Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:25, 31 December 2007

↑ To top of page

Shortcuts

Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)

For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners.

Ask a question

Search the frequently asked questions

Search the help desk archives and other help pages

Shortcut

[[:|WP:HELPDESK
WP:HD]]

December 25

noinclude style tags for cross-project use

Is there a tag (like the <noinclude> tags) that can be used to not pass certain information over to another project. Ie, can you put something between some tags on an image: page on commons which won't be shown on the other projects that use that image? C hris_huh^talk 01:05, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have not heard of such a tag, which does not necessarily mean there is no way to do whatever you are trying to do. However, your question is ambiguous. In particular, these terms are vague:

"certain information" - does this mean graphic information, or text information?
"shown" - do you mean when [[image:...]] appears on "the other projects"?

If possible, please give a specific example of an image, a project, and what "information" you don't want to be "shown" on the project. Normally when we "show" an image on a project, only the image appears, not any of the text on the image page. If I'm guessing correctly about what you mean, I think when someone clicks on the image to view it, they browse to the image page on Commons, at which point they are no longer viewing the other project. It might be difficult to prevent the user from seeing some of the text based on the project they browsed from. An obvious but rather grotesque hack would be to upload multiple copies of the same image under different filenames, and type in different text for each image. Then you can more or less control what text a user could see, by linking to particular copies of the image from different projects. --Teratornis (talk) 17:49, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The question probably refers to the rendering on a local image page of the editable content on the image page on Commons, and it seems the answer is no, this applies even for content in noinclude tags, see m:Image:Tst.png.--Patrick (talk) 23:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, maybe it is not possible. What i was thinking of doing was have a Featured Picture star in the corner on commons (like the featured picture star on wikipedia). But i wouldnt want the star to show on other projects (ie wikipedia), as it could mess up page layouts. C hris_huh^talk 16:45, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can put the star but avoid an absolute position.--Patrick (talk) 17:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But that would still mean the star would be shown in Wikipedia (wouldn't it?), which may be confusing since there is a star there for featured pictures on wikipedia. Maybe its just not possible. C hris_huh^talk 17:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A different star, e.g. with the text "Commons" could be used. Anyway the different position is also a clear distinction.--Patrick (talk) 18:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that's an option. Will mention it on Commons, but what do you mean by different position, are you still thinking of having it top right. Wouldn't the position only change if it was featured on both wikipedia and commons (ie the star would be pushed to one side)? C hris_huh^talk 00:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of the simple case of an image vertically positioned according to the position of the code (one only specifies left or right); in that case it appears in the area of the local page where all editable content of the image page on Commons appears, like one of the images on m:Image:Tst.png. Perhaps what you say it also possible, I don't know. It seems that for putting a star in the corner you need an absolute position, and that in the case of two items with an absolute position, in the case of a conflict one hides the other. Different positions can be used, but that may be difficult to coordinate if many wikis are involved.--Patrick (talk) 03:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Therefore I think Commons should avoid absolute positioning on image pages.--Patrick (talk) 10:08, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree Patrick on the fact that the Commons should avoid the absolute positioning on image pages. JoshHuzzuh Talk 00:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing a Title

Hello

I spelled the title of my artice wrong

My article is: Highland Creek Subdivsion Charlotte North Carolina

I spelled subdivision incorrectly.

How do I fix it?

Thanks

Marshall600 (talk) 01:45, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've corrected the redirect you made from Highland Creek Subdivsion Charlotte North Carolina to Highland Creek Charlotte North Carolina, assuming this is the preferred article. For future reference, anyone with an account older than 4 days can move a page from one title to another using the "move" tab which appears at the top of the page. This is the preferred way to change article names because it preserves the page history. --Kateshort forbob 02:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a template...

that we use to identify the language of an external link? I thought there were language-specific templates that would provide a tip to the reader that a link was in Japanese or French... E_dog95'^{Hi '} 02:57, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Put something like {{ja}} or {{fr}} before the link. Mr.Z-man 03:01, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much! E_dog95'^{Hi '} 03:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked IP address

My IP address was blocked sometime in the year 2006. I have not even used Wikipedia until this month and I was trying to edit a typo on a page (Age of Empires 3). When I looked closer, I was told that I could email and administrator about my problem. When I tried, it said that I needed to have an account in order to send an email. I tried to create an account and it sent me right back to the page about my blocked IP address. Please give advice if you can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.131.87.129 (talk) 04:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The IP address you are editing from currently is not blocked (if it was you wouldn't be able to edit this page), and it never has been blocked according to the block log. Perhaps you have a dynamic IP address. Try creating an account again and see what happens. Raven4x4x (talk) 04:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That’s an AOL IP. If I recall correctly, at least in the past, creating an account from AOL caused problems. Might that be the problem here? --teb728 t c 06:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:AOL is inactive and says a specific AOL problem was solved in 2006. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

aerofoil

what is aerofoil? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.247.14.184 (talk) 06:35, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See aerofoil. --teb728 t c 06:43, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember this desk is for using Wikipedia. Any other questions should be directed to the reference desk. Thank you. Rt . 12:43, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question about WP:EL

A user keeps adding news links to the EL section of the page Malaysian Indian. There are 5 links to the same issue but different news, and all links are from BBC. I removed 4 links because i thought 1 links is enough. He put it back in again today. I dont want to contra the WP:3RR. I told him that wikipedia is not a soapbox, and told him to read WP:EL. He said those guidelines doesnt apply here. I also told him to put the links at the page HINDRAF to which those news links are more relevant. Please advice. kawaputra^torque 09:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll warn the user now. It seems they have a serious POV matter. Rt . 12:41, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks. kawaputra^torque 13:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Article for already used name

I am looking to write an article about an artist that has minimal exposure, (one article written about them). The name is already in the Wikipedia database, but none of the titles that come up are for this particular person, how do i make a new article for a title that is already on wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fluffysadness (talk • contribs) 09:35, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The way to get around the naming is to add a qualifier in the title like “John Doe (artist)”. But if this artist is as unknown as you seem to imply, he may not be notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. Dozens of articles are deleted every day because the subject is not notable enough. Here is general advice on creating an article:

Before creating an article, 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 for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. --teb728 t c 09:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that the person is notable enough for an article, then you'll want to read up on disambiguation pages, which is how you distinguish between different people (and other things) with the same name. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 11:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing an article

I was emailed "Girl Orchestra in Auschwitz" which was an article about the woman's orchestra in Auschwitz. IN your factual information, none of which I dispute, was omitted any reference to my mother, who was a survivor of the women's orchestra. I just wanted to edit this for correctness, using my mothers maiden name so as not to currently identify her. Do I just edit the record? or do I need to send documentation to someone? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.27.221.5 (talk) 14:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is Girl orchestra of Auschwitz. Wikipedia content should be verifiable, based on published reliable sources. Editors are not allowed to add their private knowledge and should also observe Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. A Google search on the name gave no results but I haven't examined any printed sources. Has her membership been published by that name? The information that she was alive as of 2005 also requires a published source. You can make suggestions at Talk:Girl orchestra of Auschwitz. Maybe it will be seen by editors with access to good printed sources. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:03, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indian wedding card Invitation quotation sample

Please send me sosome sample Indian wedding card Invitation quotation sample —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.197.96.50 (talk) 15:40, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over two million articles, and thought that we were directly affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the online free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand side of your screen. If that is not fruitful, we have a reference desk, divided into various subjects areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:03, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You won't let me sign in. Why?

I have tried and tried to create an account with you. I tried months ago, and you would not let me create an account. You still will not let me sign in, you keep saying "error" "error". What can I do about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.54.119.252 (talk) 17:47, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the message say more than "error"? Different things can prevent account creation and there should be a more specific message. Some IP addresses are blocked from account creation. Which username are you trying to create? See also Wikipedia:Request an account. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how to add a new article?

Hi i would like to start a new article....how do i go about doing that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rumroom (talk • contribs) 18:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before creating an article, 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 for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:08, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And this is very good advice. You may want to do it twice and practice in the sandbox. Although I have created some articles and do ok with structure and formatting, I still managed to create a duplicate article yesterday because another author did not follow category convention. Search several times just like in a search engine before you start a new one.--Mrg3105 (talk) 20:24, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Something is spelled wrong and I can't find the "edit" link!

Image:Lifecycle_moss_svg_diagram.svg has "mose" instead of "moss"... and I can't find the "edit" link! Please help!!! 68.101.123.219 (talk) 22:38, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, unlike pages, the image can't be edited in situ. It needs to be downloaded, edited and re-uploaded. I'll give it a go, if nobody else gets there first. --Kateshort forbob 22:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Image:Lifecycle moss svg diagram.svg. --Kateshort forbob 23:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! 68.101.123.219 (talk) 00:33, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How To Make An Artice

I know that I might sound like a complete idiot, but I navigated the page many times and couldn't find out how to make an artice. Please help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LoopDeeLoop (talk • contribs) 22:57, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What page? jj137 ^♠ 22:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what "the page" refers to (the Wikipedia website?), but maybe this general advice is helpful:

Before creating an article, 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 for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 26

Why have I been bloccked indefinitely?

Dear Sir/madam,

I am a new user to Wikipedia and wanted to edit a page on a subject I know about. However, when I clicked 'edit' a message informed me that I have been banned indefinitely for unacceptable behaviour.

But I have only just arrived - how can I have committed the unspecified offences that have led me to being banned indefinitely even before i have done any activity whatsoever?

Whom do I need to contact to have this unfair block lifted?

Thank you.

KGH —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gat0wer (talk • contribs) 00:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to contact the Admin who blocked you and ask him/her why you were blocked and request the ban be lifted. Dunfermline Scholar (talk) 00:21, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is likely that your IP address is shared, and was blocked, taking you with it. To check this, sign out of your account, and go to your talk page (type Special:Mytalk in the search bar on the left hand side of your screen). Your IP address should be prominently displayed under the Talk page header. Then, make a note of your IP, go to [1], and search for just your IP, without the 'User:' prefix. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 00:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However, since you were able to edit this page that means you are not blocked; it is possible that you are on a dynamic IP, or one that changes every time your router connects. It is possible that you were connected to a banned IP, and that was remedied because you were able to post here. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 00:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles by age

Is there a special page or category that lists articles by the date of their creation? -- Menti fisto 03:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could try Recent Changes and look through there to find the article. What exactly are you looking for? ~ Bella Swan 04:33, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Special:New pages ( Special:New pages )- all the new pages are listed in this log. Cheers- CattleGirl ^talk 06:32, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RC is rather impractical since edits are made constantly... I'm looking for something (could have been manually edited too) that has a list of all articles beginning with the first one made etc...

New pages are impractical too... they could be useful though if only they had that 'earliest' link articles have. -- Menti fisto 13:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Ancientpages starts in 2004, but it has some links you might follow. --Teratornis (talk) 23:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Text alignment

How can I make the text at List of United States business school rankings align left for the first three columns?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 06:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. You can have a look at the diff for what I did :) Cheers- CattleGirl ^talk 06:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you knew that and wanted the numbers to remain aligned right?

I have absolutely no idea :S. CattleGirl ^talk 06:58, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know a way to align a whole column in one place, but cells can be aligned one at a time: [2]. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Highlights

Hi, I have seen some users highlight text with a coloured background before and I would like to know how to do this. Thank you! --WPholic (talk) 07:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The code is <*font*style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:yellow*">YOUR TEXT HERE<*/font> (take out the asterisks). However, I recommend that you don't use this on Wikipedia- or if you do, only use it in a template or a table, or perhaps your userpage (see more at Wikipedia:Colours). Cheers- CattleGirl ^talk 08:13, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow highlightihng: <font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:yellow">YOUR TEXT HERE</font> produces YOUR TEXT HERE.

Black border: <font style="BORDER:2px solid black">YOUR TEXT HERE</font> produces YOUR TEXT HERE. (Don't use the nowiki tags.) --Coppertwig (talk) 15:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism

This article section strikes me as something plagiarized. I have asked this question in the past and the Orange fellow has helped me and told me what to tag it with, but I don't remember what it was. Can someone give this a once-over? It looks like something taken from a UNICEF site.--EndlessDan 14:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look on WP:TM, the index for template messages, which took me to WP:TMAIN#Copyright violations, yielding {{copypaste}}. Hope that helps. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 14:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The section was started in [3] and appears to have been written by the editor Asilwal (probably for another purpose originally). It may be OR but doesn't look like a copyvio. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how to remove images used for spam

hi, i just saw this image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ichigopanda.gif.gif being used in this article here to spam http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ichigo_Kurosaki&diff=180191431&oldid=180171680. that action has been reverted, but now i was wondering how one could delete an image like that (which is only used to spam). i thought of the orfud tag/template, but since it's not a nonfree image i don't think i'm allowed to use that.. any suggestions please? i tried to do a little research myself but couldn't figure it out. thanks :) -Twsl (talk) 14:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the image is at Wikimedia Commons, as most images displayed here on Wikipedia are. You can register and log in to Commons, and see commons:Commons:Deletion guidelines for instructions how to ask to have images deleted if they fit various deletion criteria. --Coppertwig (talk) 15:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Subpages and userpage, talkpage.

Could all reference of SKYNET X7000 be erased, the account will no-longer be in use as i'm closing the account down, all scripts from SKYNET's monobook has been removed, due to closer further responses to this message or to the talk page will not be made, thank you. SKYNET X7000 (talk) 15:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand you won't be replying here, but just in case you are watching:

you can request subpages be deleted by adding {{db-author}} to them if you have created them and are the only author. Your userpage may come under this heading as well; however, it is less likely that your talkpage will be deleted under these criteria.
If you are leaving the project permanently, you may be able to exercise the right to vanish, depending on circumstances; more information is available at the page.
If you are just moving to a new username, as long as you don't reference the old name from the new one, and don't do anything that would bring you under unusual scrutiny (eg. vandalism), there wouldn't be any way to connect the two. As far as I know, there is no way to technically close an account.

Have a nice day, whatever you decide to do! --Kateshort forbob 17:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userpages and pages in your userspace can almost always be deleted by adding {{db-author}} to the very top of the page in question. Talk pages typically cannot be deleted, unless you are leaving the project permanently or are blocked indefinitely and your talk page is tagged as such. Mr Senseless (talk) 20:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uno Spin card game rules

We bought Uno Spin for Christmas, and there were no directions. The box said to go to service.mattel.com to "View and print instruction manuals." However, none are available for Uno Spin. A search showed others have had the same experience. One person posted some instructions in a review they did of the game.

Since Uno has directions, as does Uno Attack, directions for Uno Spin seems appropriate. However, that article has been deleted, and I cannot find the reference in the log to understand why it was deleted. Please help me find that entry, or just explain it to me so I do not feel obliged to share this seemingly relevant information to others who are searching for it as I was.

Larrydkuch (talk) 16:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)larrydkuch[reply]

The entire content of UNO Spin was:

"UNO Spin is a card game similar to the original UNO card game but it incorporates a spin wheel. When a spin card is played someone must spin the wheel, forcing themselves or opponents to pick up, discard or exchange cards."

It was nominated for speedy deletion as no context: Wikipedia:CSD#A1. The deleting administrator did not explicitly say whether that was the reason for actually deleting it. Note also that Wikipedia is not a game guide.PrimeHunter (talk) 16:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

download link in article

I've never edited an article before so It seemed best to ask about it here.

The Problem: In the article ISO_image ISO image there is a link to a utility program. "Virtual CD-ROM panel ". When I clicked this link it downloaded the file without the normal questions about where to put it. Eventhough this link seems to be correct as put on Microsoft it is too easy to change the link to a trojen.

The Questions:

How should I fix it?

1. Just remove the link because it is an opening for trojen dissemination. 2. Place a reference to a download site that explains what this file is (the majorgeek article is better than microsoft page) 3. Discuss the issue using the discussion page. (Would this be best done in addition to the fix, prior to the fix or not even helpfull since it is a fix of a security issue?)

University of Nalanda

Hi thank to every body how play a vital role to grow up this site. I give best regards to all of the members, readers, writers and the promation boday who gives their donate to support this site.

i am PAMAL ARYA, student of Nalanda university and i see most of Indians wants to suffer the Hindi site , which offers article in Hindi.

I introduce my self that i am the cheif of biolabs, That are reserching in the field of Biology( gene theraphy, enviroment and Bio-Medicine), so have a support in the form of donation we wants to give you article / content in Hindi version. Say me How can we send ?

wish you happy new years —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.99.21.75 (talk) 16:45, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the Hindi Wikipedia. Thanks! Jonathan (talk • contribs • complain?) 17:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's the point of this box?

Look, I've typed in a box, but for some reason, it's presented in such a way that line-wrapping is disabled and you have to scroll to see what I wrote. Why?! --Seans Potato Business 17:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the box (created by a leading space at the start of a line) is used to display computer code, for one thing. According to this, it is used to preserve whatever formatting the editor adds. (It took me months to figure this out!) --Kateshort forbob 17:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to know how to make text in a box with normal line-wrapping then you can place the text in a table. Click "edit" to see how this example text box was made with a table. See Help:Table for more ways to design tables. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Military bases in US States

Under what part of the table of contents should these be placed? Also, are there any templates for creating an article on a State or country? ThxSmarkflea (talk) 17:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which article(s) are you referring to? In an article about a US state, for example Florida, I see no reason to have a separate section name for military bases. Or do you mean which other sections to mention military bases in? That depends on the circumstances, for example which layout the article has and how important the base is to the state. Often a detail like a military base shouldn't be mentioned at all in a state article but only in other pages, for example List of United States military bases, or an article about the city the base is in. Templates don't create articles but different templates can be used to display information in an article about a state or country, for example {{Infobox U.S. state}} and {{Infobox Country}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or do you mean which other sections to mention military bases in?

Yes, I think such things are interesting. Thanks for the other info.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smarkflea (talk • contribs) 18:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editors often have different opinions about what is important enough to mention, and how much space to use on it. If you add details about military bases to state articles then others may choose to remove it. Article content can be discussed on the associated talk page, for example Talk:Kentucky. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:56, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse a list

Does anyone know a text editor which can easily reverse a list. So that the last entry will be the first and the first entry is the last. I know there are some php scripts and some excel macro's which can do it, but a simple text editor with that option would be more practical. Garion96 (talk) 20:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure about a text editor that could do that automatically. If you have a spreadsheet application such as Microsoft Excel, you could easily reverse the list. Hope this helps, if you don't have a spreadsheet program, cut and paste the list onto my talk page and I'll do it for you. Mr Senseless (talk) 20:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

publishing a new page

I am trying to publish a new page. I have entered all the info into the "sandbox" and saved the page, but its seems to still be in the sandbox. How can i publish my info on a page where is will show up in a search? Can i create a new page without using the sandbox? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abeuke (talk • contribs) 20:56, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, the sandbox is for editing tests and is automatically cleared every day. You should cut and paste the Wiki-markup (after pressing edit this page on the sandbox page) and paste it into a newly created article. You can create an article by searching for the title of the new page, and when no match is found, click create this page. Before you do that, however, make sure a similar article doesn't exist under a different name, and be certain your contributions meet notability and verifibility guidelines and conforms to a neutral point of view. Hope this helps. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:04, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Abeuke. The text you tested in the sandbox is currently inappropriate for an article as it reads like a marketing commercial for the topic. Wikipedia is not a forum for advertising. As such it is subject to [and should be if added in that form] speedily deleted under section G11 of our criteria for speedy deletion as it appears to be a "page which exclusively promote some entity and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic." Please note a few relevant polices: Articles must be written from a neutral point of view, they must be on notable topics, the information in them must be verifiable through citation to reliable sources and they should not be written by someone involved with the subject as that presents a conflict of interest. Please also see our business faq.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:04, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More importantly than what I just wrote, you must not add this material to Wikipedia as, as I've just discovered, you would be violating the copyright of this website. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:10, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikithoritarianism vs. Wikidemocratism

I saw this on Meta: Wikithoritarianism. I never knew there were two different ways to go about using Wikipedia like that. I came across a "Wikithoritarian" on an article and got into an argument a while ago. What do you think is a more successful way of editing? 69.138.16.202 (talk) 22:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a number of philosophies with regards to editing Wikipedia. I guess I'm sort of a "WikiUnitarian" about all this; I think that each philosophy has its uses, and which one is better or more successful all depends on the context. Maybe I should just slap {{context}} on all those Meta pages just for good measure! There are some situations where Wikithoritarianism is good, and some situations where it just causes trouble. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 22:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moderation is key, I think. Too much concentration of power can lead to abuse; too much dispersion of power can lead to paralysis. In general, however, Wikipedia is governed by community consensus, subject to the Wikimedia Foundation's position as site owner. Another key question: is policy prescriptive (tells us what to do) or descriptive (tells others what we already do)? In practice, I think many "community norms" are made via something akin to countless iterations of the bold, revert, discuss cycle. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:44, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do you define "successful"? Also, it's not clear from the Wikithoritarianism essay exactly what a particular Wikithoritarian would do in a given situation. It sounds like two editors could both be Wikithoritarians and do different things. Usually, doing different things leads to different levels of "success," although both editors might define "success" self-servingly. --Teratornis (talk) 23:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I might add that I'd prefer Wikipedia to be as algorithmic as possible. That is, we should standardize every procedure, in enough detail, to cover every editing situation that can ever arise. Then every editor could simply follow instructions, with no guesswork, and there would be nothing to argue about. Ultimately, machines could write Wikipedia for us (see Cyc). Of course humans do not know how to write such a complete algorithm, but Wikipedia has gone a long way with the Manual of Style and so on. At the very least, it would be good to minimize the number of times Wikipedians repeat the same dispute. Once an issue has been settled, other people should not have to waste time rehashing it unless someone has come up with new relevant information. --Teratornis (talk) 23:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 27

Citing a reference's author

When using {{cite-web}}, I was citing News: April Fools: The British own deviantART.com and the author of that news article is a user on deviantART named kronix, who has a page at http://kronix.deviantart.com. He isn't officially employed by deviantART, so I can't put deviantART as the author. So for cases like this, would I simply cite the author as "kronix" if his full name is not known? --Dan Leveille^TALK 02:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dan. Citation templates are completely optional. If the format of the template doesn't work for a particular thing you are citing, you can just format the reference directly (in fact some editors don't like citation templates because they feel they make the text harder to read in edit mode and therefore harder to edit). See Wikipedia:Citing sources#Full reference templates. To cite an author you can say something like "<ref>Copyright holder (200?). [http://www.URL name of article]. ''John Doe at deviantART''. Retrieved on date"</ref>; whatever makes the citation the most transparent. The problem is that blog posts generally are not reliable sources and shouldn't be cited at all. See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources (online and paper). There are some exceptions to this general rule but without knowing the context of the citation (a quick look at your contributions did not reveal it) I can't weigh in on whether any would apply here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WTIC-FM Article Update Question

76.118.247.91 (talk) 02:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the section of the WTIC-FM article to include information on their "Wayback Weekend". To cite proof of the existence of this radio program, I direct to the page on the WTIC-FM website that describes this "Wayback Weekend". These updates are particularly present in the final paragraph of the WTIC-FM article. Unless physically checked by a Wikipedian, the WTIC-FM article might not entirely pass the non-opinionated presentation test. In other words, I got sort of excited about the material and it might be appearing a little like an advertisement. For that reason, a person should read the article and scan for the "Wayback Weekend" and see if it passes the test. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.247.91 (talk) 02:55, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very good of you to point that out. I edited the page a bit. I removed "widely-recognized and ever-growing" because it does sound rather like an ad, besides not having any reliable third-party source to verify that information. I also removed the links from "Wayback Weekend", because the same link is listed in the External Links section. You only need each link to appear once in an article, and external links are usually only at the end. (See WP:EL). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coppertwig (talk • contribs) 03:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

capitalism

what is capitalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.95.154.33 (talk) 02:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Click me.--Kerotan ^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 03:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that this page is for using Wikipedia. Thank you. Rt . 17:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

usability from the "secure" wikipedia

First of all, I'd like to say the "secure" wikipedia page is great; I actually wish HTTPS/SLL was used for logins to Wikipedia by default, since people logging in from internet cafes, public libraries, or other public access terminals could be displaying their credentials to other members of their network. But anyways, I was wondering if the Administrators or sysadmin know of the "You have requested an encrypted page that contains some unencrypted information. Information that you see or enter on this page could easily be read by a third party." pop up that occurs when browsing wikipedia with Wikipedia in the "secure" mode with Firefox. Sure, there is a "toggle switch" to turn off those errors, but I'd prefer to leave them on, so I know when I am on a truly secure (or unsecure) page. As a side-note, this is not a Firefox-only error; it's simply displayed differently under IE7. With IE7 a dialog box pops up asking "This page contains both secure and nonsecure items. Do you want to display the nonsecure items?" - upon hitting No (do not display nonsecure items) - the only "change" I notice, is that it appears the images within the MainPage are not linked to a secure SSL (HTTPS) page, so they are deemed "unsecure". Just thought I would bring this to attention. Sorry if this is the wrong place. --adamh 04:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

My understanding is that SSL encryption takes a lot of extra server effort and can't be cached effectively by Wikipedia's servers or at all by intermediate proxies. Therefore to save a huge amount of work for the servers, article images which come from the upload.wikimedia.org server go over ordinary HTTP, and HTTPS isn't available. Same limitation for images uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. It's a shame but I'm not aware of a workaround, except to dismiss the warning or turn off images completely. • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 00:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Auto marking as patrolled

I often patrol the new pages special page. If a page is marked CSD, then can the wiki software automatically mark it as patrolled? peterl (talk) 04:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, often is the case where editors who place speedy deletion tags don't "patrol" the page. It's normal to do it if you wish. Rt . 17:22, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

infobox for "pronunciation" and "also called"

how do i add a little box on the right side where I can put the pronunciation as well as a list of all the "also called", to remove them form the flow of the first sentence to restore the flow? in an article like this Asperger syndrome. if such a box does not exist, we should seiously consider inventing one. It would clean up the article and separate the "name" info and lists form the actual prose.--Sonjaaa (talk) 04:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe any such boxes exist. You can make suggestions such as this at the proposals section of the village pump or, since this is currently very entrenched, quasi-policy, the policy section might be the right place. Personally, I think pronunciation and alternate names go nowhere else but right up front in the prose. They are exactly what I would expect to find in the first sentence of an encyclopedia and I would oppose making them less integrated but others might have a different take.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

system security scanner

I need a information regarding system security scanner using port numbers,as im doing a project based on this topic i need a keen information the project im doing is based on java so kindly give the information regarding this topic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.135.129.13 (talk) 06:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the 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, select the relevant section, 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. Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 11:42, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused about where to do the content editing?

Here are the titles and URLS of two related pages:

Wikipedia:WikiProject Metalworking/Main page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Metalworking/Main_page

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

I want to fix this page by editing what is present and extending the information. I am uncertain about how these two pages relate to one another. I looked in help and found that blue background pages were ABOUT Wikipedia. So, I suspect that I have been editing the wrong page. Could I get an explanation of these two pages. What is their relationship? function? If I wish to improve the WP content, which do I edit?

Thanks in advance. 24.15.33.131 (talk) 06:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and welcome :)

The first link you supplied was a wikiproject. Basically a wikiproject exists as a sort of "centre" for organising and improving a group of related articles- in this case, articles to do with metalworking.

Users will use the wikiproject page as a place to organise their edits, suggest changes that can affect many of the metalworking pages, and lists things to do that can be done to protect the page.

It seems to me that the first link you supplied was the beginning of a re-written version of the second link you listed.

The second link you listed was in the wikipedia mainspace, and that is the page you would edit to improve wikipedia content.

You aren't required to join or really take any notice of the wikiproject if you don't want to. It's just there as a sort of editing tool, I suppose.

I hope that answered your question- if not, please feel free to ask. Cheers- CattleGirl ^talk 06:55, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For more information, see: What is an article? and WikiProject Council/Guide. The English Wikipedia (what you are viewing now) has about 6,832,632 articles, and a very large set of additional non-article pages that help the 47,514,278 registered users (and a comparable number of unregistered users) coordinate their editing efforts. Wikipedia is the largest encyclopedia in history, and probably the largest collaborative editing project as well, so the organization here is very complex. To get an awe-inspiring taste of just how complex Wikipedia is, check out the Editor's index. --Teratornis (talk) 04:16, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you look at what I have done on these pages:

My edits go down to History. History begins old stuff that I have not touched. Metalworking

Here's what I had to say on the discussion page. I assume that is the talk page. Talk:Metalworking —Preceding unsigned comment added by Begs (talk • contribs) 06:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Account appears to be linked to a single language

I've been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, mostly without signing in because most of the times that I tried to sign in, I would be told that there was no such user. I have 'discovered' what is going on: I am fluent in a number of language and - as a translator - I often read the same article in more than one language to see if in the text I find a word that I might be looking for. In the process, I notice small (or not) errors and when I try to log in I am told there is no such (me!) user.

The riddle has been solved - I can sign in on the English version of the article and can move to other pages etc, but the moment I switch to another language, I am no longer a registerd user!

It that deliberate or a small gremlin/ oversight?

Best regards,

Rui Gabriel Correia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rui Gabriel Correia (talk • contribs) 10:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Each language of Wikipedia is a separate project, with different policies, content, and users. You need to create an account (or edit as an I.P.) for each language (and each project - i.e. Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wiktionary, etc.). Sarcasticidealist (talk) 10:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a proposal to solve this problem: meta:Help:Unified login., but I can't see any indication of when it's likely to be put into operation.--Kateshort forbob 11:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At least registering is very fast! No legal mumbo-jumbo requiring you to agree to take full responsibility if someone else does something wrong, etc. --Coppertwig (talk) 16:18, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proofreading

Does Wikipedia not support any proofreading sofware?

Rui Gabriel Correia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rui Gabriel Correia (talk • contribs) 10:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wikEd is an editor designed for use on Wikipedia. It has features that aid in proofreading, like search and replace. Then there's Lupin's Anti-vandal Tool, which checks for spelling errors, swear words, etc. Firefox has a spelling checker built-in. There's no grammar checker that I know of that works in Wikipedia's edit window. But there's a free web-based grammar checker named SpellCheckPlus.com that you can cut and paste up to 3000 words into. Language Tool is a free open source program you can load on your computer - use it on files, then cut & past the files into Wikipedia. I have no idea how they treat wikisyntax. The Transhumanist 11:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Mozilla Firefox browser has an option "check my spelling as I type" under Tools-->Options-->Advanced. It underlines misspelled words in the edit window. (At least, misspelled words get underlined on one computer I'm using but doesn't seem to work on another one -- maybe it's underlining in the same colour as the background.) --Coppertwig (talk) 16:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on what you mean by "proofreading software," some bots may qualify. See: WP:EIW#Bot. It's possible for someone with programming skills to run any sort of external text processing program on a Wikipedia page's text by using a bot (you could run any sort of spell check program, grammar and style checker, etc. that you can run on a text file, although the program would need to know how to ignore wikitext markup). In the unlikely event that you are an Emacs expert, you can probably use Emacs as an external editor for Wikipedia pages and do all sorts of things. (Probably an Emacs expert would not be asking a question like this on the Help desk; an Emacs expert would probably be sitting off somewhere feeling smugly superior to hoi polloi like the rest of us who labor with tools that are underpowered enough to be just comprehensible, Emacs being very much the opposite on both accounts.) --Teratornis (talk) 04:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Currency standards used by Wikipedia

Hi

I see that country GDPs, per capita incomes etc are expressed in US dollars. It would be easy to create a 'neutral' currency (WiCU - Wikipedia Currency Unit) made up of a combination of global median benchmarks based on inflation, GDP, etc. This master/ neutral currency would then be linked to a conversion engine such as Bloomberg's, Oanda or Wikipedia's own currency conversion software. On hovering over - for example - Spain, GDP = WiCU 785 billion, the cursor would bring up a window with a table: 1 WiCU = 1,2 USD 1 WiCU = 0,9 EUR 1 WiCU = xxx JPY etc etc [WiKU??? 'Kurrency'???]

Alternatively, pages could have a "Change currency for amounts on this page" feature, linked to an existing currency conversion engine.

Rui Gabriel Correia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rui Gabriel Correia (talk • contribs) 11:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would violate Wikipedia:No original research. Existing conversion systems use major currencies, such as the US dollar, as a benchmark. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 14:53, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia generally follows what everyone else does. As most economists and researchers use USD, Wikipedia does the same. --h2g2bob (talk) 15:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia we have (or should have) some sort of written guideline for everything we do more than once. In this case the guidelines for currencies are in WP:$ on the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) page. I looked that up by consulting the Editor's index: WP:EIW#Money. --Teratornis (talk) 04:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that if you believe you have a way to improve an existing guideline, you can discuss it on the corresponding talk page, which in this case looks like it would be: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). But before suggesting any new guidelines, first read the corresponding talk page and any archived talk pages, to make sure you are not rehashing something that was already beat to death and settled. Wikipedia runs by WP:CONSENSUS, in theory at least, so you can be pretty sure that whatever appears in lots of Wikipedia articles has probably been agreed upon by lots of people. Getting them all to agree on something else can be like turning a battleship. Not impossible, but not necessarily easy for one guy in a rowboat. --Teratornis (talk) 04:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I might further add that being new to Wikipedia editing lowers the probability of one's suggestions getting very far here. Wikipedia has a number of features that tend to seem strange at first to new users (see: WP:REP). Before suggesting changes to Wikipedia policies or guidelines, one should have enough constructive edits to gain credibility (the magic threshold seems to be an edit count in the 1000 range, even though lots of Wikipedians claim not to consider edit count to be a valid measure of anything), and one should also be familiar with the major arguments for and against the existing policy or guideline before rekindling the debate. Obviously to get something changed, one must have new arguments that are more persuasive and compelling than the old arguments that led to the current scheme, and not just persuasive to oneself, but to all the people who may have a vested interest in the status quo. All I can say is, good luck with that. If you can change long-standing Wikipedia guidelines, you can probably also solve world hunger and bring democracy to Cuba. --Teratornis (talk) 05:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ministers of pakistan

i want to know the names of all ministers of pakistan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.146.172 (talk) 11:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See List_of_Chief_Ministers_of_Pakistan for the list of chief ministers. Please remember this desk is for using Wikipedia. Any other questions should be directed to the reference desk. Thank you. Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 11:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marking patrolled

How do you mark something "patroled" (I'm noticing that non-admins can do it too: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Hencetalk). And what does it accomplish? The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"[Mark this page as patrolled]" is a clickable link on the bottom righthand corner of new pages when you visit them from Special:Newpages. The link will not be displayed if you find your way to a new page in a different way. If you go to newpages you should see that certain pages are highlighted in yellow while others are not. The yellow articles have not been mark as patrolled thus providing you with information on what has been looked at already by others. For more information, please see Wikipedia:New pages patrol/patrolled pages.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! The Evil Spartan (talk) 14:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Back to currencies

Hi

So my question was only half-answered: must everything always be denoted in USD, or can other major currencies be used?

--198.54.202.166 (talk) 15:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes major currencies only, and it is dependant on the article that its used in.--Kerotan ^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 15:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this related discussion currently taking place: Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Dollar versus Euro (permanent link; see bottom of page).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In case you missed my late long-winded replies to the original question, see WP:$ for the currency guidelines. --Teratornis (talk) 05:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cannot understand if the source is reliable in wikipedia

I want to use this source[4] as a reference for Crime in India article, but I am not sure if it can be regarded as reliable source or not. Please help.Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:42, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems reliable to me as a quick look over, let me dig deeper. Rt . 17:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, yeah seems fine. Remember to use inline citations. Rt . 17:26, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Such questions can also be asked at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing log in

After logging in, I click on "edit" and am sent to a page which informs me that I am not logged in. I log in again and the cycle repeats.

What is the solution?

Thanks

Please provide a link to the page. Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 19:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like you have cookies disabled. Wikipedia uses a log-in cookie to keep you logged in. To make sure cookies are enabled in Firefox, go to Tools -> Options -> Privacy tab -> Accept cookies from sites, and make sure the box is checked; for IE7, go to Tools -> Internet Options -> Privacy, and make sure the security level isn't set too high. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 21:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

citing info/sources

I edited an article about NPfIT and it en got it altered back by Wikipedia. I got a message stating "Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to National Programme for IT appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. --VinceBowdren (talk) 16:03, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I believe the points you were trying to make are valid; but they do need to be balanced, and backed up with citations - e.g. a newspaper report of a criticism issued by Liberty. Also, the introductory paragraph of the article is probably not the place for them - there is a paragraph dedicated to criticisms, which would be more appropriate. --VinceBowdren (talk) 16:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)".

Being new to this sort of thing I was hoping that someone could supply with some basic information.

How do I cite emails? Do I have to put them in the article? How do you point out basic facts without appearing non-neutral? Is it possible to list the uses as a bullet point list? The list might seem controversial, but does that make it non-neutral? If listing them is non neutral, then why is not listing them seen as neutral? How do I cite information from news articles etc? Where do I cite them? Do I put a link in right away, or put it at the end? How do I challenge what is already on the site to ensure it is factually correct and not 'dumbing down' to the point it is basically wrong? As it stands it is factually incorrect to the point is almost a deliberate deception. It seems odd that it is acceptable to say it is OK to say 30,000 GPs will have access in the introduction, whilst the full list is not appropriate. An example of it being wrong is that it is not 30,000 GPs and hospitals, it is 1.2 million staff including ) staff at out of hour services and NHS direct (the BBC updated its news web site after I made a formal complaint about them claiming it was just 30,000 GPs and 300 hospitals). I was going to re-do my edit to take some info out, but I don’t know what to put in it or how to re-write it without being accused of being non-netural.

Who started the article on NPfIT?

If asked to, I can supply the emails from the NHS (including very senior managers) backing up, but I just don’t know where on the site I would need to put these emails. Some links are listed bellow

http://www.e-health-insider.com/news/3216/government_rejects_consent_call_for_sus_use http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/nov/01/health.medicineandhealth1 http://www.advisorybodies.doh.gov.uk/piag/piag140306mins.pdf http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=23&storycode=4115863&c=1 http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=35172&in_page_id=34 Medicalprivacy (talk) 19:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia content must be verifiable, based on published reliable sources. Unpublished emails cannot be used as sources. In fact, a template to cite emails was deleted at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 April 19#Template:Cite email because use of it would be against policy. I suggested the deletion and like the final comment by WilyD: "Flagrently unverifiable. Would not be opposed to salting the template, then rolling it up in a carpet, throwing the carpet off a bridge into a river, then launching the river into a star, which could then be chucked into a black hole. Hopefully the information about the template would be destroyed as it was converted into Hawking radiation."

You ask a lot of questions. These links may answer some of them: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Citing sources. article history. Changes to articles can be discussed on their talk page, in this case Talk:National Programme for IT. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So I can not cite emails that were supplied by senior managers within Connecting for Health even though it would show the introduction on Wikipedia distorts the facts? The fact that the users put in 30,000 GPs is a deception and there is nothing anyone can do about it? A 'reliable souce' depands on where you get it from. I guess I will just have to assume info on Wikipedia is more a case of rummor than hard facts. Medicalprivacy (talk) 17:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned, you cannot cite private emails. If Wikipedia allowed that then some people would make up mails or distort their true content beyond recognition. You should have a published reliable source to add content. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources for our take on this. It goes both ways: It's allowed to tag (for example with {{fact}}) or sometimes remove unsourced claims. See Wikipedia:Verifiability. And see also Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. I have not evaluated this case, but if you make a radical edit like [5] without prior discussion then don't be suprised when somebody reverts it.

Wikipedia has problems with people who add false or unreliable information. See Wikipedia:General disclaimer. If the information is sourced then other people can check the source. By the way, sign your discussion posts with ~~~~ at the end, and don't sign edits to articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't assume wikipedia's content is only rumour and not hard fact. It is only because of these policies of verification that wikipedia continues to have such high-quality information at all, instead of unsubstantiated and unreliable heresay. You cite several respectable sources above (e-insider, the guardian, etc); if you add what they have to say to wikipedia with citations in place, we'd absolutely love to have these facts included in the relevant articles.

But, it is true that your unpublished sources - private emails from staff at CfH - could not be cited in wikipedia. It is only after a source has been publically cited in a reputable publication that an encyclopedia can include their information. I hope you see how this policy is designed to maintain the credibility of this website? --VinceBowdren (talk) 02:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I seem to be having is what is a credible source. For example the Foundation for information Policy Research ststed ".... will make everyone's health records available for browsing by a million NHS workers." http://www.fipr.org/press/071217insecure.html but some people do not see them as a credible source and are said to be impartial even though they gave writen evidence to an enquiry (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmhealth/422/422we22.htm) The BBC website states "Eventually, around 1.2 million healthcare professionals could have access to some of the information on the system, including nurses, dentists and pharmacists" http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6167924.stm. Another news article states "Last week Pulse revealed that three SUS users in every organisation within the NHS have been given access to patient-identifiable information contained with Commissioning Data Sets and Payment by Results data." [6] (Pulse is writen for doctors.

Where do you cite them (at the end or after each fact)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Medicalprivacy (talk • contribs) 14:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the skin to default skin

I was exploring the different available skins in Wikipedia and changed to a skin other than the default, but then I changed my mind and wanted to revert back to the default skin, but then I noticed that the SAVE button was responding to my clicks. I even on RESET hoping that this buton to would reset my profile to default settings, but that didn't help either. I looked into your FAQ, but couldn't find a similar problem's resolution. Pls help me to revert back to the default skin view. - Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sajjanj (talk • contribs) 20:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go to my preferences and click on skins. You can change it back there -Brian Alexander (talk) 20:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you meant to say that the save button was not responding to your clicks. Use this link to change skin instead. Brian Alexander's link is the normal preferences link which probably doesn't work for you. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That only changes the skin of one page view.--Patrick (talk) 01:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The link should keep you in MonoBook until you save a new skin or leave preferences. Everybody should be able to select and save another skin when they enter preferences that way. Sajjanj's problem was not being able to do that with the normal Special:Preferences link where you enter preferences in your current skin. This is a known problem with some skins. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thanks.--Patrick (talk) 02:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dowloading to make a time consuming edit off line

I wish to make a major format change to a table in an article. It would be easiest for everyone if I could download the table, make the changes on my home machine, and then upload as a paste/insert to the existing article.

Can this be done? Is it approved? Any problems to watch out for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.166.20 (talk) 20:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Specify which article please. Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 20:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This can certainly be done. I don't know the circumstances but it can be a good idea to first suggest a major format change on the articles talk page and see if there are objections. Especially if it's a controversial table like in List of massacres which your IP address has worked on. There is a risk other editors will dislike your format and revert it. And it's possible somebody will edit the live table while you are working on an old copy. Then you should merge their changes into your revised table. You can reduce the risk of this by placing a template from Category:Under-construction templates when you download the table. Then others will know somebody is working on it. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can use your mouse to copy-and-paste the wikitext (i.e. the contents of the edit box; the stuff you want to edit) into your favourite text editor (or at least into one that allows copy/paste), work on it as much as you like, then when you're ready, copy-and-paste it back ... except that as PrimeHunter said, others might have edited it meanwhile and you shouldn't just discard their edits. --Coppertwig (talk) 21:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Just to keep you in the loop, I have found a scannable list of over 4,000 massacres in a university library. Just thought I would try to make the list complete.Aaaronsmith (talk) 01:16, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure you don't add copyright violations. And if you plan to add a large number of massacres then I strongly suggest discussing it on the talk page first. There is already discussion about which massacres to include. And "massacre" is so loosely defined that "complete" is very open to interpretation, but a thousand would certainly be way too many for a list with details about each. Also note that Wikipedia lists are often primarily or only intended for things already mentioned in other articles. Category:Massacres has plenty to pick from. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Search Log

Hi, I have been using a mobile portal of Wikipedia (wapedia.mobi) and I see they have a log of recent document searches - suffix URL is: /Special:Searchlog

This doesn't appear to be a special page on Wikipedia itself, I wonder if there is one hidden away somewhere?

Anyone know?

Cheers

R —Preceding unsigned comment added by TetsuoTheRob (talk • contribs) 21:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea, but if you go to User:Teratornis#Useful searches I have some search links you can click on to look for technical stuff like this in many of the places where people may have written about it. --Teratornis (talk) 05:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find my own questions; codes in different colour, please.

I've asked questions here before and now I can't find them to know if they've been answered or not. Can I be notified one way or the other--and be given links? Can you notify me in my Talk page and with a New Message notice?

My new question is can you please change the way all the edit boxes are displayed? When I am editing an article it's really hard because the text and the codes are all in the same colour and intensity. Elsewhere in the 1990s I used to see the text in light face and the codes in bold, or something like that. Even better might be a colour difference. Thanks! Korky Day (talk) 21:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This Google search finds two old help desk pages with posts from you: [7] and [8]. In the second you also asked how to find old posts from you. Whenever somebody other than you edits your talk page, you should automatically get a new messages notice. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm continuing this on my help page because otherwise I'll lose track of it. Korky Day (talk) 02:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Text protection

HI

Where can I learn about protection for the texts I include in Wikipedia, please?

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by MireilleDubreuil (talk • contribs) 22:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of protection do you have in mind? Maybe one of these answers your question: Wikipedia:Protection policy (protection against vandalism and edit wars), Wikipedia:Deletion policy (limited protection against complete deletion), Wikipedia:Ownership of articles (protection - actually no protection - against changes by other editors), Wikipedia:Copyrights (limited protection against reuse of your text). PrimeHunter (talk) 22:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How to place a Wikipedia listing

I represent a writer who should be listed on your site. How do I place a Wikipedia entry?

Thank You

Elena Karina Byrne 22:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)22:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)~~

Please read WP:COI for Wikipedia's guidelines on conflict of interest, and WP:BIO for the guideline on notability. Please make sure that your client meets those guidelines before beginning the article. Then read Wikipedia:Your first article. Corvus cornix_talk 22:22, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Impossible Dream

Can you advise the original Singer of "Impossible Dream" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.164.226.206 (talk) 22:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This question would be better answered at the Entertainment Reference Desk. Corvus cornix_talk 22:22, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While the above holds true, The Impossible Dream (The Quest) may be what you are looking for. You can do searches yourself using the search field on the left hand side of the screen.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brights movement

Can somebody please fix the references on the Brights movement page? I don't undertand what the big red error messages are saying. Thanks. Corvus cornix_talk 22:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was recently a software error for reference names containing digits. The software has been fixed so no edit is needed. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well, it got fixed anyway. :) thanks. Corvus cornix_talk 23:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

consolidated in-line citations suddenly turn RED

RE: Daijō-kan, Gemmei, etc.

ALARM: Most of the citations in articles I've created over the past year seem to have suddenly turned RED ... not only in this specific article but in several others I quickly checked. What happened? I'm guessing that this appears to be a sudden systemic change -- an error not attributable to me? something bigger than me?

In each of the articles I have created, the consolidated in-line citations have been "named" with the first letter of the author's last name plus the relevant page number; ergo -- I've NOT created a name a mere integer ... and, although there has been no problem prior to 27 December 2007/17:00 (EST) ... everything has suddenly gone awry. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 23:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the section immediately above this. There was a software change that got reverted. :) Corvus cornix_talk 23:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If a page hasn't fixed itself by now then purge it or make a null edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia on SmartPhone using Windows Mobile 6.0

How can I best use wikipedia on my SmartPhone using windows mobile 6.0? Using the desktop version is so slow on my phone. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paparomeroalpha (talk • contribs) 23:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the technology but try seeing Wikipedia:WAP access. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I discovered the answer: http://en.wap.wikipedia.org/ Resolved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paparomeroalpha (talk • contribs) 06:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC) {Resolved|1=Paparomeroalpha (talk) 06:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)}[reply]

December 28

Using the Wikipedia Open Ticket Request System

I sent an email to info-en-q@wikimedia.org on 26 December 2007 and received no response. I expected some kind of acknowledgment. Today I found the Wikpedia Open Ticket Request System Wikipedia:OTRS. I found it highly confusing as it does not make it clear how to initiate contact. I eventually emailed en.ABCD+wikipedia@gmail.com, expecting a Ticket. I still received nothing. What am I doing wrong ? Is my gmail address regarded as spam ? I followed the guidelines on this page. I wrote a short email where I was polite and straight to the point.

Perhaps I am over-reacting but I am becoming increasingly distressed by the complete lack of response from Wikipedia while on the receiving end of invectives and false accusations by an established Wikipedia editor. He/she remains aggressive and uncompromising while hiding behind the safety of his/her pseudonym. Unfortunately, he/she has chosen to make false accusations using my full real name on a talk page and refuses to remove it. Ironically, he thanked me for being polite and honest. I do not wish to engage in a flame war with him/her. I just want this unpleasant matter to go away quickly. Perhaps in my haste I am going through the wrong channels. Sorry about that. Can you help ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.145.220.20 (talk) 23:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you're looking to contact OTRS, I suggest you do so via Wikipedia:Contact us; beyond that, sounds like some internal affairs. I'll see if I can get an OTRS volunteer to peek at this thread. Other than that, you could send another email. – Luna Santin (talk) 02:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm one of the OTRS volunteers; if you'd like to email me about the problem and let me know what email address you used, I can look up the ticket for you and see if there is something we can do to assist you. Depending on the type and complexity of the issue, it may take several days to more than a week for a volunteer to respond to your email. You will often find that on-wiki problems are solved much more quickly using the on-wiki processes, for instance, in your case, you may wish to review the procedures at dispute resolution. If another editor is violating policies by attacking you or outing your real identity, you may wish to use Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts or in extreme cases, notify an administrator. You're also welcome to contact me at my talk page if I can be of assistance, but please be aware that talk pages aren't a good place to leave confidential information, such as your email address. Shell ^babelfish 04:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only time you even get an email response from OTRS, just to say we got your email, is when we reply to it. I am also on the OTRS team with Shell, so I can see what is going on. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:34, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remember it is the holiday season, the OTRS workers are volunteers and may not be spending as much time as usual about now. Mr.Z-man 06:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images of oneself and rights

I want to upload an image of myself for my user page, an image which I own. Can I do so retaining enough rights that I can specify that it is only allowed to be posted on my user page? If so, what kind of attribution can I use? Is there a way for me to retain all rights and restrict it to just my user page? Charles 03:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think if it's to be used outside of article space, an image must be under a free license. I don't believe you'd be able to limit its use to only your user page. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 03:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could upload it that the author of picture (ie yourself) would have to be attributed to the picture. lemme just look it up.--Kerotan ^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 03:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I am eager to see what the options are. Charles 03:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[9] Here is the one I was referring to. would that do?--Kerotan ^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 03:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, but not the best, but still good. Is that as far as I can restrict the use of my image on Wikipedia? Charles 03:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. Free content can be reused by anyone for anything. --teb728 t c 07:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Creative Commons Attribution license is the "most restrictive" that can be placed on personal user pages. Anything higher like copyrighted pictures require fair use in order to be on Wikipedia articles. Unfortunately, personal user pages cannot have fair use pictures, only "free" pictures. --Hdt83 ^Chat 08:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Polarity therapy page missing [edit]

The first sentence has been altered incorrectly however there is no [edit] choice for just that line. The first appearance of [edit] seems to apply only to subsequent material.

Johnchitty (talk) 04:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)Johnchitty[reply]

Simple enough, just click the "edit this page" tab at the top. Good luck! Soxred93 has a boring sig 04:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Markup error

Does anyone have a clue why the following markup does not render correctly? It's the lead from a stub I was about to write.

'Antoine Dadine D'Autreserre (1602–1682) was a French jurist. He was also referred to as Dadinus, Dadino, Hauteserre or Alteserra.

Thanks! Sandstein (talk) 07:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure, but I did find a solution, albeit a rather messy one.

Antoine Dadine D'Autreserre (1602–1682) was a French jurist. He was also referred to as ''Dadinus'', ''Dadino''', ''Hauteserre'' or ''Alteserra''.

--Kerotan ^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 07:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but sorry for the trouble. I've found the problem: a superfluous apostroph mark after "Dadino". Best, Sandstein (talk) 07:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To update Special:Ancientpages

How does one update Special:Ancientpages? Can somebody go ahead and do that? Please, Let Us Update Special:Ancientpages. Thank you. —Preceding comment was added at 08:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've already posted at the appropriate talk page. Perhaps you could put a {{editprotected}} tag there and ask for an update; otherwise, it's probably worth proposing for deletion, if they're not going to bother to update more than once a year. The Evil Spartan (talk) 09:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can't delete special pages. --uǝʌǝs ʎʇɹnoɟ ʇs(st47) 00:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for information on Italian Miliarty records.

My grandfather fought in world war 2, and i came on here seeking information. Just wondering does Wiki provide any info on Italian soldiers who fought during the second world war?

74.56.118.12 (talk) 08:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Italy is mentioned frequently throughout the World War II article, and there's a section on their involvement in the war at Kingdom of Italy (1861-1946)#World War II and the fall of Fascism.

Is that the information you were looking for? CattleGirl ^talk 09:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See also Military history of Italy during World War II. Few individual soldiers are mentioned in Wikipedia, often high-ranking officers. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Depicting Muhammed in pictures at Wikipedia article

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

Dear Sirs,

I would like to thank you for your work at wikipedia. However, I have a problem with depicting The Prophet Muhammed in the wikipedia article in the link above.

Although the images are taken from 15th and 16th century drawings, and I know they are historical documents, it is still not allowed in the current Islamic faith to draw pictures of the Prophet. The reason for that is due to respect for Him and His companions. This is to distinguish Him. Add to that the recent dispute and problems caused by the caricatures two years ago.

I hope you take this into consideration. I suggest blurring the face in the images if you cannot remove them all together.

Thank you, Best regards,

Rajy K. Al-Rayyes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.35.72.140 (talk) 09:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mr. Al-Rayys, and thanks for your comments. However, Wikipedia has a policy: Wikipedia is not censored, which means that it adds text and photographs even if people sometimes find them offensive (whether that be swearing, blasphemy, or sexually explicit photos). In fact, if you review the talk page and its archives, you will see this issue has been talked about extensively, even ad nauseum. Please note I do not always agree with the policy, but it stands as is. You are welcome to make suggestions, however, at WT:NOT to a change in policy. The Evil Spartan (talk) 09:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation template thingy... (SOLVED)

Resolved

Can someone please fix my disambiguation template here: Glow-in-the-dark - I looked on the WP, info disambiguation page but I was overwhelmed with information since I am late for a meeting. I sorta made something up, which obviously didn't work! Otherwise please leave the explanation here and I will fix it when I get home tonight. Thanks! Saudade7 12:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:D for disambiguation information. Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 12:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks The Helpful One, but alas, that was the page that I said I didn't have time to read through because I was late to meet someone! No worries, someone has answered the question below! Happy New Year! Saudade7 19:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could use {{subst:dis|Glow-in-the-dark|Bioluminescence|Chemiluminescence|Phosphorescence|Radioluminescence}}, but that {{Dis}} template seems to preclude any explanation of the articles linked. Alternatively, you could just do it manually: leave the article as you have it now, remove the dis template and add a generic {{disambig}} template, which produces the "This is a disambiguation page" bit at the bottom of the page. There may be a way to add article explanations in a template, but I haven't found it yet! --Kateshort forbob 14:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)There is a list of templates[reply]

Thanks Kateshort forbob, I will fix it now. Happy New Year and Thanks! Saudade7 19:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About ISP Market in Bangla Desh

Need to know all about ISP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.11.122 (talk) 13:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the 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, select the relevant section, 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. Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 13:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

getting wikipedia CD

dear sir/madam

i want to buy a wikipedia CD can you please tell me where can i find Wikipedia CD's near Delhi,India region?

thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.49.198 (talk) 14:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you can accesss bit torrent you can download a copy - see Wikipedia:Wikipedia-CD/Download. Regards, Ben Aveling 14:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resolving persistent errors in category info-box

The category box at the foot of Daijō-kan identifies it as having inadequate reference sources. Whatever else may be construed as a flaw, it is obviously not lacking in-line citations nor bibliographic source notes. I can't figure out how to delete this mistake? Rather than contacting you for help, what could I have done differently to resolve this anomaly?

EXAMPLE -->> Categories: All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements since December 2007 | Government of feudal Japan | Meiji Restoration | Government of Japan | Government ministers of Japan

Is there a systematic way for me to figure out how this happened or how to avoid this kind of problem in other articles? --Ooperhoofd (talk) 15:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Find Junior Taxation Undersecretary or (more generally) "citation". - CarbonLifeForm (talk) 15:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's caused by {{Failed verification}}, added in [11]. Categories are often added by templates. If you click "edit this page" then the bottom of the window shows the transcluded templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images

How Do I Link To An Article Via An Image (Ie: You Click The Image And The Browser Takes You To A Page Instead Of The Images Description Page?) Thanx! xxx Hyper Girl (talk) 15:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have to do it in a rather indirect way: imagemaps. See mw:Extension:ImageMap for examples. Instead of having multiple hot-spots, you will want the whole image to be one big hotspot. -- kainaw ™ 15:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've got the following code:

<imagemap> Image:Wikipedia-logo.png|100px
rect 0 0 400 360  [[Main page]]
desc none
</imagemap>

Which produces:

test

But I can't click the image. It should link to the main page but it doesn't. I'm really not sure what to do here. Any help? Thanx! xxx Hyper Girl (talk) 16:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the code - I changed the rect to default. It works now and is easier than defining a rect. -- kainaw ™ 17:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Kainaw! xxx User:Hyper Girl 17:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

search

where would I go or what would I use to find a specific person? 71.7.201.72 (talk) 16:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Click here and then type what you want to search for in the box and click "search". Good luck! xxx Hyper Girl (talk) 16:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can I use a widget on Wikipedia to import a photo gallery?

Is there a way and is it acceptable practice to use a widget on Wikipedia in order to import a photo gallery? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.77.16.6 (talk) 17:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most images uploaded to Wikipedia are deleted because they are not properly licensed for use on Wikipedia. As such, you need to upload your images one at a time and indicate the licensing for each image. -- kainaw ™ 17:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article written as an advertisment

I see this message on the RAQ wiki page and wonder what I can do to make it not read like an ad. I have zero affiliation with the band and live on the other side of the country from them. I have no agenda other then adding an info page on RAQ to explain what and who RAQ is. I thought I was doing this by not adding tour dates and such. Just a bio and a list of albums and songs, thats it. What can I do different? I admit I am a total kneub here.

Smiles, Mark —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marklar1025 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What you can do to improve the page, in this case, is basically cutting out stuff that sounds like an ad campaign or advertising and replace it with more encyclopedic language. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and is written from a neutral point of view. The article you mentioned, RAQ, looks like a positive review or poster for the article, which is definitely not what Wikipedia is supposed to be. Just try to cut out some of that stuff, find independent, reliable sources for it so that it's not just using the band's own website, and it'll improve the article a lot. Be bold in editing; if you mess something up, it's really no big deal and it can be quite easily fixed. And considering the current state of the article, I somehow doubt you'll make it worse. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 19:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 Questions regarding posting

My Grandfather's page has erroneously listed his name as “Gus” Kenneally when his name was George & his nickname was “Gigi.” How do I change it ?

Also I posted a picture of him on the site & it was taken down for Verification? Not sure how to put a picture on it…..

I am a long time site user …just not versed in how to add or change stuff….

Can someone help? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gus_Kenneally —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.63.96.108 (talk) 20:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To change the title of a page, you need to move the page to the new title. To do this, you need to create an account, four days after which you'll be able to move pages. (Newly registered users can't move pages.) I'll move the page myself for this article. For images, they need to be released under a free license or fair use, so it might have been deleted if no license was specified. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 20:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

create page for a candidate

Hi:

We are trying to create a page for a candidate. How do we do this properly? We just received a message, (don't know how to reply to it) stating we were making unconstructive changes or what appeared to be vandalism. Of course, that is not our intent. Therefore, what is the proper way to create a page for a candidate?

Because we may not be able to find your response on this page, as we are unsure of how to properly use Wikipedia, please send a reply to <e-mail removed>.

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freda Stevens (talk • contribs) 21:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:SPA, WP:COI, m:Role account, WP:NPOV, WP:RS, and WP:BIO. --Teratornis (talk) 23:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit here may have resembled "vandalism" because you posted some information on a user page that belonged on that user's talk page. Please read Help:Talk page to learn how we communicate with other users on Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 23:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To summarize all those pages Teratornis linked to, it's probably not a good idea for you to create a page on that person because you appear to have a conflict of interest there, and would have difficulty writing it from a neutral point of view. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 02:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalizing my contributions

A user named Duplicity notified me that they removed links to my blog which I'd added to several Wikipedia articles: [12]

Duplicity did not tell me which articles he/she removed links from & I'd like to find out how I can track this down. Second, I replied to Duplicity that I am not violating a conflict of interest rule because I am an established expert in the fields I write about--the Israeli Palestinian conflict. I have an MA in this field, publish widely in established media like The Guardian, Los Angeles Times & have been interviewed for my expertise by the NY Times, Seattle Post Intelligencer, Jewish Forward and other publications.

I also have a chapter that will be published in a book of essay by Verso Books on the Israeli Palestinian conflict this September.

The information in my blog is always sourced to reputable Israeli and U.S. media and my posts are highly researched. I only link posts to Wikipedia articles that are directly relevant & where I think a Wikipedia reader would gain added knowledge of the subject.

Is there any way I can prevent people like Duplicity from vandalizing my contributions? Richard (talk) 21:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions were not "vandalized" by Duplicity; they were reverted because the external links you added weren't appropriate for the article. Regardless of whether you are considered an expert in a subject, you still have a conflict of interest in adding a link to your own blog. Also, blogs are generally not considered reliable sources, partly because they inherently have the point of view of whoever writes them. What you can do is discuss your sources and links on the article's talk page and explain why they should be included in the article; this avoids issues with having a conflict of interest. And, being an expert on the subject, your help with improve the articles will be welcome. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 22:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, the posts linked to were entirely appropriate to the article. Second, in the entire COI article you linked there isn't a single reference that I saw saying that linking to one's own blog is a conflict of interest. Besides, a conflict of interest always involves a person who receives a benefit from their behavior & I have received no benefit whatsoever fr. the link. On the contrary, the link is meant to enrich the reader's experience by allowing them to read an external source that would provide more detail than is possible in a Wikipedia article.

Regarding blogs, your view of blogs is a bit one sided. Blogs have a pt of view. But so does journalism & so do books & so do research papers all of which are supposedly of higher reliability as Wikipedia sources. Not all blogs are the same. Some blogs are entirely reputable sources in their subject area. Some are propaganda & worthless for Wikipedia's purposes. There is no one size fits all regarding blogs.Richard (talk) 07:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Conflict of interest uses another definition than you and since this is about Wikipedia, it's our definition that applies. There is no point arguing with it. If we changed the definition of the term itself then we would also change the guideline so it still covered people linking their own site for whatever purpose. The most relevant page in this case is probably Wikipedia:External links which says: "You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked. If the link is to a relevant and informative site that should otherwise be included, please consider mentioning it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it." PrimeHunter (talk) 15:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category mishap

Hmm. . . well I must have forgotten a step somewhere. I just added a Category:WikiProject contemporary music articles (click the red link, it works) link to the new {{Template:Contemporary music}}. It seems to display some of the talk pages, but doesn’t believe the category has been created yet. :) Should I have avoided trying to create the category and add it in the same step? Thanks, --S.dedalus (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page itself hasn't been made - just go to Category:WikiProject contemporary music articles, click edit and type a brief description. The box for editing gets placed near the bottom of the page. --h2g2bob (talk) 23:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, DUH.

Now I feel silly. Thanks for your help; I didn’t realize a potential category could be filled with articles like that before it even existed! --S.dedalus (talk) 00:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 29

Dual licencing

The image [:image:DNA_polymerase.svg] is released under two licences with the allowance that you may choose either. One, the GNU one, says that you can't use it on the cover of a textbook (an extremely random stipulation if you ask me; not much stranger than saying "you can't use it on page 37 or 62") while the Creative Commons one imposes no such restriction. So what's the point of providing two licences in this way? What does GNU give that CC can't? --Seans Potato Business 00:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"No front cover texts" does not mean you can't use it on the front cover of a book. Instead it is a section from the Text of the GNU Free Documentation License, specifically defined as "The "Cover Texts" are certain short passages of text that are listed, as Front-Cover Texts or Back-Cover Texts, in the notice that says that the Document is released under this License. A Front-Cover Text may be at most 5 words, and a Back-Cover Text may be at most 25 words." Basically, the Wikipedia template is using that wording to make sure people don't use loopholes to get out of requirements of the GFDL, and making sure every word you see is freely licensable.--Ybbor^Talk 02:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rated articles

Is there any kind of mark to evaluate articles in terms of quality? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.19.173.88 (talk) 01:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is. Wikipedia has six classes of articles:

Stub class: The article is only a few sentences long or isn't well organised.
Start class: The article has a good amount of content but most readers who aren't familiar with the subject will need to consult another resource.
B class: The article is beginning to become comprehensive. Casual readers usually will not need to consult an outside source, however researchers may need to.
Good Article (GA-class): The article has passed the Good article review process.
A class: The article is useful to all but a very small portion of readers. There is little to no information missing.
Featured Article: Meets the Featured article criteria and has passed the Featured article review process.

Ratings for an article can usually be found on the top of its talkpage. To access this page, click "discussion" at the top of the article. If the article is part of a WikiProject, the project may have its own set of rating criteria. Most WikiProjects have a template where you can tag an article as being part of that project and give it a ranking. An example is {{USRD}}. Note that you can assign ratings up to B without the article being reviewed by an outside party. NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 01:28, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

page editing

on the Lakeland Florida page, i added a new name (April Moore) to noteable people from Lakeland. it it only show when om logged in on my contributions link. will it show permanently, and do i need to do something further?

Chris G —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cg6152 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears you were logged out when you added the name, and you then logged in and made a couple minor edits to the page, including linking the name. So the actual addition of the name is logged in the contributions of your IP address rather than the contributions of your account. Regardless of this, you still made the edit, so it'll appear in the article whether you're logged in or not. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 02:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you didn't see recent edits in the article in some situations then you probably needed to bypass your cache. The name was an unsourced redlink and has been removed by another editor since the above posts. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This Tutorial is great!

Question: Last night, I added the movie "Help Me Eros" into the Requests for new articles, with a brief description of this new Taiwanese film. But today, it doesn't come up on the Search. I'm hoping this tutorial will help me learn how to cite sources, that's a bit tricky for me. Sincerely yours, Torch --Torchpratt (talk) 05:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your request is still there, but no one has created that article yet. Due to the large number of requested articles and the fact that some of them are on pretty obscure topics, it could be a while before someone creates it. On the issue of citing sources, perhaps Wikipedia:Citing sources might give the information you're looking for. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 05:44, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your request is [13]. Some requested articles are never created. If you mean why your request doesn't show up in search, are you searching Wikipedia space (project pages starting with "Wikipedia:")? By default, searches are only in mainspace (where the articles are). To include Wikipedia space, first make a normal search, then click Wikipedia at the bottom of the search page and search again in the bottom search box. This [14] shows your request. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:53, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so I wrote it myself. It's on the Template X1 page here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:X1 How do I make this into a real story? I read the thing about citing sources and I think I can handle it. Can you great people help me out again? --Torchpratt (talk) 07:05, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:X1 is intended for template experiments and often overwritten. It's a bad place to develop an article. Your version is [15]. You could copy the contents to your own user space, for example User:Torchpratt/Sandbox, and work on it there. Try to add references to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (films). PrimeHunter (talk) 15:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the love of god

Dear Brother / Sister

Your might be wondering who is this person calling you brother or sister, it is my believe that all man king is brothers and sisters, from Adam and eve, but we have been separated by space and cultures and languages over many many years, the reason I am writing to tell you about Islam not the Islam that you hear about in the news and been made to be a religion of terrorism and killing and destruction.

Islam is none of those, Islam is a religion of peace and harmony and justice for all, and a religion to warship only one supreme god with out mediator or some one between you and hem, and the last prophet from god is Mohammed may peace be upon him, not to delete other prophets and other religions but to update and complete them, so he tolled us to respect and obey other prophets peace and harmony be upon them all as much as we love and obey hem, and all their massages is tolled in our book the Quran, and to love and respect all man kind, wither white black or red, and I hope to be a live example of that, a complete stranger in the other side of the world sending you the message of god.

Not to enforce it on any body but to give an eye opener and let them think and compare and make the decision them self’s, this is one reason, and the other, every Muslim will be asked on the day of judgment why didn’t he pass the word of god, after he pass the word than the other person will be asked why didn’t he believe and why didn’t he pass the word of Islam to the people he care about and so on.

To make it simple your only asked to believe in one and only one god, that it controlling the world, have no mistress or son, and can be asked and worshiped directly, and that is Mohammed is a messenger from god, that is the first pillar of Islam and if you believe in that, the other 4 pillars are very simple but if you don’t than none of them will be excepted, I have selected some websites for you to get more information about the moderate and peaceful Islam, because my English doesn’t allow me to express my self and my message very well.

I am asking you in the name of god the great and merciful to read and understand the message of Islam and pass the information to whom you love, but please be careful not take Islam from any body the preach violence or to warship any body or any thing with god, or use greave or stones or a cleric as a messenger between him and god. Good bless you and your family and whom you love.

(Please copy and paste)

<external links removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.36.32.33 (talk) 05:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for sharing an affirmation of your faith with us. We would welcome your knowledgeable contributions here on Wikipedia, please consider joining the project. Regards, Keilana_(recall) 05:41, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to point out that Wikipedia isn't the place to spread your beliefs. You're more than welcome to help improve Wikipedia, but just keep in mind that Wikipedia has a policy of keeping to a neutral point of view in articles. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 05:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your post is inappropriate for this forum which is about asking questions related to using Wikipedia. While by your lights I'm sure you have noble intentions, some people, and I'm one of 'em, find proselytizing incredibly offensive.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 08:57, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This claim caught my attention:

not to delete other prophets and other religions but to update and complete them

I suppose that bit comes too late to save the Buddhas of Bamyan. Actions tend to speak a lot louder than words. --Teratornis (talk) 08:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RadioIO Article Creation

76.118.247.91 (talk) 05:42, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attention any skillful Wikipedians out there. There is a terrific Internet Radio company called "RadioIO". You can visit the website and read all about it. As you can see, I'm an unsigned user. I know very little about Wikipedia article writing. I figured if any skilled Wikipedia users gave the "RadioIO" website a visit and read up on the excellent online radio provider that an article could be created. Anyway, please visit the "RadioIO" website and let me know what you think.

Thank you for the suggestion. You may suggest an article's creation at Articles for Creation, however you should keep in mind Wikipedia's general notability guidelines, Wikipedia's Web notability guidelines, and Wikipedia's spam policy. Thanks! Regards, Keilana_(recall) 05:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non IT

What is mean by Non IT? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.246.109.161 (talk) 07:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Without being provided the context this phrase appeared in it is impossible to tell what it refers to for sure. However, IT is a common abbreviation in English for Information technology. By the way, this page is for asking questions about using Wikipedia. knowledge questions such as this should be asked at the reference desk. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 08:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mystery Fish: Fish of Babel!! Where to report differences in different languages?

Hi

1. I looked up pumpkinseed (fish), in English and it says it its natural to north-east North America, from where it was spread including to Europe; in Portuguese it says it was taken to Europe from South America; in Italian it says it was taken to Italy from the United States;

I've often come across divergent content like this - where do I report it if I am not personally able to effect any changes?

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 07:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I presume you speak of differences in articles in different language Wikipedias. If you aren't sure about accuracy, you might place a {{Dubious}} tag on it and mention the reason you find the information uncertain on the talk page. Even if you aren't confident enough in the issue to place the "dubious" tag, you might bring it up on the article's talk page, where interested editors may be able to dedicate the time to researching the matter. (Note that I do not know the procedure on other language Wikis. :)) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mystery Fish 2: Missing Links!

Hi

2. In English, the article has links to articles in 7 languages; in Portugues links to 6 languages and in French links to five languages. I 've seen this often too. Are new articles not created on some kind of a root that automatically link up with existing articles?

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 07:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Interlanguage links are either manually added by users or, in some cases, added by bots, but there is no automatic linkage between one Wikipedia language page and others. If you look at these pages in edit mode you should see at the bottom codes which add the interlanguage links. For example, in Pumpkinseed, you can see the addition of the link to the French Wikipedia article with the code [[fr:Crapet-soleil]] at the bottom of the article. When you find discrepancies such as you have here, you can and are encouraged to go ahead and fix them! Just add the code to the missing languages in the Portuguese and French Wikipedia articles.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 08:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mystery Fish 3: Lost in Translation

HI

3. If you follow the link to the article in Dutch, you get the same fish, same information, etc. However, if on the Dutch page you click on other languages, it takes you to a completely different fish!!! It is also not the first time that I see this. Does Wikipedia do some kind of sweep to track down cases like these?

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 07:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it is as I have stated in response to your post in the preceding section. It is done by real people such as yourself finding a problem and fixing it, or specifically programming a bot to do so (but only after requesting and obtaining approval of the community). Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 08:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Machine translation used in Wikipedia

Hi

I am writing this here about an article in Wikipedia in Portuguese simply to bring it to the attention of the English-language editors as well. The article on Pernambuco - in Portuguese - the section on "Historia", was machine-translated. The top was then edited, but towards the end it is one big mess. I wonder whether the rules and guidelines mention anything about over-eager contributors quickly machine-translating something for the sake of putting up an article.

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 07:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. See Wikipedia:Translation which has a section on this, here ("...the general consensus of Wikipedia contributors is that an unedited machine translation, left as a Wikipedia article, is worse than nothing").--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 08:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone check this edit?

Can someone check this edit on Kenny Cooper? Rubietje88 (talk) 09:36, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Original research was removed by an anon. If you disagree with the removal of this information, try and found a source for it. -Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 10:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbor Day Foundation 2008 Drive

Received a request for money in return for free trees from 100 Arbor Ave, Nebraska City, NE 68410 Is this part of the National Foundation? I hate to send money to a phoney organination. Please respond if this is ligitamate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.222.223.215 (talk) 13:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for asking questions about Wikipedia; you may have more success at the Reference desk where people can answerr general knowledge questions. Regardless, if an organisation contacts you out-of-the-blue and asks for money, you may be correct to be doubtful. In this case, the Arbor Day Foundation's websitesays that this is their address. You can purchase directly from their website. "money in return for free trees" - the trees aren't free, then. It appears that what you may have received is an offer for membership of the organisation where you would receive a gift (trees) when you join up. Hope this helps. However, I would advise that you do your own research on this subject and not rely solely on the word of an anonymous Internet user before deciding to give someone money. --Kateshort forbob 14:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life of Osama bin Laden

I want to create an article titled Personal life of Osama bin Laden. I have some questions regarding this.

First query, is this article be suitable for wikipedia standard?
Second, can I put separate section named "Appearance and behavior" in the article. Can "Appearance and behavior" be included within personal life?
Third, if this article fits with wikipedia standard, then what will be its title, Personal life of Osama bin Laden or something better. Please help. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will what you want to write fit into and compliment Osama bin Laden, (which I notice has a warning that it maybe too long) if so I recommend you discuss on that talk page and see if the article would be enhanced by your planned additions. 1) yes if it assists in the knowledge about the man. 2) Presumably if it is relevant to understanding the subject, but a hard one this one, 3)No IMHO - fit it into the existing if possible. Please though explore all possibilities it could be a worthwhile addition to the subject. Edmund Patrick ( ^confer _work) 15:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, try and be certain that the information added regarding bin Laden's personal life can be cited in verifiable sources. For some reason, this seems like it would be difficult to confirm....who knows tho, I might be wrong ;) Lazulilasher (talk) 17:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist problem

This has been annoying me for some time now: Why is it that some pages that are on my watchlist do not show up when I refresh the list? I've missed several discussions because of this glitch. When I go to a certain page that I know is watchlisted, I see new discussions, but it doesn't show up on my list. Is there any way to fix this, and am I the only one having this problem? Jeffpw (talk) 16:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check to see if you've pressed anything accidentaly on your preferences, by clicking here. Hope this helps, Rt . 18:57, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing I had turned on was hide minor edits and bot edits. I have now turned them off. Pages I edit are automatically added to my watchlist, so that's not an issue. For instance. This page was not on my watchlist just now, and I had to go into my contribution list and click on the section to see that I had received a reply. It's not like I don't have any articles coming up. It's just that a percentage of them don't show up at any given time. Most frustrating. Jeffpw (talk) 20:27, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm quite. Have there been any bugs recently? Rt . 20:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Database lag can cause watchlist problems. There's a list of common problems at the Village pump (technical), where you may want to post your issue. Also try Bugzilla if you feel that it is a software problem. NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 20:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Standard procedure for linking to WikiSource?

If I want to edit a page about a piece of literature, for example, and say that the piece in its entirety is available on WikiSource, what is the standard procedure for this? A link in the See also section, a template (if so, what is it and where do I put it?), or something else?

Please advise! It Is Me Here (talk) 16:56, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's {{Wikisource}} eg. {{Wikisource|Foobar}} produces

similar to the Wikiquote/news etc boxes. I think I've also seen text links in See Also or External Links sections. There's a full list available here. --Kateshort forbob 17:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I looked this up yesterday because I didn't know the answer either. It's supposed to go in the External links section, with the other interwiki links, like Wikimedia Commons, etc. Lazulilasher (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 17:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transcluded editable template

I am having trouble editing the transcluded version of User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/Header at many pages such as User:TonyTheTiger/List_of_the_Day/Nominees. What is the problem?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 17:33, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can't edit the page or the transcluded header? Rt . 18:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what you are saying. How do I change the page so either the edit button disappears or so that it works when transcluded? P.S. I have used several edit buttons in transcluded pages that work such as those at WP:CHIFC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The edit button is probably there because of the H2. Change that to a DIV, and I’ll bet that edit button goes away. --teb728 t c 22:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replacing photo.

If I find a photo that can be improved (correcting white balance, exposure levels, ect.) How do I replace the current photo with the new photo? Do i just upload the new photo as a new file and change the link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Genemacy (talk • contribs) 18:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upload the file with the same name. Like on Image:Example.jpg, at the bottom of the table it says "Upload a new version of this file". Just click that. :) Rt . 19:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

responses

How can I tell if anyone has been responding or looking at my ad? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.150.48.182 (talk) 18:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can put the page on your watchlist. But what "ad" are you referring to? There are strict enforcements about advertising on Wikipedia. Rt . 19:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Strict enforcements" meaning that it's not allowed. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 19:33, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In case you don't know, this is the help desk for the free encyclopedia Wikipedia. We have over two million articles and advertisement is not allowed. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion on Peer-Producing Note on Wiki

Hi,

Happy new year!

I'm a pretty heavy user of Wikipedia, but, sorry, not an active contributor. I'm trying to learn more here and then maybe later will share some ideas with enough self-efficacy.

What I want to say here, is that as a frequent user, not a contributor, I would like to propose a way that we can do something for Wiki. Wiki could provide a feature that allows logged-on users to hightlight the content they read. And some program can be developped to recognize the frequency of a certain sentence (or phrase, or paragraph) to be highlighted. Then when other users read the same item, they can choose whether other people's highlights be shown. Maybe they can even have the options of several level of popularity of highlights. The most popular highlights only shwow the sentences highlighted by the most people, and if the user wants, Wiki can show them sentences highlighted by less people.

Does it make sense? I'm not natively English speaking. So I would like to talk with anybody interested in this idea and develope it to strongthen Wiki's service to the human society!

Thank you very much for providing this amazing knowledge tool!

Xi CUI 1229 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.142.66 (talk) 20:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try the Village Pump. Rt . 20:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) It's an interesting concept, but I don't think it would be practical. For one thing, it might discourage people from actually improving articles, instead just highlighting a few parts of it. Another issue would be accountability. Wikipedia deals with a lot of vandalism, so what would stop people from highlighting random parts of an article just to mess things up? There'd have to be a whole separate log for it, which would become unbelievably cluttered in a very short time. Also, there's really no need. The manual of style sets up the introduction of an article as pretty much exactly what you're describing: the part that's useful to the largest number of people and is most read. I'd say the current system is working fine, and introducing something like that would end up causing more problems than it would be worth. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 20:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What you are thinking about falls under the general category of: Collaborative filtering, a field which is barely scratching the surface of its potential (and ~~isn't being done at all on Wikipedia yet~~, as far as I know). With all the smart people who are thinking of all the smart things, it's hard to have a truly original idea, especially a good idea. So when you get an idea, the first question to ask is, "If my idea is so good, why hasn't anyone else thought of it?" The second and third questions are, "OK, if someone else has thought of it, who are they and what have they done?" Wikipedia is pretty good for answering the latter kinds of questions. I also recommend watching a lot of TED (conference) and Google TechTalks videos on YouTube, just to listen to some really smart people talk about their ideas and their work. It's like yoga (or maybe like powerlifting) for the brain. --Teratornis (talk) 08:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In my reply above, I originally claimed Wikipedia is not doing any collaborative filtering. Then I checked the backlinks (Special:Whatlinkshere/Collaborative filtering) and it turns out User:SuggestBot uses collaborative filtering algorithms to suggest articles a user may want to edit. That is not quite what the questioner had in mind, but it is some sort of an example of collaborative filtering on Wikipedia. (I'm surprised nobody caught my error. Just because I write something, hardly makes it true!) --Teratornis (talk) 17:01, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV in Articles on Religion

Should articles on religious figures and concepts portray them as facts, i.e. Jesus is the Messiah vs. Jesus is believed by Christians to be the Messiah. I have seen both used in different articles and was wondering whether there is a specific policy on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.239.246 (talk) 21:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant policy is Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. What articles should do is state established historical facts as facts and beliefs as beliefs. So, the article Jesus follows this by stating that certain historical sources claims certain things about his life, and it states his existence as a fact since there is strong historical evidence for his existence. However, it states only that he is believed to be the Messiah, not that he is or is not. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 22:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's all about rephrasing things as facts. For example, "In Christianity, Christ is regarded as the Messiah" - is a fact we can back up with reliable sources. But "Christ is the Messiah" - shouldn't be given as fact since nobody can prove it. (Isn't that what faith is about anyway, following it even if it can't be proved?) Of course once/if the correct context is established first, such as talking about a certain story from the Bible, then you can state the rest of it normally. E.g., in Parable of the Prodigal Son. Because then it's not presenting the happenings in the story as fact (which can't be proven), it's just explaining what the story says (which can be proven because people can read it!). • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 02:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It stands to reason that most people who have knowledge about a particular religion, and motive to write about it, are adherents of that religion. (How many people who aren't Zoroastrians know anything about Zoroastrianism, for example?) Religious people have to make a conscious effort to write factually about their own faith, because every religion I am familiar with systematically tries to erode the boundary between fact and imagination, by presenting its unprovable supernatural claims as fact. Visit any house of worship and listen to the message: whatever the doctrine, the pastor/priest/imam/etc. will present some real-world facts, and some claims about the supernatural, with little if any distinction between them. Sacred books, of course, make absolutely no distinction: the Bible, for example, describes a number of ordinary real-world events, along with miraculous events such as the Earth standing still, or even rotating backwards (not that the writers understood then that the Earth rotates), talking donkeys, water standing up to leave the seabed dry, the dead coming back to life, etc., along with divine interpretation of ordinary events (a plague struck Israel, because God was punishing them), with everything described with the same matter-of-factness. In fiction, there is the notion of "in-universe" description, i.e., describing fictional characters and events as if they are real. In fiction, at least, the idea is to understand when one is speaking in an "in-universe" kind of way, but in religion, even to suggest that there is such a distinction amounts to blasphemy. Therefore, one might argue that for a proponent of a religion to write about that religion constitutes a conflict of interest. Certainly, one can make as strong a case for religious conflicts of interest as one might make for commercial conflicts of interest, given that among the proselytizing religions at least, the motivation to sell the religion can be as strong, if not stronger, than the motivation for a business person to sell a product. The business person just wants to make a buck, whereas the religious person might believe the fate of your eternal soul is at stake. However, just as a practical matter, it is probably impossible to stop proponents of religions from writing about them on Wikipedia. It's up to the community to police the religion articles to insure they properly distinguish between facts (which are claims that virtually all sane people can agree on, when they have reviewed all the evidence) and supernatural doctrinal claims which lack any sort of conclusive evidence to support them. --Teratornis (talk) 08:32, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV metastasis of something a little off?

The following edits bother me. There is something a little off in serial controversies I don't fully understand yet. I'm confronting an evolving problem set.

The context which makes it reasonable to seek help is this odd edit:

Talk:Daijō-kan#Plagiarism

What shall I do -- now, before this bubbles into something bigger?

Ignoring this whatever-it-is "issue" may be precisely the wrong thing to do.

This seems needlessly troublesome; but there you have it. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 22:46, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If addressing the other editor directly and civilly does not help, you may wish to seek assistance at one of the forums mentioned in the dispute resolution policy. Good luck. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for suggesting a more constructive direction. A good step towards something better. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 01:36, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

If Wikipedia knows that "American" is an incorrect word for describing someone from the United States, why does it use it anyway? Hyano czespony (talk) 23:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. "American" is a correct word to use in describing someone from the United States just as someone from China may be described as "Asian" and someone from Sweden "European". While "American" may properly apply to any person from the Americas, it has also often been generalized to citizens of the United States of America since the first recorded use of the word in this sense in 1765. See [16] and United States#Etymology. If you have further questions about this common practice, you may wish to ask them at Talk:United States or the reference desk. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, remember it's not "Wikipedia" that "uses" any particular words as such, it's whoever happened to write that particular word. If you think something can be phrased better, be bold in editing it. E.g., "American singer" could be rephrased to "US singer", if you think that works better and is more accurate. :) • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 03:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And "US singer" would almost assuredly get reverted. Corvus cornix_talk 21:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Wouldn't it be more accurate? • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 13:24, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I wouldn't revert it, but it is less common usage. :) Evidence suggests that "American" is consensus. We have Category:American singers, for instance, to which Category:United States singers redirects. This a distinct category from Category:Canadian singers and Category:Mexican singers, so evidently it's not continental but national. Then we've got the existence of Category:Mexican American writers, which specifies that it is for "United States writers of Mexican origin." I don't remember if there's a specific guideline addressing this, though I've poked around in the MOS for a bit. Perhaps somebody else can produce something. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"US" is offensive in that it implies that "American" is incorrect. "American" is the one and only correct usage. See American. One of its definitions is "A person or attribute of the United States of America ". "US" is the abbreviation for the country, not for the nationality. Corvus cornix_talk 17:17, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 30

adding images

okay, i used to be wikiwizzard, and now i cant remember how to add images i find on ggogle image search. will someone please explain to me how i add images from google image search??? i would appreciate the help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Randy6767 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, adding images from Google Image Search isn't a good idea because the copyright status isn't usually known. You can check the website for some sort of terms of use and tag it according to those terms, but if there isn't any sort of terms, you *may* be out of luck - I don't know if fair use applies to images of unknown copyright status. I'll leave that to an admin or an experienced user who knows more about the image policies. NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 01:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

font/typeface

The font or typeface in which Wikipedia appears on all three of my computers is almost unreadable when in bold. Is there a way for a reader to change it to Times New Roman or other font that is clearer?70.178.162.67 (talk) 02:15, 30 December 2007 (UTC)cafgol[reply]

Hello there! Well, Wikipedia doesn't have any built-in methods. However, some browsers allow you to change the fonts that appear on a page. Mind if I ask which one you're using? If it is Firefox, you can just enter the Tools menu, go to Options, and click on the Content tab. There should be a section that allows you to force webpages to render in a font of your choice. Hope that helps, Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 02:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The simplest solution may be to simply make the fonts bigger in your browser. On most browsers, use Ctrl + the mouse wheel or look on the View menu. Additionally, if you create an account and log in you can use the preferences page to adjust the skin that Wikipedia uses. For example here is this page in a different skin. Generally though I don't think the other skins are as nice or as readable as the normal one (called Monobook). There is another way to customize every aspect of Wikipedia's appearance selectively (you will need an account to do this) by creating a user sub-page with a custom stylesheet. There is a complete help page on it; see Help:User style, but it still looks very complicated, unfortunately. But if you try that method I'm sure there will be editors ready to help if you need it. • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 03:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(E/C) If you create an account you can then place a font choice in your account's css code at Special:Mypage/monobook.css. See Wikipedia:Customisation. You can also change the skin your account uses by going to preferences. Skins other than the default (MonoBook skin) use different fonts to display.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GA

There seems to be a broken template at WP:GA. It seems to be transcluded from elsewhere and I don't want to take the time to figure out what is going on.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 03:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was [17]. I have reverted it. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:13, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

creating an article

how do i create an article —Preceding unsigned comment added by CAP414991 (talk • contribs) 03:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before creating an article, 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 for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turning off SVG support

How do I turn off SVG support, even when the browser claims it supports it, and just go back to PNG rendering? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GregChant (talk • contribs) 06:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not being at all technically inclined, I can't help, but I wanted to note that if none of the other volunteers at the help desk today are able to help either you might want to ask the question at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Good luck. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Searching the Help desk archive for: SVG finds some results, but I don't see an exact match to your question in the first couple of pages of results, and I don't know the answer off the top of my head. But one previous answer leads to:

Those links suggest that you need to (somehow) tell your browser to turn on its content negotiation with various servers that serve SVG files, since they should (hopefully) also be able to automatically provide a PNG alternative if your browser requests it. Exactly how to tell your browser to do this would depend on which browser you have, so if you can't figure it out on your own, be sure to mention your browser name and version number when you ask for more help. You might find the answer with a Google search of the Web; for example, if your browser is Mozilla Firefox, you could try this search: Firefox SVG PNG content negotiation. However, I don't know whether or to what extent Wikipedia's servers implement content negotiation on their end. --Teratornis (talk) 17:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how do I create a page for wikipedia and where exactly do I start?

how do I create a page for wikipedia and where exactly do I start?Bridalguy (talk) 06:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before creating an article, 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 for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. --teb728 t c 06:38, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsing info on user talk page?

On my user talk page, I have a box called "Information". The code is as follows:

{{Userboxtop|Information}}
{{User Wikimedia Commons}}
{{user email}}
{{Template:user engineer}}
{{User:UBX/architecture}}
{{User uottawa}}
{{User:UBX/facebook}}
{{Userboxbottom}}

Are there tags which I can place around it which would show the title ("Information") that would collapse it by default and show a little "show" link? Thanks! Charles 07:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See: WP:EIW#Collapsing. --Teratornis (talk) 08:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For userboxes (I don't know if the other one would work on both, or just navboxes) there's [18]. Cheers- CattleGirl ^talk 08:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Teratornis and CattleGirl! I've done it now thanks to your help. I will copy this section over to my user talk page for reference if needed later. Charles 08:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting us know it worked. As you can see from other questions on the Help desk, most people who ask a question never post a reply (not that this Help desk makes it easy for wiki-editing novices to figure out how to do that), so we rarely know if questioners got what they needed and are happy, or if they just got fed up and decided to end it all. --Teratornis (talk) 19:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing unneccesary references

Hello. I have been a member of Wikipedia for nearly two years, but still have one problem. On the article How to Grow a Woman from the Ground, there are unneccasary references in the lead, but if I try to remove them, it messes up the whole reference section. Please help! Thamusemeantfan (talk) 07:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the lead section defines some named references, which later sections refer to only by name (you can see in the references section that the first two references have multiple links back to the article). To fix that problem, find another instance of the same reference later in the article, and copy the full version of it from the lead section. If you don't understand what I'm talking about, read WP:FOOT carefully, especially the information about reusing named references. --Teratornis (talk) 08:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain to me why my add-on are removed

Hi

I am new to your great wikipedia I am a 56 years old 100% no-money founder of Allah.com and I contributed with our free subtited copy in the proper place but it was removed, I even arranged the year order of the collections ... etc

Here are some examples: the edited link: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_translations_of_the_Qur%27an&action=edit&section=11

My insertion:

2007, English, "Koran: a Sub-titled Accurate Translation - Free download" "The Koran" by Anne Stephens and Shaykh Ahmad Darwish of Allah.com

Thank you, God bless you

Ahmad Darwish Hadithman (talk) 13:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I know it's frustrating to try to improve an article only to have your efforts removed. :( Since the editor who removed the material did not leave an edit summary, I can't be sure, but I suspect that it was removed in consideration of the external links policy. External links that seem specifically promotional are discouraged, even if the material they are promoting is non-commercial. The EL guideline suggests that you propose their usage on the talk page of the article and reach consensus with uninvolved parties as to whether or not they are appropriate for inclusion. Meanwhile, if you would like specific clarification since I can only hazard a guess, you can civilly ask the editor who removed the material at the article talk page or (as in this case it seems the editor is not a regular contributor to the article) at his or her talk page. Please remember to sign your notes on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end. You may also click on the signature button

located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. I hope this helps. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question by 82.26.79.190

There is no right of reply. So I will use this medium and if it is wrong pass it to who should see it. My IP address has been mine since I brought it from the apple mac shop. I have never edited or added to this site although I do use it for information. It feels like a violation to be warned and blocked or made to open an account and not given the right to find out how this has happened.

The subject I was supposed to have falsely edited and vandalised is something I have never heard of. I will not be using this site again, and will warn others against using it for you are named and falsely accused without being given the right to investigate and get your ip address cleared.

Miss Richards

You seem to have the ip address should anyone of the volunteers be bothered the email to reply to is (E-Mail removed for security purposes) I will happily carry this conversation I am extremely annoyed at this audacity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.79.190 (talk) 13:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Continued at User Talk:82.26.79.190. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 13:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is, of course, one of the costs of allowing unregistered users to edit on Wikipedia - we end up confusing and distressing lots of people who did not commit the vandalism we accuse their IP addresses of making. Evidently Jimbo Wales is willing to accept the kind of collateral damage Miss Richards reports here (not that he ever experiences it firsthand). Bear in mind that probably only a fraction of people in Miss Richards' situation manage to find their way to the Help desk and ask for clarification. A major challenge for experts in every field is to imagine what it is like to be a nonexpert, and tailor their communication accordingly. --Teratornis (talk) 18:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unapproved bots everywhere!

According to WP:BOT, users should not run bots without approval. Well, on Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval, there are a list of approved bots. This list is considerably shorter than Category:Wikipedia bots. So, did they not require approval in the past and allow bots to exist de facto? Did they archive the previous lists of approved bots? Or are there just unapproved bots everywhere that need to be taken care of by WP:ANI? 69.138.16.202 (talk) 13:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the history of bot approval, but they have archived the list of approved bots. (Here's a few more recent requests). --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Page Waste

I have tons of edit pages that I don't care about cloging up your system. How can I get rid of them?

dmelliott 15:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, if you're referring to the sub-pages of your user page, there is a simple way to request deletion. Simply put the text {{db-userreq}} at the top of the page. This adds a speedy deletion tag and adds it to Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. Then the next time an administrator checks the category they can delete the pages. There's also a guide on it here. For other types of speedy deletion template have a look at WP:CSD. • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 15:32, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However, even "deleted" pages will still be in Wikipedia's database "forever" (i.e., as long as Wikipedia continues to exist, and maintain its present policies, which seems likely to be for years to come), so they will still be "clogging up (our) system." Fortunately, Moore's law (or Kryder's Law) continues to push down the cost of disk storage, so it keeps getting easier to store copies of the pages you don't care about. Deleting pages from (the visible portion of) Wikipedia will, however, allow the various search engines to stop indexing them, so you'll be helping someone out by some tiny amount, just not Wikipedia so much. --Teratornis (talk) 18:49, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded images

How can I see what images have been uploaded by User:Whatever? - CarbonLifeForm (talk) 15:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Special:Contributions/Whatever. Currently this user has no contributions what so ever. For specifically images, see here

Hope this helps :) Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 15:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For image upload logs, go to Special:Log and enter the username there, and select "Upload log" from the dropdown list. Alternatively you can check edits to image description pages from Special:Contributions by setting the Namespace to "Image". This won't show image uploads if the description page wasn't edited though; similarly, it will show edits to image description pages even if the image itself wasn't touched. • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 15:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk?

Is there any criteria (criterion) for becoming a clerk at any of Wikipedia's numerous pages? EG. WP:CHU?

VIVID (talk) 15:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This specific case has been discussed at Wikipedia talk:Changing username#How do you become a clerk?. Algebraist 15:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most pages and processes don't use the clerk title. For two others that do, see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Clerks and Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Clerks. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:08, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translator

My friends told me that there is a translator on Wikipedia. Where can I find it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.208.248.29 (talk) 15:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's no automatic machine translator on Wikipedia, although there are Wikipedias being developed in over 200 languages and you'll notice that many articles have interwiki links to the same article in another language, in the list on the left-hand side of the page just below the navigation menus. E.g., History. For a general translator you could try Google Translate (http://www.google.com/language_tools) or AltaVista's Babelfish (http://babelfish.altavista.com/). Hope that helps. :) • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 16:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an addition to the above, if you're looking specifically to translate an article from a foreign language Wikipedia into English, you might request assistance at Wikipedia:Translation. If you stumble upon a foreign language article in the English Wikipedia, you may request its translation here. The procedure is described on that page. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:EIW#Transl for information about translation, although much of that is for people who edit Wikipedia (as opposed to people who only read Wikipedia). --Teratornis (talk) 18:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the {{Google translation}} template may be useful. For an example of using this template, see Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2007 October 19#Translate article. You can effectively use Google's translator to create an automatic machine translator for Wikipedia to or from any of the languages Google recognizes. The quality of machine translation is still a bit rough, but for topics you know something about, you should be able to understand at least half the sentences. Hopefully Google will continue to improve its translation software; Douglas Lenat has lectured in the Google TechTalks series, so presumably Google intends to use Lenat's knowledge-based technology as exemplified in Cyc, which might lead to smarter translation (in particular, more accurately disambiguating words with multiple meanings). --Teratornis (talk) 18:30, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I remember your mentioning that before. I'm going to snag it this time for my personal use. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A general way to snag anything from the Help desk is to use the {{Google help desk}} template I created. For example, Search Help desk for: translation, which leads to, among other replies, the half-dozen times I have repeated the answer I gave above (humm, sounds like time for another standard response template). A very large fraction of questions on the Help desk tend to be partial or total repeats of earlier questions. Which suggests there are groups of users out there with similar goals and background knowledge, and Wikipedia's design leads them to have similar questions. --Teratornis (talk) 18:55, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's awesome. You people who can Do Stuff amaze me. :) (I can halfway program my TiVo.) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, {{Google help desk}} wasn't exactly a great leap for mankind. It's a cut-down of {{Google custom}} which I wrote by looking at the {{Google}} template that someone else had written, and adding in the "Google custom" style of searching on a particular site that we use on the Help desk routinely. I had to read a few things on Help:Template and Help:Magic words to figure out and/or remember the things that {{Google}} uses. In any case, don't sell yourself short. You mastered the English language; by comparison, MediaWiki's template syntax is trivially simple. Watch some Tony Robbins videos on YouTube to fill yourself with unstoppable confidence, RTFM a bit, then whip open an edit window and start breaking stuff. Never say something is impossible until you've tried it 700 times (assuming the tries are survivable, of course). --Teratornis (talk) 16:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lyopholize & lyopholizer

Could someone please create these redirect pages so that they have the same targets as lyophilize and lyophilizer? Both are plausible typos, and should probably be created with "Freeze drying#Technological_industry" as a target. Thank you. --69.118.143.107 (talk) 18:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 20:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Self promotion

Allegheny County Library Association contains a lot of bragging about accomplishments, most of it from their own web site. How can I post something there to discourage this? Good Cop (talk) 18:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A relevant guideline is WP:PEACOCK. I will look for the messagebox template you can apply. (Must edit fast to avoid edit conflict.) --Teratornis (talk) 18:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another guideline is WP:ADVERT. --Teratornis (talk) 18:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TEMPLATES lists a large number of template messages; something in there will apply. --Teratornis (talk) 18:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a copyvio, I've tagged it as such. NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 20:20, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image templates on Wikimedia

Just out of interest where is the link to wikimedia pictures so you could change the images for the Navigation bars on the userpage. I've been searching but can't find a link. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 19:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you are talking about Wikimedia Commons, you can access it by typing Commons:Main Page in the search box (and click the resulting link at the top of the page, it should be coloured light blue in Monobook) or by going directly to http://commons.wikimedia.org. Any image in Commons is also usable in Wikipedia, just type the image filename like you normally would. NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 20:16, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thanks for the reply. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 21:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia "accuses" me of spamming!!! ;-)

Hi

I wanted to make a small edit to a page on the Portuguese wikipedia but was told that the page I was trying to save was blocked by the spam filter.

It said further that the blocking was likely due to a link to an external website and cited the text that triggered off the anti-spam measure as being "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v".

However, a text-search for the text in question drew a blank. I then deliberately looked for things to change on other pages - to rule out the possibility that the reason for being blocked was some malicious ware on my machine - and was able to do so without any problem. The page in question is "http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patu%C3%A1_macaense".

[seeing that it is NOT a language-related issue, rather a technical one, I am bringing it up HERE, as I have made the English Wikipedia my home]

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 21:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a link to a YouTube video in the External links section. You will have to remove it to save your edit. NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 21:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are two links starting with http://www.youtube.com/watch?v. Many links are displayed differently on the rendered page so you have to search the edit window. I don't know whether all browsers can search the edit box correctly. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My addition to "alternative theories" in "Gravitation" and to the "Pioneer Anomaly appear to have been deleted.

Today, Sunday, Dec 30, 2007 at about noon California time, I added reference to an alternative theory of gravitation to the alternative theories section of the "Gravitation" paper. The addition cited a paper on the "arXiv". I believe that I correctly processed the editing, but it now does not appear in the article.

The same as above is the case for an added reference to alternative explanation of the "Pioneer Anomaly"

I searched the Deletion Log and found nothing about them.

Is there a time delay before they appear ? Or, were they deleted and if so why ?

209.204.186.8 (talk) 21:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(This) is the diff that shows your content being removed, assuming that it's a published paper in a reputable peer reviewed journal you should probably re-add it using a proper citation. Assuming that it's self published, or not formally published then it shouldn't be re-added, per WP:SOURCE.--69.118.143.107 (talk) 21:16, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference, there's a tab in the corner marked history that allows you to see what edits have been made to a given article.--69.118.143.107 (talk) 22:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If a paper is only in arXiv then it's selfpublished with no peer review and unsuitable as reference for Wikipedia, except maybe if the author is regarded as an expert in the field. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

power of attorney

what is the process of filing for power of attorney.. also was the the purpose of it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.96.235.255 (talk) 21:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested in our article on power of attorney. If that doesn't help, you can always try the reference desk.--69.118.143.107 (talk) 21:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Wikipedia does not give legal opinions. If you ask again then say which country it's about, and which state if there are states with their own rules. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposing multiple deletions at the same time

I'd like to propose a series of deletions at the same time, but I'm not sure how to do it. There is no policy regarded multiple deletions at WP:Deletion, but my proposal makes sense, I think. Category:Economics_books is bloated with books by the heterodox economists of the Austrian school. Per WP:FRINGE and because none of the books are particularly notable, I'd like to propose that they all be deleted en masse. How would I propose this? Zenwhat (talk) 21:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Create one AfD, preferably for the first article. Then at the beginning of the nomination, put:

Also nominating:

{{la|Article 2}}
{{la|Article 3}}

etc. NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 21:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See more at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to list multiple related pages for deletion. I don't know the details but if the books are by different authors and the articles were created by different users then a large common AfD would probably be problematic. Any multiple AfD can result in some articles being deleted and others being kept. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:36, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Primehunter, they are likely by different authors and the pages were created by somewhat different people. However, the articles all espouse fringe theories and are mostly stubs that can be briefly read, before realizing they should be deleted. Example one, Example two. Zenwhat (talk) 01:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 2 example books were written by different authors more than 100 years apart. The articles were created at different times by different editors. No editor has contributed to both. The article size and number of external links are also very different. They don't look suited for the same AfD to me. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible uncivilness?

I nominated the article Nintendo GameCube for Lamest edit wars (see WT:Lamest edit wars#Nomination: Nintendo GameCube. The edit war was over two words, but I accidentally put "one word" in my nomination. An IP responded with a one-paragraph post over that mistake. They called it "slanderous" and insinuated that I was manipulating facts to get the war listed. I am deeply offended and would like another user to take a look and see if it is a) a personal attack b) uncivilness or c) just a bad case of overreaction. Thanks. NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 22:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A)No NPA. B) Slightly uncivil. C)Yes, an overreaction on your part to bring this up on the help desk. Jeffpw (talk) 22:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slightly uncivil, yes, unless it was meant tongue-in-cheek, which it might have been, since the over the top reaction ("ashamed of yourself"? "slanderous accusation"?) might be meant to demonstrate lame conflict. Reading tone in text is difficult. :P --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, reading tone is easy, since the reader is free to read any tone he or she prefers. Worrying about whether someone else is trying to insult us is just a way of submitting our emotional state to them. I recall a televised interview with Ronald Reagan in which the reporter quoted someone who said some bad things about Mr. Reagan, and asked for Reagan's response. Without missing a beat or losing his smile, Reagan sort of chuckled and said something to the effect of, "Now, did (so-and-so) really say that? I've known him for years and that doesn't sound like the sort of thing he would say." Basically, he put the burden on the reporter to prove that he wasn't just quoting the other person out of context, and the reporter ended up backing down when he saw he wasn't rattling his interview subject. One characteristic of highly successful people, especially in rancorous public fields like politics, is that they know how to handle criticism. They have sangfroid. They understand that people say a lot of things in the heat of the moment, and you can't get hung up on every little word. If someone is really out to get you, you'll figure that out eventually. --Teratornis (talk) 17:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How to edit navigation box headings and links

I need to know whether it is possible (and how) to change/edit the headings and links in the navigation, interaction, and toolbox boxes on my own wikipedia site (the lists on the left of the screen). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.146.160.130 (talk) 22:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your question mixes terminolgy. By "my own wikipedia site", do you mean your own wiki website which is not a part of the Wikipedia encyclopedia but is made with the same MediaWiki software? Or do you mean a page created here at the English Wikipedia website? Or at another language Wikipedia? And do you want everybody to see the chosen names or are you satisfied if you can make yourself see them when you have an account? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes of course it's possible to edit them on your own wiki. See Special:Allmessages for the system messages, all of which can edited. For example, MediaWiki:Sidebar contains the navigation and interaction boxes. • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 23:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 31

article on not-for-profit organization

I am interested in writing a Wikipedia article on a not-for-profit orgaization that sponsors a self transformative event every year - for the past 17 years. There is an existing community of those who have attended this event, which is loosely connected with various other alternative communities. I would have clear copyright on all materiels. Would this be something that will be appropriate for this venue? Please advise.

Thank you,

Kenn Day. --Kenndeigh (talk) 00:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before creating an article, 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 for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. --teb728 t c 02:16, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kenn. I see you've also added a mention of "Kenn Deigh" to an article, and that in the past you edited the Kenn Deigh and Lumensgate articles (both now deleted via the Articles for Deletion process. Due to the source and content of that text, and your screen name, I'd also make sure you read up on the Autobiography and Conflict of Interest guidelines. Writing about yourself or events you run is strongly discouraged. Thanks. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 07:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Show/hide

I cannot view any "show" or "hide" buttons. I run Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP Professional. Thanks, –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean you don't see the links, or that they don't work, or that you cannot make your own? What do you see here:

Click show or hide to the right

This text can be hidden

You should have seen a box with a clickable hide or show to the right.

PrimeHunter (talk) 01:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot even see the "hide" or "show." For all I know, it is not even there. –thedemonhog talk • edits 01:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It requires JavaScript which exists but can be disabled in IE6 for security reasons. See Wikipedia:NavFrame#Accessibility and try [19]. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, it worked! Thanks for the help. –thedemonhog talk • edits 02:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Four tildes

FOUR TIDES After logging on you told me to enter FOUR TIDES to display my user name ................... I do not have any TIDE(s) on my Laptop. I suggest that this TIDES thing is the figment of someone's imagination and should be done away with - it makes a bad beginning to introduce a new user with FOUR TIDES - it is an aberration. Please substitute Four Elephants or Four Monkeys!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leistina (talk • contribs) 00:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you edit, look at the edit buttons. One button will have a signature on it. Click that to sign a post. JetLover (talk) (Report a mistake) 00:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I first assume you are referring to "Four tildes" as opposed to "Four tides". There is no other name for it, other than "squiggle" (used by some of my former teachers). The tildes (not tides) are located left of the 1 on a US keyboard layout or to the right of the apostrophe or quotation on a UK keyboard layout. The US keyboard requires a shift first. x42bn6 Talk Mess 00:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The message at User talk:Leistina says: "Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~)". The tilde symbol ~ is probably on your keyboard but the position can vary. See tilde#How to type a tilde. As JetLover said, you can also make all 4 with a click on the signature button. You can also click at "Sign your username: ~~~~" below the edit box. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully Liquid Threads will make it simpler for users new to Wikipedia (and other MediaWiki wikis) to get started. Currently we have our rather novice-hostile talk pages, which are pretty good for experienced users, but they burden the novice user with the need to learn a bunch of wiki editing concepts just to be able to ask that first question. The majority of people who pose questions on the Help desk, and have few or no previous edits, do not sign their questions - this is another chunk of cognitive burden our current system imposes on the probably-already-confused newcomer. Liquid Threads takes care of signatures automatically. --Teratornis (talk) 02:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merlin's beard, real threads would be a welcome improvement! Well hopefully it will not spoil the flat code simplicity of the talk page format, but it would certainly improve the simplicity of use. • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 03:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EIW#Talk_p has a sub-entry with some links relating to Liquid Threads:

It looks like Liquid Threads provides real threading of replies, but you can still use wikitext markup. Maybe it's the Holy Grail: as easy for novices as every "normal" online discussion forum, but powerful enough to keep wiki editors happy. I don't know because I haven't played with it yet. --Teratornis (talk) 03:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

content I add to a page is constantly taken off

3 times now I have added content to the page <XL Airways> and each time it is taken off. Just a few succint lines in the History and Incidents section. The current version of the page suggests that XL Airways stopped flying deportation charter flights out of 'sympathy' for asylum seekers. There is no mention in the History section of deportation flights that were carried out under Home Office contracts, without 'sympathy', and the subsequent protests against the airline that led to them withdrawing from the deportation charter business completely. These are minor, but essential, facts to give a balanced view of the companies activities. How do I stop my additions being constantly removed? Underbelly12 (talk) 01:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You were reverted by User:SempreVolando (see [20]), with edit summary "Revert: Not an incident / accidnet [sic]." Perhaps you would do best to follow the steps at dispute resolution, of which the two I suggest you take are: Take your concerns to the talk page of the article, Talk:XL Airways or ask the user himself, at User talk:SempreVolando. x42bn6 Talk Mess 01:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or instead of getting into dispute resolution, you could try posting in the History section rather than the Accidents section. Be sure to cite your sources. If it is still removed, then WP:DR is the way to go. NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 01:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please include references to reliable sources, especially when you add quotes and controversial information. And note Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons which applies to all articles. Your edits could also easily have been reverted as unsourced. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the aviation industry, the terms "accident" and "incident" have specific technical meanings involving flight operations. Your facts may very well be relevant to the airline article, but they are not aviaton accidents (chrashes, etc.) nor aviation incidents (near-misses, loss-of engines, etc.) As is says above, put you information into the "history" section of the article, but as with any othre importatn fact, please cite your sources. -Arch dude (talk) 02:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I change the Title of my article?

How do I change the Title of my article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casanovafisher (talk • contribs) 04:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To change the title of an article, you move it to the new title. Only users with accounts over four days old can move pages, but you can also place a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 05:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, if moving to a new title could be considered in any way controversial, you should discuss any page moves on the article's relavant talk page to establish a consensus first. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia "accuses" me of spamming - NOT resolved

Dear PrimeHunter

Your reply to the query by the same subject (above) was not helpful at all - everybody is here naturally to give of their time and to contribute to this project. So please take into account that MOST people have only a superficial understanding of how some of the features work.

So if there is a link to a YouTube page that I cannot see, I am presume it is concealed, why would this be so? If if it concealed, what is the purpose, seeing that noone will see it to be able to click on it. I've looked for this link in all modes, including "View Page Source", where I see all other links, but I don't see one to a YouTube page.

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 08:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know why you can’t see them. They are in the second and third list items here. They are no more concealed than the pt.wikipedia.org is concealed behind the link “here” --teb728 t c 08:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see the youtube link as well. Maybe there is a problem with your internet browser? --Hdt83 ^Chat 08:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hindi wikipedia

59.96.101.217 (talk) 09:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)how do i get info in hindi[reply]

Here is the link to the Hindi Wikipedia: [21]. You can also look up something in English and then check the lower left language box to see if the Hindi Wikipedia has the corresponding article. --Hdt83 ^Chat 09:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi frnd any body over there help

dear sir, my orkut account always happen that it accept scrap but can't rply frm my scrap book so iwill be help ful to u i u would help me in this matter as its creacting a lot of problem —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.50.218.29 (talk) 09:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what your talking about, this area is for help with using Wikipedia, maybe the Wikipedia:Reference desk might help? VivioFateFan ^{(Talk, Sandbox)} 10:09, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just for quick reference, this user is talking about Orkut, a social networking site run by Google. GlassCobra 10:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

adding a page

how do i add a page

11:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)~

sam moss

If you want to add a page follow Help:Starting a new page however if you want to add a new article proceed to Wikipedia:Your first article for further details it'll include instructions on what to do. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 12:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confused about the replies to postings

Hi

The posts on "Wikipedia 'accuses' me of spamming refer.

The people who reply to the queries pos(t)ed here, are they some kind of uber-users with special privileges, knowledge etc, or are they NORMAL users trying to help but not always knowing what to do? If the latter, I could understand and forgive. If not, your attitude and working ethics are a great disservice to the project and I will take this up with Jimmy.

Whether I can see the links or not is immaterial,* the point is that if you are there to help, then you should be telling me how to work around the spam filter. The first person suggested that I remove the links. Someone put them there for good reason, so having to remove them to be able to edit a page is not a solution. Imagine every link having to be removed each time you have to make a small edit.

Smart-ass answers to the effect that "the links are there, I can see them" are at best puerile, at worst a great disservice and a disappointment. All that this kind of behaviour accomplishes is to annoy the contributor (unnecessarily) and make them vent out their frustration of this page for all to see - including a substantial phalange of Wikipedia detractors.

Ok, why I couldn’t see the links:

looking for text in links cannot be done on the display page, as the URL is embedded; looking for the text in edit mode with Mozilla, it does NOT search the edit template, only around it - I managed to see it them using Opera; looking for it with your eyes, I did not think of looking all the way down the page, believing that if each 'block' has an edit button, the top edit button would apply to the top block - and in the top block there aren't any links to any YouTube videos.

So, fine, I can see the links, but no-one has deigned to contribute a worthy solution.

Have a nice day

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone trying to help out here at the Help Desk is a volunteer. We have no special privileges, knowledge etc. However, perhaps we are a little more experienced with some knowledge of Wikipedia's policies. Astronaut (talk) 13:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the page history, I see the External Links to the two youtube videos were added on 31 jan 2007 by user AdriAg. Maybe the check for such external links is only done when trying to save an edit; and I don't know for sure, but is it possible that the policy to block such external links was introduced after that date? If so, it is unfortunate but removing the links is the correct solution. Astronaut (talk) 13:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned, those who reply here are just ordinary people. While they may be more knowledgeable than average, they are not mindreaders. If they ask clarifying questions or make suggestions, the correct reaction is not to assume they "do not know what to do" (though, naturally, this also happens), but rather to clarify your situation and explain why the suggestions are uneffective. Threatening to "take this up with Jimmy" is not welcome, and I'm not sure he is even aware of the existence of this desk, or cares one way or the other.

There is a limit to what people in the English help desk can do to help you. Each language of Wikipedia has its own policies and technical measures, so the problems you are describing might be unfamiliar here. They are also generally incapable of looking at the pages in question and figuring out what's wrong. You really should consider seeking a Portugese Wikipedia help desk and take the issue there.

The "edit" links for sections relate to the section below, not the section above. The same works here in the help desk - if you want to reply, do not start a new section, but rather click on the "edit" link at the top of the section and add your reply. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 13:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all who have helped or tried to. Perhaps I do/ did have the wrong idea of the people who reply here, as to the extent of their functions. I was not threatening when I said I would take this up with Jimmy, it is just that other than posting it here, and not knowing what other avenue to follow (I've seen posts about decalring disputes etc, which I feel is not necessary, nor is it the case), all I wanted was to get the feeling that someone would acknowledge that there is a problem here and resolve it, task someone with its resolution or alert the person responsible to look into it. If there is a more adequate forum to report this, then please be so kind as to enlighten me.

Also, perhaps I did not express myself clearly about the edit buttons - yes, I do know that the button refers to the section immediately below it - what I was trying to say is that I was not aware that the TOPMOST button applies to the whole page. In effect this means that unlike all other sections, the top section does not have its own dedicated edit bitton.

As for the YouTube link, I've just tested editing page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorilla_%28Cadbury%29 which contains various external links - including a link to a YouTube video - and I had no problem saving the edits. It would not have occurred to me that such a fundamental issue such as blocking possible spam would differ from language to language in terms of policy to handle it. I'll post the issue on the Portuuese Wikipedia and see if it gets resolved.

I've until now never responded below responses to my posting in the belief (obviously wrong) that only the editors use this space to answer queries.

Best regards and have a happy, fun-filled, rewarding 2008 full of personal and professonal accomplishments.

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 14:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The previous posts are at #Wikipedia "accuses" me of spamming!!! ;-) and #Wikipedia "accuses" me of spamming - NOT resolved. You described this as a technical issue with disappeared links and you were told where the links were and that your browser might be unable to search text in the edit window. Whether and how to keep the links is a content issue for the Portuguese Wikipedia and this is the help desk for the English Wikipedia. I don't know Portuguese and cannot say whether the links are worth keeping or how the Portuguese Wikipedia policies are. The link is not blocked on the English Wikipedia or meta which is why it can be saved here. It was blocked by this addition on 20 July 2007 to the local Portuguese blacklist at pt:MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist (on 4 December it was removed for 1 minute [22]). I don't know whether the Portuguese Wikipedia permits to display useful blacklisted links in an "external links" section without linking them. This could be done with <nowiki>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp2HMX2T72k</nowiki> or www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp2HMX2T72k. The Portuguese Wikipedia has a short message when a link is blacklisted. To see the longer English message, try saving a link that is blacklisted here, for example http://automotiveoilchange.net. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia project is extremely complex, with lots of detail to befuddle newcomers. Even using this Help desk is arcane and unobvious, since the Help desk doesn't work like any other (non-wiki) discussion site. Although Wikipedia poses as "the Encyclopedia that anyone can edit," in practice, not everyone looks at Wikipedia and immediately gets all the correct ideas about how to approach it. You had the disadvantage of trying to edit a page that happened to contain a fairly serious problem that a new user would be unlikely to understand. Wikipedia isn't really designed for beginners; it's designed for the kind of people who design Wikipedia. Those are generally people with thousands of edits, who communicate with each other by reading and writing hundreds of pages of complex manuals. Many of the more experienced editors have high IQs, enabling them to be comfortable with complexity. Complexity is essential to a project of Wikipedia's size and popularity. The English Wikipedia, for example, ranks somewhere in the top 10 or 20 Web sites in the world. Most of those other sites are run by large corporations who employ hundreds (or thousands) of skilled professionals to build them. Many things get more capable and thus more valuable by becoming more complex; for example, a Boeing 747 is vastly more complex than a Wright Flyer; modern medicine is vastly more complex than folk medicine; a Pentium microprocessor is more complex than an abacus; and in each of those examples, there is a large educational infrastructure for training all the people who build the complex things. All of the world's most popular Web sites are extremely complex too, but only Wikipedia invites everyone to wander in and try editing stuff. Many people who accept the invitation will have problems, and their enjoyment of Wikipedia will then depend on their ability to diagnose and solve problems. The first thing to understand is that almost everything a person could need to know about editing on Wikipedia is already written down somewhere. Learning how to search for answers is therefore essential for enjoying Wikipedia. When you can't find an answer on your own, then you need to learn how to ask questions the smart way. Wikipedia is an Open Source project, and therefore it works like other open source projects - the primary motive for people to get involved is fun. When you aren't paying money to get other people to help you, you have to make it fun for them to help you. --Teratornis (talk) 17:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are quite right - I was immediately struck by those high IQs. They knocked me completely off-balance, such was the impact like an unexpected wave when you are standing on the rocks admiring the view!. And I knew at once they could be nothing else but High IQs because I happen to have one myself! lucky for me! --Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 18:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

metric conversion

does 40 milligrams=20 milliliters? 13:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Grams is weight (or more specific:mass) and liters is volume, so they can not be compared like that in general. However, you can compare it for a specific material if you know its density. In the future, please use the WP:Reference Desk for general knowledge questions, the Help Desk is for question about using Wikipedia. Arthena^(talk) 13:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the 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, select the relevant section, 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. Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 13:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the diference between static and changing menu

i just want the diference and that is all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.210.19.83 (talk) 14:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by the "menu"? NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 14:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well... static means stationary, inactive, unchanging, and changing means..... changing, with the change presumably referring to the content (text) of the menu items. Slightly out of context sort of question, is there any more to it? • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 15:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over two million articles, and thought that we were directly affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the online free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand side of your screen. If that is not fruitful, we have a reference desk, divided into various subjects areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Fashion Designer template & photo

I have uploaded a photo of Ralph Lauren to which I own the rights to Creative Commons. I've placed that image name and caption into the template, but neither appear on saving the page. What am I doing wrong? Thanks Doc ♬ talk 15:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed it for you. =) Take at look at the edit I made. Even though it says image= in the template, you still have to use the full image syntax after it. This allows for more flexibility (e.g., customizing the image size). • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 15:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much. I had looked at other template examples and they had inserted just the image name, as in Eleanor Roosevelt so that was what I followed. I'll know next time. Doc ♬ talk 16:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opps...now how do I get the caption to show? Again, I followed the above example of Eleanor Roosevelt. Thanks again. Doc ♬ talk 16:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The templates are not always consistent in the way they work you see. If you check Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Infobox Fashion Designer you can see other uses of that exact template. However it says on the template page at Template:Infobox Fashion Designer that the caption parameter should work.... yet it doesn't seem to be actually used in the template source. Actually it's possible that other pages are using it without the caption appearing too. I think it needs someone who's good with MediaWiki template syntax figure out how to make the captions work. • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 16:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a read up on template syntax and fixed the infobox so that the caption parameter now works as it ought too. I'll check all the other pages that use the template to make sure I didn't break something, but hopefully that's it now. Phew! • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 17:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks once again, ever so much Doc ♬ talk 17:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citing a PDF document

How do i cite a PDF document? Thanks. Sunder land 06 17:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming it's a reliable source, you'd just cite it the same way you'd site any other URL. WP:CITE#Inline_citations may shed some light on this if you're unfamiliar with wikipedia's inline citation markup.--69.118.143.107 (talk) 17:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) You can use {{PDFlink}}, or just cite it like any other online source (I assume it's online). PrimeHunter (talk) 17:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle

How do i gain access to twinkle, it says my account is too new, although that's true but i'm not new to wikipedia, this account is my secondary account which i want to use for finding vandalism and then fix it. My first account which i tend to use for editing is Yun-Yuuzhan could someone please grant me access. →Yun-Shuno→

The account that you are using is less that a day old. It needs to be at least 4 days old so that it is autoconfirmed. Please wait 4 days before trying to install Twinkle. Hope this helps! Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 17:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll use this account then for the moment and wait until the secondary account is four day's old to start hunting for vandals. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 17:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interpreting the different colors associated with an authors works

What do the various colors mean when viewing the works of an author? Please see the works of James Michner as an example. 216.201.210.204 (talk) 17:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, where and what is the sandbox?

A Wikipedia search on James Michner found nothing and I don't know which page or colors you refer to. "The sandbox" refers to Wikipedia:Sandbox. The term is not made by Wikipedia as Sandbox (software development) shows. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The question probably refers to noted American author James A. Michener. --Teratornis (talk) 17:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing the "colors" are the red links for many of Michener's book titles. --Teratornis (talk) 17:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Some people amuse themselves by solving crossword puzzles; a few of us like to decode questions on the Help desk.) To the questioner: the red links on many of Michener's book titles mean that nobody has written articles about them yet. If you would like to write about one or more of Michener's books, you will need to create an account, and then read a bunch of instruction pages about how to edit on Wikipedia. You should also join Wikipedia:WikiProject Books to see how other Wikipedia users have written articles about books. --Teratornis (talk) 18:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Blue text has a link to an existing article. The blue may turn purple if you have viewed the article. Normal black text means there is no link (but in some cases there may exist an article which hasn't been linked yet). PrimeHunter (talk) 18:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing References

On "Mario Strikers Charged" page, I wanted to add a review from a gaming website. I added the review under external links. I was then going to put the link under references as well. When I went to add the reference, for some reason or another, the other references got erased. It was unintentional. Is there anyway to reboot the references that were there? And how do you add a reference without having to enter all the references that were previously there? When I clicked "edit refrences," it left me a blank page and I thought I just needed to add the reference I used and all of a sudden when I saved it, everyone elses was erased.Deasterday1 (talk) 18:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You accidentally deleted {{reflist}} in [23]. {{reflist}} tells the software where to display previously written references. See more at Wikipedia:Footnotes. Another editor has restored reflist. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make an edit to the opening sentence on a page.

This is the sentence that I want to edit: 'Kinetic art are sculptures that contains moving parts.' At this url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_art

Hitting the edit button at the bottom of the Kinetic art section where that sentence appears takes me instead to the editing page for the section on Kinetic sculpture. Usercode9623 (talk) 19:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The edit links to the right are for the following section. The lead has no edit link to the right. Click "Edit this page" at top instead. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another way to edit the lead section is to select My preferences > Gadgets > Add an [edit] link for the introduction section of a page. It is unfortunate this is not the default. --teb728 t c 21:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yet a third way (a bit esoteric) is to copy the url of one of the side edit links on a page, change the last digit to zero, i.e., "http://www....edit&section=8"--->"http://www....edit&section=0" and then go to that address.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having trouble with citing info on Bob Eubanks page.

I added some info that I thought was sorely missing from the Bob Eubanks page. It had to do with his famous antisemitic quote that he gave in the documentary Roger & Me. I cited the quote from IMDB, but it doesn't seem to list correctly in the references section. There is no hyperlink, and the page keeps telling me that the citations need work. Any solutions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.207.9 (talk) 19:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. The url needed the initial http://. If you think the article is now sufficiently sourced, you can be bold and remove the tag yourself. Algebraist 19:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template for canvass-prone xFD discussions

I though there was a template with a name like {{Notapoll}} to place atop deletion discussions prone to new and single-purpose accounts. Can't find it, and {{spa}} doesn't really explain enough. / edg ☺ ☭ 19:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you thinking of {{Not a ballot}}, perhaps? (Alternatively, {{!vote}} or {{rally}} might serve.) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moonriddengirl has hit it on the head I think with {{Not a ballot}}, because {{Not a Vote}}, which you've probably seen in the past, is a redirect to that template.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{Not a ballot}} is what I was thinking of, but {{rally}} looks useful as well. Thank you much! / edg ☺ ☭ 20:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revised Peer Review

O.K. where do I go to see currently on-going peer reviews. WP:PR seems to bbe revamped and I am at a loss.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A list is present at User:VeblenBot/C/Requests for peer review. Where are the discussions are transcluded is beyond me. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 20:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Username Usurpation question

The first instruction for the Username usurpation is: "Be sure the account you wish to usurp has no edits or log entries (except in the account creation log)." I wish to Usurp User:Spencer, who has only made one edit, to his userpage. That was ~5 years ago, and has not made an edit since. Before I waste my time trying to change my username, I was wondering if it would work, based on that one critea. S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 21:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming you mean changing usernames by username usurpation? If your proposed new username has been previously created I don't beleive that you can change your username to it, regardless of whether edits have been made or not by that account. If you want to change your username, find a name that isn't in use and do not create it yourself, request the change and a beauracrat will create it for you. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could also ask a developer, though I'm not sure they would do it, even if the only edit made by User:Spencer was five years ago. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can usurp usernames. See Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 21:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I didn't realize that adopting a dormant username was even possible! (I'm fairly new!) It says users with GFDL contributions can not be usurped, userpage contributions I don't believe are considered GFDL unless specifically said so. You could give it a try, it may be possible, make it clear that the only edit by your proposed account was a userpage edit. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks dude! S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 21:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a limit to the number of ((citation )) entries per page?

Hi, and Happy New Year,

My "thing" with Wikipedia is appending lists of source materials to articles on New Zealand place names.

Yesterday I created a fairly large list for the article "Hawera": more than 100 entries. The last section of the bibliography is headed "schools" and has from a dozen to twenty entries in it. However, instead of displaying these citations, it gives "Template:Citation" in place of each entry.

Given that these citations are formatted in the same way throughout the list - I'm stumped as to why this is happening. Is there perhaps a limit to the number of (( citation ...)) permitted per page??

TIA,

Boethius65 (talk) 21:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is limit problem with many {{Citation}}. See Template talk:Citation#COinS. Hawera#Further reading also seems far too long for a Wikipedia article. I suggest to shorten it a lot (not just enough to get below the template limit). PrimeHunter (talk) 22:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody good with tables help me?

Tables and divs are very difficult to use. I have a simple task I'm trying to do. If someone could help me, I'd appreciate it.

On my talk page, someone please make it so that my table of "guidelines" is on the top right, while the table of contents is on the top left. If you don't want to do it, please refer to me to someone who can. Zenwhat (talk) 22:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Tables has tons of information and tutorials on table syntax. That might have the information you need. Mr Senseless (talk) 22:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia: External Links in need of policy revisement?

Recently, there were varying opinions on whether Opeth should get links to both their MySpace and Facebook pages. I realized that number 11 of Links normally to be avoided at WP:EL states that MySpace pages should be avoided, yet several bands with featured articles (such as Slayer, Godsmack and Megadeth) all have Myspace links in their EL sections. I was just wondering what to do in this scenario; the Facebook page for Opeth is linked to on their official site, so authenticity isn't an issue. Any help would be appreciated. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 23:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1,495: / Line 1,495: @@
 :[[Help:Tables]] has tons of information and tutorials on table syntax. That might have the information you need. [[User:Mr Senseless|Mr Senseless]] ([[User talk:Mr Senseless|talk]]) 22:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
+== Wikipedia: External Links in need of policy revisement? ==
+Recently, there were varying opinions on whether [[Opeth]] should get links to both their MySpace and Facebook pages. I realized that [[Wikipedia:External links#Links normally to be avoided|number 11 of Links normally to be avoided]] at [[WP:EL]] states that MySpace pages should be avoided, yet several bands with featured articles (such as [[Slayer]], [[Godsmack]] and [[Megadeth]]) all have Myspace links in their EL sections. I was just wondering what to do in this scenario; the Facebook page for Opeth is linked to on their official site, so authenticity isn't an issue. Any help would be appreciated. [[User:Master of Puppets|Master of Puppets]] [[User talk:Master of Puppets|<span style="font-variant:Small-caps;color:;"><sup>Care to share?</sup></span>]] 23:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

v t e Wikipedia help pages
*Visit the Teahouse* or the Help desk for an interactive Q & A forum. FAQs (?) Reference desks (?) Noticeboards (?) Cheatsheet (?) Directories (?)**
About Wikipedia (?)	Administration Purpose Principles Policies and guidelines What Wikipedia is not Disclaimer (parental advice) Making requests Who writes Wikipedia?
Help for readers (?)	FAQ Books Copyright Glossary Mobile access Navigation Other languages Searching Students Viewing media
Contributing to Wikipedia (?)	Advice for young editors Avoiding common mistakes Etiquette Simplified Manual of Style Simplified rule-set "Ignore all rules" "The rules are principles" Style-tips Tip of the day Your first article (article wizard)
Getting started (?)	Why create an account? Introductions by topic Graphics tutorials Picture tutorial IRC (live chat) tutorial VisualEditor user guide
Dos and don'ts (?)	Accessibility Biographies Biographies (living) Categorization Consensus Discussions Disambiguation Images Leads Links Lists References Tables Titles (of articles)
How-to pages and information pages (?)	Appealing blocks Article deletion Categories Citations/references Referencing for beginners Citation Style 1 Cite errors References and page numbers Convert Diff Editing Minor edit toolbar edit conflict Find sources Files Footnotes Image deletion Infoboxes Linking (link color) Logging in Merging Page name Renaming pages Redirect Passwords Email confirmation Reverting Simple vandalism cleanup Talk pages (archiving simple archiving) User contributions WP search protocol
Coding (?)	Wiki markup Barcharts Calculations Characters Columns Elevation Hidden text HTML Lists Magic words Music symbols Sections Sounds Tables Templates Transclusion URL Visual files
Directories (?)	Abbreviations Contents (Encyclopedia proper) Departments Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Guidelines Manual of Style Policies Tasks Tips Tools
Missing Manual Ask for help on your talk page (?)