioned in the TV shows airing during 1960 on the "1960 in television" article. I would be delighted to see this show added to the list as it deserves to be. Thanks Wayne (UK) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.196.69 (talk) 08:56, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The article "List of years in television" has a section for the 1960s, List of years in television#1960s - which, by nature of that article, must be short and not comprehensive - if we listed every single programme there, the page would be excessively long and unmanageable.
Perry Mason (TV series) is however linked from the page on two specifics years in TV, 1957 in television and 1966 in television.
If you feel strongly that it should be added to the first article, please state your case on Talk:List of years in television.
If you wanted advice on different articles, please state the exact name here, so we know what you are talking about. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  11:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
I added it (prior to seeing your post above Chzz), because it was a very famous show, though I think the list itself is rather indiscriminate and maybe the whole thing should go.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:20, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
(e/c) FWIW, there is a page at the title the OP quoted (1960 in television), and it does appear to list shows that were on air during that year. I'd tend to agree that such a lengthy list is actually overkill and unsustainable, but if any case can be made for the page's current organization then it seems reasonable for Perry Mason to be listed there too. Gonzonoir (talk) 11:23, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
It's a bit absurd. Right now, as far as I can see, fair game for that list (and the same type lists in its brethren articles) are any televisions shows verifiably on air in 1960 at all, anywhere in the world, in any language, even though right now it appears to only have US and UK entries (a bit of systemic bias).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] No account, but posted question - how will I get any answers

I tried to open an account but it told me I had the wrong password, so I posted a query, as the query only knows my IP address and I doubt if I can navigate back to where I asked the question what shall I do? or even how do I get an answer to this without posting my e:mail address as instructed 82.137.72.133 (talk) 11:00, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

If you are talking about your question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology, just bookmark the page, then you can go back there to see any answers. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
David Biddulph looked at Special:Contributions/82.137.72.133 which is linked in your signature. You can also use Special:Mycontributions to see the contributions of your current account or IP address. Logged in users have it a little easier with a link on every page saying "My contributions". PrimeHunter (talk) 13:06, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Bug in Wikipedia? Several Reference Desks offer no links to add/edit questions.

For some reasons, several Reference Desks don't have the usual links for adding/editing question entries, at least for someone who's not logged in. The current subset of Reference Desks having the problem are Entertainment, Mathematics, and Miscellaneous. It seems that subset changes over time. What's going on? Some kind of edit conflict prevention mechanism (implemented incorrectly)? --173.49.13.13 (talk) 12:30, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Everything looks fine for me. Maybe its a problem at your end? --Jayron32 12:40, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
There has lately been a problem where IP users sometimes get no section edit links and a "View source" tab at top instead of "Edit" on unprotected pages. Try to bypass your cache. You can still edit unprotected pages with the "View source" tab which has the same url as the Edit tab. If you can manually work out the url for a section edit link then that should also work on unprotected pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SN_1572

In the blue box in top-right hand corner, the Distance is 13,000 light-years (4.0 kpc) but under supernova remnant - Radio detection, it states: SN 1572 is associated with the radio source G.120·1+1·4. It has an apparent diameter of 7.4 arc minutes, and is located approximately 7,500 light-years (2.3 kpc) from our Solar system. This is confusing. Please clarify distances so they are understandable & tally, rather than vague figures, which spoil the fantastic reputation of wikipedia. Thnx:Rafi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.7.234 (talk) 12:48, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The best would be to discuss this on the article's talk page. Click here to get there and state your proposals there, so other editors of this article can see them. Best luck. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:06, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Article about Jane Martine

i have contributed an article about Ombudsman, Jane Martin. it keeps disappearing and i do not know if there is something wrong with the article and it is being removed by Wikipedia. the content is entirely true and i believe it would be helpful for others to know about this very distinct failure in impartiality. If Wikipedia is removing it please will you help me modify it so that it is acceptable. The content is enclosed here.

jackie1945 email <blanked> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackie1945 (talk • contribs) 12:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I do not see any reliable sources that support this. Furthermore, articles about living people are held to higher standard than other Wikipedia articles and should demonstrate why someone is notable beyond one event. TNXMan 13:01, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
I guess you are the IP who has been editing Local Government Ombudsman. You didn't make an article but added material to an existing article. It was reverted and I have reverted it again [9] with edit summary "Unsourced POV and negative claims about a living person". It was also too detailed for that article. Wikipedia is not the place to air a grievance with somebody. If you come here because you are upset at somebody and want to expose them then you will probably be unable to satisfy our guidelines. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:23, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Place for editing requests

Hi: could I request page administrator(s) to place, maybe a link or a box, like in the end of a page so that people can safely put their request for specific editing, for that particular page only, regarding any mistakes or omissions or otherwise, or any other clarification regarding that specific page, to be sent to the appropriate administrator(s) for their opinions, to be set-up so that when a reader finds such discrepancies, someone could be readily alerted & it could be sent for experts to decide & such oversights corrected as soon as they might be detected, rather than any tom dick or harry editing pages, which might/might not be the best. This is in relation to my previous comment. Hope I am clear enough. Thnx:Rafi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.7.234 (talk) 13:06, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

That's one of the main purposes of the talk page of each article! --Orange Mike | Talk 13:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Generally every page on Wikipedia can be edited by anyone (except for semi-protected or indefinitely protected pages). No one owns an article here on Wikipedia. You can however be bold and change errors yourself. Cheers. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:22, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Funny editing

I hope I'm asking in the right place. In the last few months I noticed often funny editing that seem testing how quick is the Wikipedia's response to vandalism. I was wondering if there are any policies or if is a testing carried out by Wikipedia itself. Here an example of what I mean: a new user inserted a "unhelpful" sentence and deleted it few minutes afterwards. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sicilian_Mafia&diff=prev&oldid=421632524 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sicilian_Mafia&diff=next&oldid=421632524 (I know, I'm terribly curios for all possible useless things....;0) ) --Dia^ (talk) 13:15, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

That's pretty common in my experience. It's either someone making a test edit to see if they really can edit the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, or it's a would-be vandal who saw the error of their ways and quickly reverted. – ukexpat (talk) 13:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
If it were a test by an established Wikipedian, an admin, or anybody else who could be seen as a part of "Wikipedia itself", I'd think (s)he would say that that edit was a test edit, esp since the sandbox can be used for the vast majority of test edits (and is, if a veteran contributor does a test edit). BTW, the anti-vandalism bot catches every other attempt at vandalism, and does so in seconds. The more blatant cases of vandalism are rather unlikely to meet the eye of an unsuspecting reader.
Tomorrow, we might drown in edits like that... - ¡Ouch! (hurt me / more pain) 14:32, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for answering! Maybe I lack imagination, but if I were to write a test edit, I would just write "test test test" and I wouldn't bother with a full sentence. And, as I wrote before, in the last few months I've seen a lot of "would-be vandal who saw the error of their ways very quickly". At the beginning were more often IPs and I thought that maybe were school-children and the sys-admin there was cleaning up after them. Ok, improbable.... ;0) I just find strange. Not that I'd complain about if vandals would disappear altogether... well, will stay a mystery...--Dia^ (talk) 16:56, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Maybe you've just come upon a statistical streak in your watchlisted or viewed articles of these types of edits? They are really very common and because of that there are long standing templates tailored to address them, such as {{Uw-selfrevert}}. Anyway, I know of no breaching experiment being conducted recently.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:18, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

THANK YOU! That's what I was looking for! And WOW, information AND template! I knew there must have been something in wikipedia....ok, that means I just didn't notice this type of edit in the past.--Dia^ (talk) 18:33, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] How to Remove Page Notices

I created a page "The Order of Christian Mystics". It had multiple issues that have all been resolved but how do I remove the page notice box above the article?Loveroftruth (talk) 13:40, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Click the edit tab at the top of article and then remove the templates at the top. Please remember to explain in your edit summary or on the talk page why you have removed them. – ukexpat (talk) 13:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] mini-platform or software editor...

Is there some kind of mini-platform that allows composing articles, correct them... but not online (conection to internet must not be required).

The mini-platform -...or simple software-, holds only the framework of create/editing and preview articles, with the same properties or more similars to Wikipedia Editor online.

Having completed the article, then in the traditional way put it online, with minors corrections and adjustments, to make.

That is why, I'm not referring for any kind of 'Wiki Server'. Yep?

Thank you!

fer.m —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.127.37.72 (talk) 14:55, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't know whether Wikipedia provides a special tool for this. You could copy-paste the Wiki markup (see WP:MARKUP) into a text editor. After you changed the text and markup, you could paste it over the existing article code in the edit window. However I think this method can easily lead to conflicts with other editors, since the article might have changed when you attempt to paste your text back in and you should be careful not to 'wash away' the edits of other editors in this way. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 15:10, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Full Wikipedia Editor manual downloadable...

Is there any kind of 'full' Wikipedia manual, to be downloaded and printed.

'Full' in the sense of regulations, do and don't, also procedures, better practices, how to's?, etc., etc., etc.

Thanks!

fer.m —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.127.37.72 (talk) 15:00, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I think you may be looking for the the Wikipedia manual. TNXMan 15:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] VRLA battery / Absorbed Glass Mat / History

There is a factual error in the VRLA Battery / Absorbed Glass Mat / History section. The original patent for AGM batteries (and Optima) was granted in 1972. It is US patent 3862861. http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=t70EAAAAEBAJ&dq=3862861

This predates the development date stated in this section ("late 1980s") by many years. Optima batteries were also manufactured and marketing by Gates before the late 1980s.

Spiralcell AGM (Optima) was designed developed and marketed originally by Gates. Optima was later sold to Gylling, and was purchased by Johnson Controls in late 2000. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.36.94.35 (talk) 15:57, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

If you have a reliable source for this correction, you are welcome to be bold and edit the article yourself, citing your source. I see you have linked to a US patent, which certainly seems to be a reliable source, and certainly relates to a lead-acid battery (though it says it was issued in 1975, not 1972). I do not have the expertise to say whether or not it is (or is relevant to) a VRLA battery, and it may be that you need something further to establish that relationship; or it may be obvious to somebody who knows about battery technology.
The other information you mention should have a reference if it is to be added to the article.
If you prefer not to edit the article yourself, its talk page is the best place to post the information about the patent. --ColinFine (talk) 19:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] How to find icons?

It should be simple, but it's not. How do I locate galleries of the common icons used in templates on discussion pages? I searched Wikimedia and Wikipedia help in vain for a couple of hours.

Regards Peter S Strempel | Talk 16:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia:List of Discussion Templates what you need? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 16:29, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
There are also the messages at WP:TTALK. Clicking on the images in the templates will bring you to the corresponding image page. Hope this helps. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 16:32, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
The above page aggregates many, but if you want to know a methodology to actually hunt down where a particular icon is with others, then here's a not-so-simple explanation. Most of the free media content used on Wikipedia is hosted at the Wikimedia Commons, not on Wikipedia, which includes most if not all of these "icons". When you see a discussion template and click edit this page, you will then see the name of the image file used in the template or possibly have to go the the template page itself (if its not substituted). You can then take that name and navigate to the image's page, which will have the text "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below", with "description page there" linking to its Commons page. That commons page will inevitably be categorized so, just look at the categories it is in.
So for example, say you see template uw-test1 on a user's talk page. If its substituted (as it should be) you would see in edit mode that the icon it uses (Information.svg) is called Image:Nuvola apps important.svg, or if not substituted you would go to the page for the template itself, {{uw-test1}} then click edit to see the name of the image file. You would then drop the image's name into the search box and find this page; then click on the Commons link to bring you here; which in turn would show you that it is in this Commons Category, and that that category is a subcategory of this one.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:26, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks to both of you. In some ways I'm almost glad there wasn't a simple answer because it means I wasn't just being a sleep-deprived moron when I found nothing after so much searching. The tip about the categories is a good one, as is the advice about stopping at every icon I think I might use at some stage to ID what and where it is. Regards Peter S Strempel | Talk 00:30, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Hogging the sandbox

Hello. I'm a bit concerned about a user hounding WP:SANDBOX. They're undoing all other edits to the page rather quickly in order to keep their version - an old, now deleted Wikipedia article there. The actual damage is rather minimal but a sandbox that constantly looks like an article is unwelcoming, as is having one's sandbox edits reverted within seconds. Should something be done? Zakhalesh (talk) 16:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

He seems to have been warned by several users, and has desisted for now (has not edited in 45 minutes or so). If it fires up again, let us know... --Jayron32 17:46, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Will do! Cheers! Zakhalesh (talk) 17:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Best way to work on a draft page/facelift for existing WikiProject?

For the last month or so, I have been learning on how things work on Wikipedia. I now feel that I would like to at least make a facelift of an existing WikiProject, in this case, World's Oldest People. I feel that both the project home page and subpages can be dramatically improved via better categorization of longevity areas and articles (both in article mainspace and in project subpages). There are several WikiProjects out there that have amazing categorizations and formatting such as Star Trek. Kudos to those projects!

My question is how best do I present a possible draft of the facelift of the entire WikiProject? In my userspace subpage such as CalvinTy/WOP for example (not existing yet)? Or put it under the WikiProject subpage, such as World's Oldest People/Draft as a fictitious example? I have looked at how moves work but they typically talk about situations where userspace draft articles are appropriately moved into article mainspace when they are ready -- not much on WikiProjects themselves.

For me, several concerns with either idea above is that if I put in my userspace, I'm not certain how the move would be integrated, or usurped, for lack of a better word, into the Project's home page that already exist? (of course, only after I bring this up in discussion soon, and get consensus -- or at least, lack of objections due to the small membership of the project). Alternatively, I could propose a new WikiProject with a similar goal, i.e. Human Longevity, and then work on the parallel WikiProject's draft/format until there is a consensus on which WikiProject to keep, if not both.

If I make a draft/facelift under the current WOP WikiProject, the advantage is that project members can provide feedback to my draft, while the disadvantage is that for the first efforts on my part, I rather to create a 50,000 foot point of view first and get the categories down before getting any feedback (suggesting that my userspace may be better suited).

Thoughts from anyone, but in particular, those who work extensively with WikiProjects would be most appreciated. Cheers, CalvinTy 17:27, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I am not particularly familiar with WikiProject organization but WP:COUNCIL and WP:COUNCIL/G might be of some help. Haven't read through it though. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 18:05, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
I would have thought that the starting point would be to discuss your thoughts at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject World's Oldest People? - David Biddulph (talk) 18:16, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
@Toshio, thanks for the links. I must have glanced at these links in the past, but hadn't done so recently.
@David, that is my intention. I felt that I wanted to discuss my thoughts to the project by presenting the concept visually by showing my draft to the project members. For that, I needed to see how/where I could make such a draft first. Does that make sense? Thanks, CalvinTy 18:20, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Firefox 4 login

I check the remember me for 30 days box, but each time I go in, Wikipedia makes me log in. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Do you have Firefox clearing cookies each time you close it. Wikipedia stores the login information in cookies and if you clear them you lose the login information. GB fan (talk) 19:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
I had it set to accept cookies for the session. When I changed it to allow all the time, it fixed the problem. Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:54, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Permission to use images

May I use the following images in an educational course (taken from space elevator, Wikipedia)?

Wikipedia 220px-SpaceElevatorClimbing wikipedia 646px-Space_elevator_balance_of_forces_svg Wikipedia space elevator 300px-Space_elevator_structural_diagram_sv

98.94.134.80 (talk) 19:34, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

If you click the images in question, it will bring you to an image information page which descrbes the licensing of the images. If you have more questions, you should read Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content#Images and other media and Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia. --Jayron32 19:51, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Request

Hello there. I collect movies and I notice that you no longer show "Followed By" on a film page. For example, when viewing Star Wars film info it would show "Followed by Empire Strikes Back", etc. This was very useful in finding out what movies had sequels or movies related to it. Do you think you could look at adding that back to movie pages? Thanks for your consideration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.152.101.229 (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The fields were removed about a month ago, following an extensive discussion at Template talk:Infobox film. If you would like to read about the process whereby the information was removed, you can read it there. If you would like to comment and request that they be added back, you can also do that at Template talk:Infobox film. --Jayron32 21:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] IMdb

Is the Internet Movie Database, as a general rule of thumb, considered a reliable source and/or reference? Buster Seven Talk 20:45, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

There's a page for that! – ukexpat (talk) 20:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
I find technical info, e.g. credits, release date, etc., to be pretty reliable, but we still don't cite it as a reference. Under no circumstances, however, are the biographies and trivia to be trusted on their own. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks X 2..Buster Seven Talk 21:06, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Ava Van

Ava Van is a beauty queen who won Miss Seattle Teen USA in 2007 and competed in the Miss Washington Teen USA 2008 pageant.

Ava is of Vietnamese and of Chinese decent. She graduated Lindbergh High School in Renton, Washington where she was class president and captain of her fastpitch team. She was top five students in her junior class in addition to representing her class as top 12 seniors.

Today, Ava is a photographer at Ava Van Photography and pursuing her dreams to become a TV reporter. In 2010, she interned at the KING 5 (NBC affiliate). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.233.180.192 (talk) 21:02, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

It appears that you are trying to create an article, so please read the following:

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

Thank you.
You will need to first register an account, which has many benefits, including the ability to create articles. Once you have registered, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.
Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.
If you still think an article is appropriate, see Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. An Article Wizard is available to walk you through creating an article, but you will need to create an account to use it. if you don't wish to do so, you can submit a proposal for an article at Articles for Creation. – ukexpat (talk) 21:57, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Article incorrectly PRODded

Re IAR 36 - an editor has attempted to WP:PROD this article, but failed because they put a space at the start of the line, and also forgot one of the two closing braces. Should I (a) remove the space and add the missing brace so that the PROD takes hold; (b) remove the {{subst:proposed deletion}} entirely (would this count as a disputed PROD?); (c) send it to WP:AFD? --Redrose64 (talk) 21:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I would suggest fixing the Prod unless you disagree with the reasoning for the Prod. GB fan (talk) 21:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
(edit conflict) IMHO, just reinstate the PROD. Then everyone gets that neat 7 day period to raise any objections, and no-one loses. You can also second it, or properly contest it, as you see fit. - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 21:56, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] KEIGHLEY WIKIPEDIA PAGE

Dear Wikipedia,

Just recently on Thursday March 31st 2011 when I was reading the wikipedia page about Keighley West Yorkshire I noticed that there was some information about the supermarkets that are in Kieghley town cenre, It said that that Asda opneed in August 2009, but I know this infromation is incorrect, because I applied for a job at Asda and I know that Asda actually opened on Monday July 13th 2009, I also tried to create an account with wikipedia but it would not let me do so, so can this information about the opening date about the Asda store in Keighley.

Yours faithfully, Janeyt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.252.28 (talk) 21:50, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

(q formatted by another editor) IMHO the reference to an ASDA store should probably be removed from the article completely; or, failing that, any specific date is like to be unnecessary. - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 21:56, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Yup, why not just "opened in 2009"? – ukexpat (talk) 21:58, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Sources confirm it was July 2009 but the month is not needed and I have changed it to "opened in 2009".[10] You could have edited the page without an account. However, what exactly went wrong when you tried to create one? Can you try again and copy an error message here if you get one? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:13, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Referencing help required.

Could you please advise - after adding an entry to an article I have tried to include a reference. When following the Help instructions for entering the appropriate code it places and in-text [1] however there are already 15 references against this article. Clearly I'm going astray somewhere and advice would be most welcome. The page I have added edited is 'Darlington' (Co. Durham, UK) with the main entry referring to the Library within the Culture section.

In addition, I was not aware of the edit summary requirement until after making edit entries - is it possible to do this after the event?

Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.148.55 (talk) 22:43, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

You added the reference to your user talk page. You should add it instead to the article after the fact that the reference verifies. —teb728 t c 23:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC) I copied it to the article for you, here. Is that the place you intended? —teb728 t c 23:29, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


Yes - many thanks. I did actually attempt putting it there on the live page but in preview it showed as [1] as opposed to [13] therefore I didn't save the page. I have another reference to add so I'll try again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.148.55 (talk) 15:25, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

What you are seeing is a limitation of the Wiki editor. If you are only editing one section, the editing software does not know about the rest of the article, so starts with [1] at the beginning of the section.
The article you are interested in seems to use the {{cite xxx}} family of templates. Ideally you would use those templates to give full information about the sources, rather than just a URL. That way, if the URL goes dead, the description may allow editors to figure out where the source has moved to, or where the information might be found in a paper version of the source. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] April 1

[edit] HTML, or XHTML?

The page Help:HTML in wikitext tells its readers how HTML [sic] may be used in pages here, e.g. that a line break may be effected with the four keystrokes <br>. This comes as rather a surprise to me. I've commented in its talk page, but when I did so was told Talk pages in this namespace are generally not watched by many users. Therefore this note alerting people here about the matter. Please comment on that talk page rather than here. (I've crossposted this message to the Village pump.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:09, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I know nothing about the technical aspects of your question but have you considered making a request to move the page?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I considered making it and decided not to. Better (I thought) first to decide what the page should say and only then to decide how best to title it. But please agree or disagree there rather than here. -- Hoary (talk) 00:40, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Number of Wikipedia registered users?

How many registered users on Wikipedia? And further is known, how many still active. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:18, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

See Special:Statistics. Nanonic (talk) 00:42, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
There is a magic word for your first request. The number of registered users is exactly 14,276,235. TNXMan 00:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Botswana LGBT-related films

1. I think The_No._1_Ladies'_Detective_Agency_(TV_series) should go under the category Botswana LGBT-related films since the pliot was a made for tv film and there is a gay character in the series and it also should go under Botswana-LGBT-related television programmes. Please say your opinion about this matter.

2. Does Wikipedia have the right to talk about celebrities personal lives? Does Wikipedia have the right to talk about celebrities personal lives? It seems that Wikipedia has become a gossip blog or something. It talk about people's personal live and half of it might not even be true. Is that what an encyclopedia is suppose to do? Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 03:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

For those who want to tackle these questions, you should know that the user already created a category each for LGBT films of Botswana (or something like that, can't remember the exact title) and LGBT television series of Botswana. Both were deleted about a week to two weeks ago. Dismas|(talk) 03:18, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
This would be better discussed at WT:LGBT. – ukexpat (talk) 12:38, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
1. Categories containing only one item are meaningless. Just because a character in a film or tv show happens to be L or G or B or T does not make it a LGBT film or show. By that logic every film or TV show where a pet or even a wild animal appears is an Amimal or Wildlife film/show. LGBT issues need to be a meaningful part of the plot/story for the film/show to qualify for such a category.
2. Yes. Provided the rules concerning WP:RS, WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:MOSBIO, WP:B, WP:SOAP and whichever others are relevant, are followed. Roger (talk) 12:55, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Scraping & reusing statistics

I'm thinking about compiling some sporting statistics from wikipedia pages by web scraping. I'd use a script to collect the data from the tables on many pages, put these into a database of my own, and produce & host a website that allows users to browse the statistics in various ways.

What legal issues are there with doing this? Is the scraping allowed at all? Is providing a CC attribution disclaimer sufficient? Would I be allowed to generate revenue from the site (via advertisments)?

Cheers. Hopey dishwasher (talk) 08:44, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Many sites re-package Wikipedia pages with added advertisements; this is OK provided the conditions at Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content are met. I think you may run into technical difficulties, though, since there may not be any consistent formatting for tables from one Wikipedia sports article to the next. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:00, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Okay. I reckon I can handle the technical problems, I just didn't want to put the effort in if it was just going to get taken down immediately. Hopey dishwasher (talk) 10:03, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Dates in history - main page

1234 – An Englishman lost the Battle of the Curragh in Ireland, at the same place where an Australian would lose the 1297 Battle of Stirling Bridge in Scotland more than 700 years later.

This makes no sense..... How could an Australian fight at the battle of stirling in 1297? Was he an aboriginal who rowed a canoe to Scotland? I'm confused.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.129.145.221 (talk) 08:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

It's an April Fools thing. Mel Gibson is the 'Australian' who lost the battle (in the movie Braveheart).--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 08:49, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Help Wanted

I'm trying to revive WikiProject Espionage. I would like to know how to get it up and running again. Unfortunately, I don't know anything starting up a WikiProject and would like some help from some contributors. For example a talkpage that is archived, an assessment section, an assesment section with how many asessment articles counted by grade. That's all I can think of at the moment. Help would be appreciated. Adamdaley (talk) 09:32, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know....

You almost got me...great April Fool jokes. By the way, did YOU know that....the book, The Point, was written by Pore Cue Pyne? Happy April Fool's Day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.87.32.64 (talk) 09:34, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Non-free book scan licensing template

Is there a license template for non-free book scans? The image in question is File:Pasteur_Model.jpg. I know there are such templates for screenshots of television series, like for example the one found on File:Enterprise_Forward.jpg. Is there a similar licensing template for book scans? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I've looked through Category:Non-free Wikipedia file copyright tags without success.
(Disclaimer: for real expert advice ask at WP:MCQ or wait for another reply here) I think you may be out of luck here, because there are two sets of rights involved - one for the design shown in the model, and one for the actual photograph that you want to reproduce. Although this might be the only model that could be used to illustrate the design, it can't be the only photograph. And that's point one at WP:NFCC. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:38, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I've added a licensing template. However I am not sure it is the appropriate template for this image. Any further help is welcome. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 11:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I have created a new template for this purpose, which can be found at User:Toshio Yamaguchi/Template:Non-free book scan. This should work. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 14:54, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

If no one objects I will move this template into mainspace. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 15:08, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I moved the template into mainspace. It is now at Template:Non-free book scan. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 16:09, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
I've asked the WP:MCQ experts to check it. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:28, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Query about subject chosen for a new article

Hi,

I want to include an article about a short film that was released in 2011 and has a imdb entry. Which category will such topic come under when creating a new article? Is there any specific guidelines for writing about short films? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Priyav62 (talk • contribs) 10:28, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

There seems to be a lot of good advice and recommended guidelines at WP:FILM. Also there are plenty of editors there who have expressed interest in articles about films and can possibly help you further. Good luck. CaptRik (talk) 12:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Cork ladies's footballers

The spelling of this category looks wrong: "ladies" (plural of "lady") needs possessive "ladies'", e.g. "ladies' clothing", clothing for ladies.Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 11:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion handles the renaming of categories. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:49, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Preventing the addition of interwiki links

Bots keep adding an interwiki link on Journey (1989 video game) the French Wikipedia article [[fr:Journey (jeu vidéo)]]. But that's an unrelated video game by the same name. So how can the addition of that link be prevented? jc iindyysgvxc (my contributions) 11:47, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Probably the best course of action is to leave a message for the bot's operator at User talk:Myst. – ukexpat (talk) 12:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
(e/c) The method is explained in the last paragraph here - add the "bad" link yourself, but hide it inside an HTML comment. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:46, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
It is probably because the French article fr:Journey (jeu vidéo) has the Journey (1989 video game) as interwiki link. If they are unrelated that inter wikilink should probably be removed and that will probably stop the bot from trying to add it to the english article. GB fan (talk) 13:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Google Earth Geohack problem

I have a problem with the Google Earth co-ords (50° 28′ 44.96″ N, 3° 59′ 49.18″ W) for Ditsworthy Warren House. When I go through to the Geohack page and click on 'Google Earth w/meta data', it takes me to the house. When I just click on 'Google Earth Open', it takes me to a point marked 'Portland Lane Sheepstor' that is about 2.75km to the WNW. Help please! I don't understand how the same co-ords can take me to two completely separate places. How can this be corrected? Thanks 86.134.116.152 (talk) 13:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not really sure that I understand what's going on, in part because I don't use Google Earth, but see this thread and the FAQ linked by Dispenser there. It's apparently Google Earth's problem, not ours. Deor (talk) 13:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tag for Copyright

I am sorry to bug you about this but I have read through the copyright on images and the images I put up keep getting taken down. These are our photos and we have the right to use them. One photo is from another source but have permission to use it as well. What is the proper tag that I need to put around these photos so they stop getting taken down.

Thank you for your time.

Meewasin 16:08, 1 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meewasinvalley (talk • contribs)

It's not quite as easy as adding a tag. You must follow the process set out at WP:IOWN to provide evidence of the necessary permissions. Note also that permission is required for all purposes, permissions limited to use on Wikipedia are not sufficient. Hope this helps. – ukexpat (talk) 17:00, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] User:Peaceworld111/Ahmadiyya-related vandalism statistics

Hi. I just want permission to carry on with a bit statistical with Ahmadiyya-related vandalism. If it is realized that this is in breach of the Wikipedia guidelines please discuss here or on my talk page. Please do not put it up for AfD. I'll put it up myself under speedy deletion if it is in breach to save time. As far as I'm aware it is not in breach. Thankyou. --Peaceworld 16:37, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Two Articles (clarification needed on whether or not terms from FAQ are met)

Good morning,

I work for a company called Data Management Inc. and would like to publish two articles through Wikipedia, but I have some questions on whether they meet the terms of Wikipedia.

1. One article is a business profile that describes what Data Management Inc. is, when it was founded, by whom, etc. I noticed that there are certain restrictions that must be met:

-The subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company itself, OR -Listed on ranking indices of important companies produced by well-known and independent publications, OR -Used to calculate stock market indices. Being used to calculate an index that simply comprises the entire market is excluded.

Data Management did rank #425 on Deloitte's Technology Fast 500 in 2006 (http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-UnitedStates/Local%20Assets/Documents/TMT_us_tmt/us_tmt_2006TechnologyFast500WinnersBrochure.pdf). Would this qualify as "Listed on ranking indices of important companies?" There was also a local newspaper publication on Data Management done in August 2008 (http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2008/aug/07/local-software-company-thriving/?printer=1) as well as another that was written this year (unable to find the link - may not be available online). Would this qualify as "The subject of multiple non-trivial published works independent of the company itself?"

2. The second article describes the products and services that have been developed by TimeClock Plus since 1988. The article would cover our products, TimeClock Plus, TimeClock Plus Web Edition, and other companion hardware and software that is offered, as well as the service, TimeClock Plus OnDemand. It would provide a description of each to help anyone who is curious gain a greater understanding of what each of these are. I noticed that, for products or services, there are understandably certain restrictions that must be met as to not create spam on Wikipedia:

-Have been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company offering the product or service, OR -Be so well-known that its trademark has suffered from genericization

Given that TimeClock Plus was mentioned in he newspaper article linked above, would that allow this article to qualify?

Please advise as soon as you are able as we would really like to add our company and products/services to this extremely valuable resource.

Thank you.

Daniel Williams

Quality Assurance

Data Management, Inc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcplus (talk • contribs) 16:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Before we get into that, please read WP:SPAM,WP:COI, WP:CORP and WP:BFAQ. You are strongly discouraged from writing articles about subjects where you have a conflict of interest. If you still want to proceed, you should be aware that your drafts will be closely scrutinised and I would suggest that you use the articles for creation process to get started. On the substantive question, no, one article does not amount to the required significant coverage. Multiple sources are required. – ukexpat (talk) 16:57, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
One other point, Wikpedia does not publish "business profiles", it is an encyclopedia that contains articles about notable subjects. In view of that, WiikiCompany (which is not connected with Wikipedia) may be a better outlet for you. – ukexpat (talk) 17:04, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, my terminology is off. Not so much a business profile. Something along the lines of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcplus (talk • contribs) 17:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Same comments apply. – ukexpat (talk) 17:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick replies. I really appreciate your help. I want this to be unbiased as well (strictly informative) and to fall within the standards set by Wikipedia, so that we are consistent with your other articles. I see that Microsoft, Google, and even companies that are not quite as large appear on Wikipedia and that is what prompted me to think of creating something similar for Data Management Inc. given it's growth and expansion. So forgive me if you answered this and I'm just not understanding. On the qualifier that reads, "Listed on ranking indices of important companies produced by well-known and independent publications," would our listing on the Deloitte Fast 500 in 2006 satisfy that requirement? Tcplus (talk) 18:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Deloitte Fast 500 may be enough for the article to survive speedy deletion but I am not convinced that it alone is sufficient to establish notability per WP:CORP. Again, I cannot stress enough that it really is not a good idea for you to create these articles in view of your COI - no matter how hard you try it is almost impossible to maintain a neutral point of view when you have conflict. Also, be careful when you say "we" - it's a hot button word that may lead others to think that your account is being shared by more than one person, and that is not allowed. – ukexpat (talk) 18:41, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Okay, that makes sense. The links were very helpful. Although I am affiliated (and I completely understand the concern there), I will finish writing both articles, limiting them to factual information (avoiding opinions), and submit both articles for review. You've been a great help and I honestly didn't expect as quick a reply as you've been giving me, so thanks, Ukexpat, for your exceptional assistance.Tcplus (talk) 19:11, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Glad I could help. Please also note the user name issue highlighted on your talk page. – ukexpat (talk) 19:37, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing that to my attention. My account was created today so the Talk Page was not something I knew anything about. As to Daniel Case's comment (and thanks Daniel for your contribution as it has a pretty big impact on the fate of my articles), what do I need to do? Do I need to re-create an account under a name that has nothing to do with TimeClock Plus? It sounds like the user name I chose breaches a policy? TCPlus was just the first thing that came to my mind when I created my account (it was quick and simple) whereas TimeClockPlus would definitely sound more like a violation since the product is TimeClock Plus and not TCPlus. As far as the conflict of interest, if I submit this and it is verifiably unbiased (if Wikipedia is comfortable with it), is that grounds for it being approved? Daniel's point about regardless of the article's merit gives me the impression that biased or not, my affiliation with the company will likely kill any chance of the articles being accepted. Do I have a shot?Tcplus (talk) 20:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Couple of options: the easiest is, as you suggest, just to abandon the Tcplus account and create new account that complies with WP:UN; the other is to formally request a change of username at WP:CHU, but as you don't have any mainspace edits yet, it's probably not worth the effort. – ukexpat (talk) 20:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Image upload

How do I arrange for some images to be uploaded for an article I am writing if I am not yet a confirmed user? Gervasecb (talk) 17:25, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

The best place to request an image be uploaded would be on this page. TNXMan 17:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! Gervasecb (talk) 18:02, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Contributing new photos

I am a Wikipedia contributor (text-only up until now) and I'd like to start adding photos to my articles. How do I do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopher.hardy (talk • contribs) 17:26, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

  • If you want to add an existing image to an article, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information.
  • If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must determine the proper license of the image (or whether it is in the public domain). If you know the image is public domain or copyrighted but under a suitable free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure of the licensing status, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy. I hope this helps. TNXMan 17:44, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Creating brief bio box

How do I create a box, like the one shown here on the right, to feature the highlights of a business?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Vineyard_%26_Winery — Preceding unsigned comment added by ASVwine (talk • contribs) 19:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

See Template:Infobox winery. – ukexpat (talk) 20:03, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Can I change my Wikipedia font?

Right now with my current preferences the Wikipedia standard font appears to be Helvetica. Is there a simple way to change the standard font to, for example, Times Roman? (I tried some other "skins" but they change too many things. I like the default Vector layout, but would like to try changing just the font.) Thanks for help. --Robert.Allen (talk) 21:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Head to your browser's settings dialogue and change your default sans-serif font. Note that the font will change for every website that uses this setting. Xenon54 (talk) 22:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
source: https://web.archive.org/web/20110331191555/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk
Personal tools
  • Log in / create account
Variants
Actions

Leave a Reply