Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fuhghettaboutit (talk | contribs) at 01:39, 13 April 2007 (→‎how can i find the author's name and the date of publication: Formatting). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    ↑ To top of page
    Shortcuts
    Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)
    Ask a question


    April 10

    Commercial Non English references

    I have a question. Can a non english site be used as a reference on a english wikipedia article? Also can the reference be to a commercial offer to sell you the information but not actually give you the information that would back up the wikipedia statement? If not what rule would that fall under? Kilz 01:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    For the first question, see: WP:SOURCE#Language. I did not find an answer for the second question, but I did not search extensively. If no one else has an answer, you could try reading the various links under: User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia#Sou. Good luck. --Teratornis 01:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    We could also try applying common sense: information being for sale doesn't prevent it from being a reference, because we are allowed to cite books, and book publishers usually charge money. (Often a book is also available for free loan from a library. But not everyone has access to a library copy of a given book, and going to the library may also represent a cost in time and travel.) I would imagine that even if a book was out of print and rare, as long as a citation of it was verifiable (even if verification would be inconvenient for some or most readers), it would be OK as a reference. Also consider the extraordinariness of your claim, i.e. the probability that a reader would need to check it. If your reference claims the flat earth idea is wrong, few people would need to check that. If the reference claims to have a practical cold-fusion power source, lots of people would want to check that. --Teratornis 02:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    The reference was to Pass Consulting Who in german offer to sell you for 490euro the results of a browser study. But the site gives no information to prove anything.Kilz 02:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    That sounds more like clever spam than any kind of reference link. I would disallow it. — coelacan — 07:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    The ref is only used to give an example of a benchmark, nothing more (Swiftfox). The claim is very weak - in fact only "that there are webbrowser benchhmarks". A non-commercial ref [1] was not allowed by Kilz, forcing a commercial ref. The identical claim is made on (star rated) Firefox goes without challenge. Widefox 11:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    The noncomercial reference is to a private site with no editorial review(but at least we can see what it says so I an other editors suggest getting updated information). The remaining references are to old past versions that are 2 years old and used to prove points on the correct new version. Since we have no idea what is in the Pass benchmarks since the site gives no facts we cant say what they are. They simply cant be verified Kilz 11:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Add to this the fact that there are no other sites that give us a glimpse of what the Pass benchmarks are, that the only thing that we can see from the site is a mention of the acid test (correct rendering). Using this reference to backup speed of browser claims is ify at best. That By Widefox's own words (line 45) it doesnt include Swiftfox data, on a Swiftfox article makes it completely useless.Kilz 12:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Tables

    The editing tutorial offers very little in general. Specifically, it gives no clue as to where I should find how to format tables. I wish to edit an existing table. The table *vertically* follows an image. I wish to reposition them side by side. I can get the image to align left and the table to align right. The problem is that the table *overlies* the article content which is supposed to *follow* it. Hurmata 01:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    It might be useful if we knew which article you were talking about. In the meantime, taking a look at Help:Table can't hurt. --YbborTalkSurvey! 01:52, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. This made for partial progress. By deleting <margin: 0 0 0 1em;>, I have gotten the following text to wrap around the table instead of underlie the table. But what I want is to have the text (in this case, "External links") *begin after* the table, not *wrap around* it. The article is Governorates_of_Egypt. Hurmata 04:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure if I could explain why, but if you remove the "align=right" from the beginning of the table, you'll get the effect you're talking about. — coelacan — 07:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    You can also use the HTML code <br clear="both"/> to insert a break after the images (or tables) on both the left and right sides. It looks like someone already fixed the Governorates of Egypt article for you, but you can always use the sandbox for editing experiments to get the hang of things. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 16:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    discipline of B.Tech engineering in India

    i want to know, which is the discipline in engineering for the cuurent time, having good future for next 10 to 20 years.

    Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions, and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that's what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. — coelacan — 07:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    random article home page

    i heard that you could set wikipedia up to randomly open an article as your home page, so does anyone know how to set that up?

    Point your browser to open http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random as its home page. Sancho 03:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Save search results on articles

    Shall i save search results of articles for future reference in wikipedia?

    Exactly why would you do that?--$UIT 05:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Spreadsheet to wikitable

    Where do I find the tool to convert a spreadsheet (i.e. .xls) into a wikitable? --ChaChaFut 05:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Try Help:Tables#External links. It looks like there's at least one tool there that does direct spreadsheet-to-wikitable conversion, and others that do html-to-wikitable conversion (those could be part of a two step procedure if you convert the spreadsheet to html first). — coelacan — 07:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Chain lashing on board ships

    How do you lash project cargo on ships by means of chains ?

    Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions, and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that's what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. — coelacan — 07:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    How to fix this infobox?

    The infobox at the beginning of Ulysses S. Grant isn't working. That's to say the source is appearing rather than the box. What's wrong with it? I tried comparing with the source of other US Presidents but still can't figure it out. What's wrong? Stroika 06:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    This edit is the one that broke it. Someone removed a square bracket, which set the whole infobox out of whack. Often, to fix this sort of thing, rather than tinkering you just have to sift through the page history and then revert. — coelacan — 07:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah-ha. Thank you. One missing bracket removed by a one edit anonymous user. Now I remember why I stopped editing wikipedia. Stroika 08:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    covansys Chairman

    current chairmain is Raj Vattikutti

    • You probably need to read the instructions at the top of this page. This is not a question about Wikipedia. - Mgm|(talk) 08:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Editing the introduction of an article

    To edit a single section of an article you just click on the edit link (button, whatever) that appears to the right of the section title. Where is that link for the introduction? I have always clicked on the "edit this page" tab which can be cumbersome if the article is long. You have to scroll through reams of text to get to the edit box. Have I been missing something obvious all this time? Stroika 09:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • You can click another section and change the section number that appears in the URL, but most people use a user script to make either a tab or a edit link appear for the lead section. - Mgm|(talk) 11:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Mgm. That's been bothering me for ages. Stroika 12:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    "Reems of text before the edit box" can't be right, surely? It appears at the top of the viewport. Unless you are referring to the preview, in which case you must have chosen to display the edit box after the content in your prefs; you should not have to scroll anywhere to see the edit box. Adrian M. H. 13:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    evs

    what are domestic animals? give examples.

    This is for Wikipedia related problems, you are free to search via Wikipeia and the internet but please only use the Help desk for Wikipedia related probs. Cheers - Tellyaddict 13:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I sense a homework question.... Adrian M. H. 13:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    What are schools teaching these days, if students don't know how to search for Domestic animal on Wikipedia? (Arguably, not knowing how to search on Wikipedia renders a person increasingly irrelevant.) That article lists several dozen domestic animals. --Teratornis 21:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Category

    I have come across this fictional cateogory: Category:United Nations Space Command - it seems to me that it needs to be changed as it is not clear from the name that it is a fictional organisation. What should I do? is there something similar to AFD for cats? --Fredrick day 12:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Take it to WP:CFD, they regulars their will help you. Cheers - Tellyaddict 13:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Why not just edit the category page so it explains what the category is about? For example, there seems to a definitive article with the same name (United Nations Space Command), so the category page could use the {{catmore}} template. (I'm adding it now.) If the real United Nations starts its own Space Command someday, the category can be split into real and fictional subcategories. --Teratornis 17:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I copied the first paragraph from the lead section of United Nations Space Command to Category:United Nations Space Command, and I put a {{catmore}} template below that. Now I think the category page explains itself clearly. The category itself might still be confusing to an editor who does not read the category page itself, but I'd like to think most reasonably skilled editors would look to the category page if they had a question about it. I also put a {{talkheader}} template on the category's talk page because it contained one entry from someone who seems unfamiliar with the recommended style for talk page entries. --Teratornis 17:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    writing

    Should a person use wasn't, didn't, couldn't and so on when writing a novel?209.247.5.85 15:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    This is a question for the Reference Desk, but I don't see why not - a negative isn't problematic, although negative phrasings should probably be avoided when it is easy to change the sentence to a positive phrasing. Nihiltres 15:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I thought that the questioner was referring to the use of contractions (rather than negatives), which I would not use in any formal writing except in speech and quotes. Adrian M. H. 16:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    A novel is a work of fiction, so the author can use any style or styles he or she wants. Mark Twain sometimes wrote in the vernacular of his characters, for example in Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. --Teratornis 17:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Pick up a James Ellroy novel to see an unusual writing style at work. Adrian M. H. 17:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    My signature

    I want a new signature, my old one used to be confusing and I want a new one. This is the code I used: [[User:Pie Man 360|<span style="color:red;">Pie Man 360</span>]] <sub>[[User talk:Pie Man 360|Talk page]]</sub>[[Special:Contributions/Pie_Man_360|<sup style="color:green;">contribs</sup>]] which turns out Pie Man 360 Talk pagecontribs but when I set it to that in my preferences, it says "invalid raw signature", and all the <s and >s are replaced by their html character equivalents. What do I do? --Pie Man 360 15:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Try changing things like 
    [[Special:Contributions/Pie_Man_360|<sup style="color:green;">contribs</sup>]]
    to things like 
    [[Special:Contributions/Pie_Man_360|<font color=green><sup>contribs</sup></font>]]
    I believe that that makes the difference. Nihiltres 15:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    It's still saying "invalid raw signature, check HTML tags", what should I do? --Pie Man 360 15:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    You won't get far with that colour change unless you place the font tags within the wikilink:
    Old: contribs
    New: contribs
    Adrian M. H. 16:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Scott Baio

    On the Scott Baio article, there is a section that describes his career in detail, then a section that lists his selected filmography. His "Early Career" section is hard to read and very confusing--much clean-up is needed. So, my question is, is the first section needed, if the list of filmography is kept? ~Gatorgirl623~ 16:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    The list of works is useful, I think. It provides a neat précis. The "Career" section certainly needs a cleanup and re-write. I would also suggest reducing the number of film titles in that body of text if possible. You could tag it for these issues, but it may not get sorted for a long time, since the relevant departments and projects have a permanent backlog. Better to sort it yourself if you can. Adrian M. H. 16:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    All righty. So clean it up, but don't delete it. Right? ~Gatorgirl623~ 01:08, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Removal of 3D Architectural Solutions (3DAS) - includes "notability"

    Hello Wiki Editors,

    Please take a look at 3D Architectural Solutions (3DAS). There is a concern on this page that I would like to work with you on: "An editor has expressed a concern that the subject of the article does not satisfy the notability guideline for Companies." We've removed all links to our own websites & linked only to websites that showcase our credibility (and hopefully our 'notability'). We've also added testimonials to also show credibility & 'notability'. What else can we do to keep this article on Wikipedia?

    Thank you, Brian - 3DAS

    16:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

    It doesn't look like you've actually made any claims of notability, and a quick search for "3D Architectural Solutions" doesn't show up much. The 'testimonials' section also read like an advertisement (where else do you really find them?) so I deleted it. I'm borderline going to speedy delete it myself, but I think I'll take this one to Articles for Deletion instead. Veinor (talk to me) 16:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    (E.C.)Please see WP:COI before deciding whether you are best placed to work on the article. Also of some relevance are WP:ATT and WP:V. Adrian M. H. 16:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Addendum: I have to agree with the AfD nom. Adrian M. H. 16:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Update 4/10/07: I do see your points about advertising, but this is definitely not what we want to portray. In fact, after a quick search, I wanted to emulate a page like this: [2]. Besides offering free tutorials, books on 3ds Max, teaching classes, and client lists (for credibility), what else would you suggest I add? Thank you.Brianzajac 20:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    (the above and my reply copied from Talk:3D Architectural Solutions (3DAS)) I'd suggest getting some proof of notability; that's the reason I nominated this page for deletion. Without proof of notability, the article will be deleted in about five days. Good examples of notability would include coverage in CNN, MSNBC, the BBC, New York Times, etc. Basically, things that are considered reliable sources. Veinor (talk to me) 20:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Update 4/10/07 - b: Ok, thanks for the information. However, we have many sources that we believe are credible: CG Architect [3] is one of the largest CG Community portal sites there is (Current stats: Threads: 22,224, Posts: 155,240, Members: 22,435, Active Members: 2,376). We also have published books at companies like Barnes & Noble [4] (& Wiki at [5] ). And the VRay training [6] (& Wiki article [7] ) is a unique & very popular service for people who use 3ds Max for arch. visualization. So, with this information, how should I increase notability? Should I add info into their respective Wiki article? Or are these references from actual sites good enough to do? Thank you again. I really want to get this right. Brianzajac 21:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Try to familiarise yourself with the policies and guidelines to which I linked on the talk page. They will help to guide you. Adrian M. H. 21:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Idioms in Wikipedia

    What is Wikipedia's policy on the use of idioms or figures of speech in articles? I cannot seen to come across it in a help page, although I surmise that there must be something concerning this. Thanks in advance, Chris Buttigieg 17:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Is there nothing in the Manual of Style? If in doubt, I would leave it out, unless it is specifically pertinent to the subject at hand; I like to keep my article contributions as formal as possible within reason. Adrian M. H. 17:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    The closest I see are the links under User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia#Wor. For example: Wikipedia:Explain jargon and Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms. If a figure of speech is not understandable to all English speakers around the world, the article should explain it. Some figures of speech might be peculiar to English speakers from particular countries or regions, in which case Wikipedia:Manual of Style (national varieties of English) might apply. You could look up the figure of speech in question and see if a Wikipedia article explains it, or describes who popularized it, and then link the figure of speech to the article that tells more about it (see for example Snoop Dogg and -izzle). --Teratornis 17:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    -izzle, indeed? Well, you learn a new thing every day! Adrian M. H. 17:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    There is a particular idiomatic sentence in the Yoigo article which I think I should change to a more standard parlance. I was just wondering whether Wikipedia had any such rules or guidelines pertaining to expressions etc. The sentence in question is 'the company was kept in the freezer for several years' which is without doubt somewhat informal. Nonetheless, many thanks for your time, Chris Buttigieg 17:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC) Or perhaps I should have said, many thanks for your tizzle! Chris Buttigieg 17:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I would go ahead and change that. It is not very encyclopædic in tone. Adrian M. H. 17:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    On Wikipedia, I learn a new thing every day, but it's not every day I get thizzled for my tizzle. --Teratornis 20:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Template to notify users that they have been reported

    Hi, I created a template to notify people that they had been reported to admin after vandalism. It isn't a simple code, it is {{Subst:User:Asics/Reported|sig=~~~~}}. I believe it is very useful, as sometimes there is a backlog on WP:AIV and can take a considerable amount of time to process the block request, and I am wanting to submit it to see if it passes as an official User Warning. So, I have a few questions:
    1. It needs to be made more simple, obviously I can move it to mainspace, so should I do this?
    2. But how do I get it, so it is just {{Subst:templatelocation|~~~~}}?
    3. After this is done, I would like to submit it to a place where it could be accepted as an official warning. Is there such a place?
    4. And finally, I do not believe there is a similar warning (non-official anyway), but is there in your view a need for such a warning?
    I look forward to hearing the answers and views! Thanks, Asics talk Editor review! 18:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Question 2 has been answered by Mr.Z-man on my talk page. It now works as {{Subst:User:Asics/Reported}}. Asics talk Editor review! 19:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    To try to answer question 4, let's run with the idea. What would you hope the result would be of using this template, after adding to WP:AIV? Notinasnaid 19:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    If it is intended to function as a "justice will be handed down to you shortly" kind of message, I don't suppose that would worry your average vandal. And it may actually be better not to warn them; after the usual escalated warnings, they will know that a block is on the cards anyway, and this might just serve to encourage them to take avoiding action (such as a sockpuppet account or public IP). Your intentions are obviously good, though, so kudos for that. Adrian M. H. 20:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand both of your views. I do now see the view that it probably wouldn't do any good, as they won't change as they have already been reported. Saying that, it may get them to realise, ones with a conscience anyway, that what they have done is bad. But as you said, it could prompt them to create an account. Would you suggest deleting it? As after hearing your views it seems that would be the best idea. Thanks, Asics talk Editor review! 20:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    On the other hand, if the administrator for some reason, decides not to block them, then it would show to other users that they had been reported before, as no warning would be present if the admin just decided they shouldn't be blocked. Asics talk Editor review! 20:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, there should still be the previous warnings on their talk page (even if they remove them, they're in the history, which is why an accurate edit summary is essential when leaving warning templates). Vandals don't have a conscience, unfortunately. Adrian M. H. 20:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, I see you point, I am going to delete the template and then request the page be deleted (speedy deletion). Thanks for your help and advice, I now see that the template may only cause more problems! Asics talk Editor review! 21:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Wildvine

    Yes listen I know this is how you ask about Wikipedia but I have to tell you that on the 'Omnitrix' section of your website someone has deleted the 'Wildvine' section. I was wondering if you would be willing to put it back up for other fans as well as myself. I would really appreciate this. Thanks for your time.

    I dug around the archives and brought back the Wildvine section. The only problem is that I'm not experienced in table coding and now it is at the bottom of the page. It looked good when I previewed the section before saving. Can anyone more experienced than I am fix my attempt at restoring the section? --LuigiManiac 19:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have just had a quick look at it (it's at Omnitrix), but I can't see a problem with that section being last in the hierarchy. I'm no expert on that subject, though. Adrian M. H. 20:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    That's strange, when I went back after you replied, it was right where it should have been at the bottom of the section (before it was at the bottom of the page, right above the Ben 10 template). I couldn't see who fixed it. I'm not really an expert on Ben 10, either, I've never watched it. --LuigiManiac 20:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    templates and category

    I'd like to use a template in a category description. The problem is that the template adds pages that it's in to that category, and I don't want the category to be added to itself. It's hard to describe, but you can see it here: Category:Dinar. It's not terribly important, but I wonder if there's any way to remove a page from a category that it's put in automatically. Thanks. Ingrid 18:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    It should be fixed now. I edited the template to only put article pages in the category. If this is a problem for some reason or something doesn't work right now, leave me a message on my talk page. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 19:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. I don't understand how it works exactly, but it seems to do what I was looking for, which is good enough for me. Ingrid 23:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Numbered Lists

    I know that if I want to create a numbered list I just use a bunch of #'s

    1. Item #1
    2. Item #2
    3. Item #3
    4. Item #4

    But say, two of the items are tied in rank and instead I want them to both have the same number (or have it go 1, 2, <blank>, 4, how would I do that? Zomic_13 20:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    For more control over list item numbering, see Help:HTML in wikitext. You could use an <ol> tag, or maybe two of them, and use the start parameter to play with the item numbering. --Teratornis 20:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    New message sign

    i've never edited wiki and it says that i have. how do i get rid of the new message sign appearing on all the pages i look at. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.106.140.254 (talk • contribs)

    That refers to "your" user talk page: User talk:24.106.140.254. If you never used Wikipedia before, others probably have edited Wikipedia from the same IP address you are using. To make the new messages box go away for now, browse to User talk:24.106.140.254. A better method is to create your own account so you aren't sharing that IP address with other users. --Teratornis 20:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    That comes with the territory for users of dynamic IPs. If you activate an account but fail to login, I think you will still see any messages that were aimed at other recipients of whatever IP you happen to have at the time. Best to make an account and take the option to stay logged in. Adrian M. H. 20:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Many times the "new messages" bar is stuck up there even if you read the talk page. This problem still hasn't been fixed. [8] -- Hdt83 Chat 23:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Is it WP policy to remove the names of dead victims of IRA killings from WP articles?

    The reason I ask is because of this edit:-

    http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=La_Mon_restaurant_bombing&diff=prev&oldid=121705050

    and the edit summary of "(→The Dead - remove list of dead as per wiki policy)":

    W. Frank 21:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    No. Feel free to revert the edit. In your edit summary, you might ask that any such "policy" be specifically cited on the article talk page, so others can review its relevance. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Please excuse my presumption for asking this question (I don't wish to be the offender in an edit war) but do you think your answer is authoritative? Are you an admin or whatever the appropriate word is?
    If you are correct, it really is astounding that this character can go around deleting whole chunks of an article because people assume good faith when he simply states in each edit summary "remove list of dead as per wiki policy"
    I've asked him on his user talk page User_talk:Vintagekits#Northern_Ireland to point me towards an authoritative source for such a POV but he hasn't done so.W. Frank 21:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    You might find John Broughton's Index useful for future reference; it links to almost every bit of important/useful content. Adrian M. H. 21:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Some comments:
    • To see a user's administrative rank, go to Special pages | Users. Select: Group: (all); Group users starting at: John Broughton, to see John's entry. Any extra rankings beyond an ordinary user would appear in parentheses to the right of his name. None do, so evidently John holds no special rank here. However, John did edit an impressive editor's index, so I would imagine he knows quite a bit about Wikipedia policy (although that says nothing about the authoritativeness of any particular statement he might make). On Wikipedia, we don't judge policy statements by personal credentials so much as we judge them by looking up what the policy documents say.
    • Yes, it really is astounding that almost anyone can edit almost anything on Wikipedia. I'm as surprised as you are that Wikipedia works at all. Just about every time I describe Wikipedia to someone who isn't already familiar with how it works, they react with astonishment: "Anybody can edit almost anything? Then why doesn't it quickly turn into garbage?" Why Wikipedia works at all is complicated; two important factors include the built-in revision control system, and the vigilance of the user community (thousands of users tirelessly revert vandalism and try to improve articles).
    • Some topics are especially divisive, and pose a particular challenge for Wikipedia. In the real world, when a topic is highly controversial, that usually means:
      • The topic has substantial, and different, impacts on different groups of people.
      • The facts of the matter are inconclusive, but different groups of people have leapt to conclusions anyway, and hardened their positions by selectively ignoring bits of contradictory evidence. (The neutral point of view when the facts of a matter are inconclusive, is to admit that one does not know which of the plausible conclusions may eventually turn out to be correct, and not all of the plausible conclusions may necessarily have been thought of yet. If everybody actually thought that way, the entire history of warfare, politics, religion, and commerce would be completely different.)
    • It is perfectly reasonable for you to request a meaningful policy citation from another editor who claims to be following policy but does not cite any particular policy. "Per wiki policy" looks to me like an instance of weasel words. It isn't even a technically correct statement, because there is no "wiki policy." Every wiki has its own policies. The policy that matters here is Wikipedia policy. When someone can't write weasel words correctly, we definitely want to check the sources.
    I'm not an administrator either, so don't take my word for anything. Read the policy documents instead. --Teratornis 22:27, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    What about WikiProjects, or the neologisms 'crosswiki' (en.wikipedia.org to es.wikipedia.org, say), 'wikilawyer', etc.? I see those in common usage, and they certainly don't span multiple wikis. While I do agree that a more specific citation would've been better, WP:NOT is actually official policy; but even if it were a guideline, I'd still agree. I remove things 'per WP:EL' or 'per WP:SPAM' all the time, and the former is 'only' part of the MoS! Veinor (talk to me) 23:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I would imagine that Vintagekits was using WP:NOT#MEMORIAL, which I think can be appropriately applied to the simple list of names, and the sentences "Twelve people were killed in the explosion. The dead included three married couples" were redundant to other article text. — Scientizzle 22:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • Agreed - the page already lists the number of dead - I'm not sure the rest is particularly called for. WilyD 22:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Forgive my query, but it is the bombing that is notable because of the number and deaths of the victims. The article does not memorialise people but it is surely a bowdlerisation not to enumerate the ages, origins and genders at least of the victims since it is the sheer horror of this incident that caused many consequences.

    Forgive my indelicacy, but to censor the list of victims of a bombing is a bit like removing the 2-1 score of a soccer match on the grounds that such a score occurs all the time and is non-notable, is it not?

    No. It is not. I think that Wikipedia not being a memorial (which, by the way, covers this perfectly. And I honestly can't believe you compared the list of people who died in a terrorist attack to a soccer score. The score is a lot more relevant that the list of dead; that's useless information unless you know who they are. On the other hand, a score is useful: a 2-1 score indicates, for example, that team X and team Y both played pretty good games, whereas if it was 10-0, then team Y was horrible (or team X was really good). On the other hand, not to be heartless, but whether it was John Doe or Jane Roe who died doesn't make a difference to me; I don't know either of these people. The horror of the incident has nothing to do with the people that were killed, in my opinion. Veinor (talk to me) 23:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not really. The article on Toronto doesn't list the 2.5 million inhabitants of the city proper. This is just distilling "infinite information" to "encyclopaedic information". WilyD 23:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I think we need to put the article in context:

    It begins by stating:"Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" and goes on to say (at Shortcut:WP:NOT#MEMORIAL) that " 3. Memorials. Wikipedia is not the place to honor departed friends and relatives. Subjects of encyclopedia articles must be notable besides being fondly remembered."

    Now in this proximate case, is it not the Bombing that is the subject of the article?

    Nobody has yet disputed that the Bombing itself is either non-notable or a "memorial article".

    It then follows what referenced facts should be included and it is here that I fail to see that the number, ages, genders of the victims are not pertinent to the article.

    It would be a bit like an article on the grassy knoll failing to mention the name of the president who was assassinated.

    I can't quite see your analogy with Toronto inhabitants; the present case is a bit like stating that to mention the demographics of the inhabitants of the City is irrelevant to the article.W. Frank 23:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • The article (quite rightly) notes the number of dead. Same as Toronto notes the number of inhabitants. Neither notes who they are. This isn't like the Kennedy assassination not noting who was killed (that's the whole point - if Johnny Nobody was shot and killed across town that day, there'd be no article) - it's like the Kennedy Assassination page not noting everyone who was watching the President drive by, or the name of Kennedy's driver. In this case, replace those twelve dead with twelve random guys, and the event's importance doesn't change. WilyD 00:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • There's no way that WP:NOT#MEMORIAL applies to newsworthy events like these. I imagine that MEMORIAL was intended to disallow the cyber equivalent of "roadside shrines" on Wikipedia. Squidfryerchef 23:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • The prevention of the "cyber-equivalent of 'roadside shrines'" is certainly an important intent of WP:NOT#MEMORIAL, but I believe this list of the victims can be reasonably argued to be an "indiscriminate collection of information". None of the victims was individually notable, so adding the names to the article adds little that a good source link could not provide. Is it a big deal to have a list of 12 names? Not really, but only 'cause its a rather small number. It would be, however, a problem to list all 102 fatalities from Adam Air Flight 574 or 1198 names in RMS Lusitania or even every car bombing victim. It's easier (and better, IMO) to draw the line at no unnecessary lists of otherwise-non-notable-victims, no matter the size of the tragedy. (Likewise, it's better to not list every lucky person that received a free car from Oprah Winfrey. Such would also be indiscriminate.) — Scientizzle 01:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • I couldn't agree more. Lines must be drawn somewhere and discouraging any lists of non-notable victims is the sensible solution. Adrian M. H. 15:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Numerous one edit editors making the same edits

    Is there anything that can be done about the numerous editors to the Vikki Blows article? They all add back in the same image which can't be used under WP:FU. I've tagged the image as an orphan so that one day soon it can be deleted but I tire of going back to the image and the article on a daily basis to put the tag back and take the image out. Here's a link to the page history. Input, ideas, etc? Dismas|(talk) 21:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Translation

    How does one go about becoming a translator for Wikipedia? Ciaran12 22:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    You can translate pages from a wikipedia in one language to another at your leisure. Simply find an article that interests you on one wikipedia that does not exist on another wikipedia (or would be improved by some of the other wikipedia's content), and add the information by clicking "edit this page" on the target page. johnpseudo 22:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    See Wikipedia:Translation. Adrian M. H. 22:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I used to do a lot of this and a great way to find good translation candidates is to do a search for article talk pages tagged with Template:FAOL for a particular language, which identifies that the foreign language article is a featured article. For example, see this search for articles tagged as featured in the French Wikipedia. Of course, this only finds articles already in existence here. Another method is to go to Wikipedia:Featured Articles, then click on the language you wish to translate from the interlanguage links on the left hand side of the screen. There may be articles there which have no equivalent here. Finally, you might want to check out WikiProject Echo.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    HELP!!! Emergency!! Popups stopped working!

    Hi. All of a sudden, my popups just stopped working. I didn't edit it when it started failing. I don't know if it's my computer or the page itself, but when I logon, there is an error in the page. The popups no longer work. I tried deleting some of the text in my monobook, but it made almost no difference. Could someone help? Thanks! – AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)(+sign here+How's my editing?) 22:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    April 11

    Severance package, union dues

    our company is giving us a severance package,now what I would like to know can our union take out union dues out of this severance money. were losing our jobs so why should they be aloud to take out these dues. For me this would be about 150 dollars. I would appreciate your responce. Thanks4.238.249.1 23:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Even if I were qualified in Labour law to answer your question, and I most certainly am not, I would need to know a bit more about your situation, such as which country you work in, as the laws vary (you did mention dollars, so that limits the possibilities, but not to just one country). Your best bet would probably be to ask on the Reference desk, hopefully providing enough information on the second go to enable someone to answer the question. The "best" advice would be to consult an attorney, but the attorney's fee would probably be similar to what the union wants to take, so even if an attorney could get you out of paying that last dues, you would be unlikely to profit. I imagine the union probably justifies hitting you one last time by taking credit for the fact that you get a severance package at all, or one so generous as you do receive; is your severance package part of your collective bargaining agreement? --Teratornis 02:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Image problem

    I uploaded Image:Stanny.svg, but it didn't turn out right. Any ideas what happened? FictionH 00:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm just guessing here, but when I view the SVG source for your image (which I can see in my browser when I view the page source of the otherwise blank (in my browser) image page), I see this questionable code:
    <image
     xlink:href="Stanny.PNG"
     sodipodi:absref="C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\My Pictures\Stanny.PNG"
     width="215"
     height="305"
     id="image3463"
     x="0"
     y="0" />
    Immediately I would suspect the reference to the Stanny.PNG file path which evidently refers to a file on your computer. However, I have not looked at the SVG specification enough to know whether what looks like a problem there really is a problem. You might examine the SVG code of some other images that appear correctly and are similar to what you want yours to look like. --Teratornis 02:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    It is referencing a PNG file on your "My Pictures" folder, which is non-existent on any other people's computer or the Wikipedia's server. You should not upload raster files encapsulated in SVG and instead should either upload the raster file (PNG, JPG etc.) directly, or trace it and upload the SVG. --antilivedT | C | G 11:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • But after making the PNG, I resaved is as a SVG with Inkscape. FictionH 21:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Another image problem

    Okay, I feel like an incredibly daft newbie. How can I get a photo Image:KPGA.jpg removed and added to the article I meant for it to go to? XGowronx 00:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    The image, Image:KPGA.jpg, should not be added to any article until the copyright and source issues are sorted out. Dismas|(talk) 02:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    It's hard to understand your question without knowing the articles you refer to. Currently, the image is here: Image:KPGA.jpg, and clicking toolbox | What links here shows a (non-displaying) link to it on your user talk page (Special:Whatlinkshere/Image:KPGA.jpg shows User talk:XGowronx). That link, however, is a copyright notice that you should read carefully. Where does the image appear now that you don't want it to appear, and what article do you want to add it to? See Help:Image for instructions on how to link to images. Guessing wildly here from the actor's name in the descriptive text of the image, I'd guess you want to put the image in the Keith Allen article. You can see how to do that by looking at other actors' articles that do have images (often within an {{Infobox actor}} or {{Infobox Biography}} or something similar). For example, view the source of James Woods. --Teratornis 02:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Vandal problem

    Hello a user on 68.145.239.157 is vandalizing random pages. I know this fellow in real life, but I do not know which steps to take to get him to stop. I'll be removing his edits until something more permanent can be done. Lonesoldier 01:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

    I've responded on your talk page. Check out WP:VANDAL for more information on fighting vandalism. — Scientizzle 01:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Doris Day

    Can you make sure that the article on doris day stays fixed and either lock the article for a period or lock out the IP of the person who keeps adding the bad info.

    Please let me know what the resolution for this request is.

    <email redacted>

    If you scroll down to her Private life section and go to the second number 2 bullet point, you will see that someone has entered in false information about a fifth marriage to Otis Day. Bernie has taken this out three or 4 times, but someone keeps on putting it back in.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.102.197.45 (talk • contribs).

    I'm not sure who "Bernie" is, and that name doesn't show up in the article history...If you feel someone is vandalizing the article, check out Wikipedia:Vandalism for ways to fight it. Also, feel free to leave a message at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard to gain more attention to the problem if it persists. If the vandalism gets really bad, Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is an option. — Scientizzle 01:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I need a bot

    I'm looking for a bot that can go to the talk pages of an article in a particular category, check for a certain WikiProject banner, and then affix that particular banner if needed. Are there any bots that you would recommend?--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 01:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    An editor described doing something similar here (permanent link). --Teratornis 02:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia:Bot requests might be a better place for this question. Dismas|(talk) 02:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, thanks--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 02:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    MUST I EDIT IN DETAIL, OR CAN WIKI EDITOR HELP BY DOING THE EDTING?

    The 4-10-2007 version


    NOTE TO THE WIKI “Nuclear Power” EDITOR:

    1. The following edits to Nuclear Power are hereby submitted for posting. These are edits of the text on 25 pages printed on 3-31-2007.

    2. Please help by posting the changes for me, or

    3. Let me know if you want me to enter the edits in each section/paragraph being revised. —Submitted by Wiki user <Rabqa1@xxxxxxx> based on the 4-7-2007 personal communication from review of the 3-31-2007 text by my associate, G.S., an active nuclear physicist.

    Thank you for any help, guidance, or instructions that you can provide,

    RAB

    ______________________________________________________

    Excerpts from the personal communication (4-7-2007) from nuclear physicist G.S. to <Rabqa1@xxxxxx> :

    Here are a few comments on the Wikipedia article (< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power>). I take it you are undertaking to do some editing thereof. Excellent!

    • * * * * * * * * *

    The first two sentences of the second-last paragraph of Section 4.1 (“Fuel Resources”) could be improved. They read: "As opposed to current light water reactors which use uranium-235 (0.7% of all natural uranium), fast breeder reactors use uranium-238 (99.3% of all natural uranium). It has been estimated that there is up to five-billion years’ worth of uranium-238 for use in these power plants.[13]"

    I suggest substituting something like this (paragraph): As opposed to current light-water reactors, which get more than half of their energy from uranium-235 (0.7% of all natural uranium) and only about 40% from U-238 (99.3% of all natural uranium), fast breeder reactors can use essentially all of the uranium -- they can extract over a hundred times as much energy from a given amount of ore. It has been estimated that there is more than five billion years’ worth of uranium for use in these power plants,[13] in which case nuclear power is just as inexhaustible (sustainable) as the sources currently considered "renewable."

    • * * * * * * * * *

    There's also a problem with the first two sentences in Section 4.3 ("Reprocessing"). They now read: "Reprocessing can recover up to 95% of the remaining uranium and plutonium in spent nuclear fuel, putting it into new mixed oxide fuel. This also produces a reduction in long term radioactivity within the remaining waste, since this is largely short-lived fission products, and reduces its volume by over 90%."

    I suggest something like this (paragraph):

    Reprocessing the plutonium from the used fuel back into thermal reactors in the form of mixed oxide (MOX) can increase the energy extracted from the original fuel by about 20%. However, recycling that used fuel into fast breeder reactors can make available virtually all of the energy in the remaining uranium and plutonium, for a 2,000% improvement in fuel utilization. This also reduces the long-term radioactivity in the remaining waste, since it consists almost entirely of short-lived fission products, with greatly reduced repository requirements. Also, the needed waste isolation time becomes 300 years instead of 10,000.

    • * * * * * * * * *

    In Section 6.4 ("Nuclear Proliferation"), 4th-last paragraph. The last sentence reads: "Breeder reactors have been banned in the U.S. since President Jimmy Carter's administration prohibited reprocessing because of what it regarded as the unacceptable risk of proliferation of weapons-grade materials."

    Better:

    Development of fast breeder reactors in the United States was halted in 1994 by President Bill Clinton's administration, because of fear that the required reprocessing would lead to unacceptable risk of proliferation of weapons-usable materials. This decision was largely reversed in 2006 by the Bush administration, in announcing the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). [64]

    • * * * * * * * * *

    REFERENCES

    (Add)

    A. To Reference 13. Add NOTE: See the Cohen paper [63] posted at <http://www.sustainablenuclear.org/PADs/pad8301cohen.pdf> .

    NOTE TO THE EDITOR: There is a typo in Reference 13. The McCarthy reference should read “Facts From Cohen...”

    B. Reference 28. NOTE typo—remove the s before the c in “Association”.

    C. Reference 63. “Breeder reactors: a renewable energy source” by Bernard L. Cohen, Am. J. Phys, 51 (1), Jan. 1983 (Professor B. L. Cohen, Department of Physics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260)

    D. Reference 64. GNEP references:

    - January 10, 2007. “Department of Energy Releases Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Strategic Plan.” < http://www.gnep.energy.gov/gnepPRs/gnepPR011007.html> A descriptive press release.

    - The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). <http://www.gnep.energy.gov/> The official GNEP Web site.

    - Vic Reis, Senior Advisor, Department of Energy, “Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP).” Presented at the American Nuclear Society meeting, Reno, NV, June 5, 2006. < http://www.sustainablenuclear.org/PADs/pad0606reis.pdf> [A comprehensive technical overview of the GNEP]

    • * * * * * * * * *

    External links

    (Add a new link after the Brookings link)

    ▪ CFRI (The Center for Reactor Information)—The sustainability and renewability of nuclear power (http://www.sustainablenuclear.org/)

    • * * * * * * * * *
      • END OF FILE**


    File 070410 (4-10-2007) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rabqa1 (talk • contribs) 02:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    Some comments:
    • The name of this site is Wikipedia (specifically, the English one; but we just refer to this as "Wikipedia" here without loss of generality). The word wiki is different; Wikipedia is one member of the set of wikis; there are thousands of others. Referring to this site as "wiki" is somewhat like referring to a specific nuclear power plant as "plant," as if there were no others. We often discuss other wikis on the Help desk, so it's best to be specific.
    • There is no Wikipedia editor per se; instead there are thousands of volunteer editors, and you can become one too. This is the encyclopedia anyone can edit. See WP:FAQ for an overview.
    • You provided references for your proposed edits; that's good. Many new editors don't provide references. See WP:CITE for instructions on the mechanics of citing references in articles.
    • On Wikipedia, anyone who has something to contribute is strongly encouraged to edit articles directly. This requires learning some wikitext syntax; see Help:Editing.
    • If you don't want to go to the trouble of learning to be an editor here, you could try repeating your suggestions on Talk:Nuclear power.
    • I might try reformatting your suggestions above, perhaps on your user page, so they take proper advantage of standard wikitext features such as links and lists. I would imagine many if not most of the issues you raise are already discussed in other articles (for example see Nuclear reprocessing), and you would want to work your new material into the existing web of related articles.
    --Teratornis 03:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Ratings and improvement tags

    What is the etiquette regarding rating new articles? Do you rate your own article when you create it or do you wait for someone else to? Also if your article has been tagged with a needs improvement for whatever reason and you improve it, do you remove the tag yourself?CindyBo 03:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    From what I have seen, article ratings are neither uniform nor consistent. Evidently it depends on random editors with random understandings of subsets of Wikipedia policies randomly browsing to articles and deciding to rate them. Some WikiProjects have their own rating schemes. See WP:STUB for information about stub tags. You could also ask the person who placed whatever tag you refer to to tell you the specific guideline, policy, or manual of style page that motivated the placement.
    • I try to remember to give some explanation on an article's talk page when I slap a tag or make substantial edits to an article, as a courtesy to other editors who might like more explanation than a typical short edit summary.
    If you properly address the deficiency/ies listed in a tag, you could remove it yourself, but a more conciliatory method would be to leave a notice on the talk page of the editor who placed the tag to have another look at the article and see if he/she agrees that the tag is no longer needed. Of course you would have to dig through the article history to figure out who left the tag, so if the tag-placer really wanted to be notified when someone fixes the problem, he or she would probably have made that simpler by leaving a request on the article's talk page.
    • A simpler method would be to explain what you did on the article's talk page, with enough detail to justify removing the tag. Then if someone thought the article still had the problem, they could discuss it on the talk page (which is what article talk pages are for).
    • Another option is to fix the problems in the article, and leave a notice on the article's talk page that you think you fixed them, and you invite other editors to check the article before you remove the tag. Mention that if you get no response in two weeks, you will remove it yourself.
    It's easier to answer these kinds of questions if they come with links to the specific article(s) questioners allude to. Otherwise, hypothetical questions are prone to having lots of conditional branches (if the situation is X, we would do one thing, if the situation is Y, we would do another thing, etc.). --Teratornis 03:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, CindyBo. Fellow British Columbian? Per what others have said, ideally the editor who placed the 'deficiency' tag will have started a thread on the talkpage outlining what is missing or needs improvement. Personally, I believe it is appropriate for an editor (even the author of the article) to remove the tag once s/he believes in good faith the concerns have been addressed, but s/he should use the talkpage thread to address the posting editor's concerns to show that the improvements have been made. If there is no talkpage thread, the improving editor can just start one saying "saw the deficiencies tag, improved the article in the following ways, removed the tag." Alternatively, if the editor who added the improvement tag didn't say why (sometimes they just put it in the edit summary so it's good to check), it is not bad form to just remove it. Some editors, out of courtesy to the editor who applied the improvement tag, just make the improvements, note them on the talkpage, and wait for another editor (not necessarily the tagging editor) to independently assess the article as 'improved' and remove the tag. Anchoress 03:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Obviously some ratings though are obvious. Only a GA can be rated GA, only an FA can be rated FA, and only a stub should be rated Stub. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 03:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    What are the Green plus and Red Minus numbers

    What are the Green plus and Red Minus numbers I see on 'my watchlist' page between the diff/hist and the editor's name? User:Pedant 04:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    The number of (what was it, megabytes?) added or removed from the page--$UIT 04:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Just plain bytes. I shudder to think that people have added/removed over 1GB at a time. Veinor (talk to me) 04:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    In other words, one byte is about one letter or character or symbol. +3 in green means three letters were added recently. -500 in red letters indicate five-hundred letters or bytes were removed. -- Hdt83 Chat 04:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Would like to move my page under the "Clothing Brands" Category

    Username: FOKUS

    The FOKUS page is completed but needs to be moved under the "Clothing Brands" Category and I can't figure out how to do this. Also, I'd like to update more information under the Company Profile for FOKUS (including when the Company was Founded, Key Players, Headquarters, etc.)

    Hi, FOKUS (talk · contribs): Unfortunately, there are a few problems with your request. Wikipedia, not being a directory but rather an encyclopedia, is not organised by category like many online directories are. Rather, all the articles are just listed alphabetically, and they are tagged with categories for sorting purposes, kind of like blog posts have categories or keywords that are used as filters.
    Moving your article, which you created on your userpage will not be a problem, but your article may not meet our criteria for inclusion in the encyclopedia. You need to read WP:5, WP:COI, and WP:NOT, and then if/when your article is modified to be more appropriate in terms of content and formatting, if you believe it meets the criteria for inclusion, you can either ask for help here, as you did, or post the {{helpme}} template on your user or talkpage and get help. Please ask me or anyone on this page for more assistance; we're here to help! Anchoress 05:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Website keeps getting deleted from the External links section

    Why does my Website keep getting deleted from the Celtic Woman pages such as Méav Ní Mhaolchatha at the bottom in the External links section. Thank You for your time and God Bless!Always Remember All Things Are Possible With God !! 05:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    You should read Wikipedia:External links, particularly Wikipedia:External links#Links normally to be avoided. --NE2 05:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict)It appears the link you were trying to add was a link to a fansite/forum. Unless the article is about that website (which it isn't) this is generally forbidden by the external link guideline. External links should be specifically about the article's subject and should be kept to a minimum. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 05:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, to emphasise, you should not ever add links to your own website. You may suggest links on an article's talk page and allow the other editors to decide. Notinasnaid 06:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I can't see pictures / images in the wikipedia website

    Instead of pictures what appears is a small box with a red x at the top left hand side of where the picture / image is supposed to be. How can i view the pictures / images? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.207.31.85 (talk) 09:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    • Can you give an example of such an image? What browser are you using? Can you see images elsewhere? Can you see the Wikipedia logo on the top left of the page? - Mgm|(talk) 10:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    delete my account

    Please somebody help ....first of all i want to know where wikipedia charges for creating accounts and if it is so how can i cancel or delete my account.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spr sn (talk • contribs) 11:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    • Wikipedia does NOT charge for creating accounts anywhere. If you made any edits we can't delete your account for legal reasons, but you always have the m:Right to Vanish. - Mgm|(talk) 11:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Editing Redirects

    A week or so ago I removed the redirect flag from the page Copernican Revolution which inappropriately pointed to Copernican Principle, and wrote a stub article incorporating some material on the "Principle" page which was actually about the revolution. I now find that this article has vanished entirely: the redirect is back in place with no sign in the history of the edits I made. What did I do wrong? What should I do, to establish Copernican Revolution as a separate article? PaddyLeahy 11:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia article names are somewhat case-sensitive. The one you wrote is at Copernican revolution. Looks good! Angus McLellan (Talk) 12:13, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    (after edit conflict):Fixed. The page you edited was under Copernican revolution (second word uncapitalized), which was still a redirect to Copernican principle. I have changed where the redirect points, as noted above. I am also tagging the redirect for deletion and suggested in that tagging that once done, the stub you created be moved to that correctly capitalized name. You can normally just move a page to a new title, but not when a redirect already exists for the target name. Note that I found the "missing" article by looking at your contribution history. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit 12:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for all the hints. I moved the page as you suggested. PaddyLeahy 15:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    starting a page like "David Hammond" when another person is already in wikipedia

    Hi How to you start a page that has alread a page named after it?

    roddyRoddyYoung 12:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • You want to read Wikipedia:Disambiguation. If there's already an article about a sportsman and you want to write an article about an author, you call it David Hammond (author) and refer to the page I mentioned at the start of my comment to make sure people can find it. - Mgm|(talk) 12:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Voting for Change

    When voting for a merge and it is close between merging and not-merging, how many votes ahead would one of the choices have to be in ordered to be considered the consensus vote? Zomic_13 13:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    It isn't a vote. Arguments are not decided by numbers, but by the points put forward. See Wikipedia:Voting is evil. A consensus is not the same thing as a majority. Notinasnaid 13:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have to say that was very unhelpful. Instead of providing an answer to my question (or at least an alternative process), you only criticize the process that many of us have taken part in. Also, I know that a consensus is not the same as a majority. That is part of the reason why I asked my question in the first place. Can anyone else help? Zomic_13 15:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia:Resolving disputes lists a few alternative processes in this section. I'm not very familiar with wikidisputes, but it sounds like Requests for comment or third opinion would be the next step, since they're the friendliest. Those processes can lead to a compramise that every one is pretty happy with. -Haikon 16:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    That was a perfectly acceptable answer from Notinasaid. You asked how many votes would swing it; but it is not about votes. It is a decision-making procedure based on opinions and arguments put forth. Adrian M. H. 16:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sorry if you didn't find it helpful. I guess you mean this discussion. I am not criticising the participation (which seems to be reasonable and at a healthy level). However, the debate should not be concluded by counting votes, hence my post. Also, the page specifically tallies votes, and reports "Support: 7; Oppose: 3; Current Consensus: Merge." This is not a correct use of the process or of the word "consensus". Notinasnaid 17:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Quoting from another related article [9]: "Factors taken into account in closing controversial requests include Wikipedia policies and guidelines, arguments presented during the discussion, and precedents drawn from other articles." No counting should take place. Notinasnaid 17:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Cats Help

    Hello,

    My name is (removed) and i would very much apreciate it if you would help me by telling me the little cats name from "A Swiftly Tilting Plant", part of the "Wrinkle in time series." Although this may seem mundane and unimportant i wish to know because i remeber it meant "the love that without which the universe would crumble" and i wish to name my little girl that is on the way that. So please respond by adding that to the Swiftly Tilting Planet page, i would much appreciate it.

    24.252.109.107 15:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC) (removed)[reply]

    You may want to ask at the Reference Desk as well - they specialize in knowledge questions. Hersfold (talk/work) 20:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    The question is a bit of a stumper, but it seems one way to find the answer would be to read a copy of the book: A Swiftly Tilting Planet. If that's too difficult, maybe the answer is obtainable somewhere on the book's entry on Amazon.com. I tried Amazon's "search inside this book" using the keyword "cat"; that popped up two instances, neither of which mention a name, nor do they sound like "the little cat" you have in mind. Ah, but then I searched for "kitten" and that pops up a reference to a name: "... Meg sat up, blinking and rubbing her hand against Ananda's fur. The kitten had returned and was sleeping ...". Except that searching again for "Ananda" suggests that's the name of a dog in the book. (Cat, dog, what's the difference?) Anyway, you can have loads of fun running searches on Amazon, and eventually you could reconstruct the whole book without having to buy it. --Teratornis 22:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Tagging Articles

    How do you tag an article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Heismanhoosier (talk • contribs) 16:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    Heismanhoosier 16:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Assuming that you can make unbiased assessments based on Wikipedia's article standards and guidelines/policies, you will find most of the tags that you need at Wikipedia:Template messages. You can probably find some guidelines on their use among the links in the help pages. See also Wikipedia:Deletion policy. Adrian M. H. 16:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Editing the title of an entry

    I am trying to update an entry regarding a product; the name has changed since the iniatial Wikipedia page was created (not by myself or the product's owning company). Is there any way to change the title of the actual searchable entry in addition to editing the definition outlining the characteristics of this product? Is it possible to do on the same 'edit' page? 68.7.17.91 16:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Since you don't have an account, you cannot do that. See WP:MOVE for details. I would suggest making a request instead, for which some evidence that cites the name change would be advantageous. Adrian M. H. 17:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Template parameters

    What is necessary to change {{ChicagoWikiProject}} to handle parameters like class and priority? TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 18:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


    Change Stub Title

    I entered a stub for a band and got a note that the title should be *** (Band). However I don't know how to change the title. When I pull up "Edit This Page" it gives me everything BUT the title.

    How do I change the title of my musical stub?

    Feidb 19:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    At the top of the page, it says "Move". Click it, then move the page to the appropriate title--$UIT 19:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    For more information, see: WP:MOVE. --Teratornis 22:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Pine Bush, New York

    Concerning the "Pine Bush, NY" page, an author, incidentally from New Jersey, continues to edit the page for his own personal advertisment. Specifically, his section on UFO's is solely there to help pedal his book (for which he includes a link) and has little relevance to the town and it's current facts and issues. The root of this problem is how someone, not even from the town, is able to effectively take over the page for self promotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.108.160.223 (talk • contribs)

    • I don't think Wikipedia has a rule about where you live when you edit a page, though it is not fond of self promotion. Has this issue been raised on the talk page of the article? This is the first thing to do when you have a dispute. It is quite wrong to add comments like "Pine Bush doesn't want an author from NJ to use our town's page for self promotion" into a page, discussions belong on the talk page. "Pine Bush" should also understand that it does not "own" this article, that it is not there for the purposes of the promotion of the town either. Notinasnaid 19:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • To kick things off I will copy this discussion into the talk page. Notinasnaid 19:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Violin Concerto No. 1 (Shostakovich)

    I was just looking up the article, Violin Concerto No. 1 (Shostakovich), since I performed the piece in an orchestra. The article has an error - it lists that the piece is scored for two clarinets, when in fact there are three clarinet parts. But, there is no option to edit the article, as there are for most articles - what's going on?

    204.85.79.109 20:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Are you sure you can't see the edit this page link at the top? The article isn't protected in any way. x42bn6 Talk 21:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Accidental page deletion

    I accidentally deleted the page on Carlos Ortega. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Finally, a username that wasn't taken! (talk • contribs).

    You can't delete pages - only sysops can - although you came close to blanking it. x42bn6 Talk 21:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    How do I fix it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Finally, a username that wasn't taken! (talk • contribs).
    It's already been reverted by a bot. x42bn6 Talk 21:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    A lot of help you are —Preceding unsigned comment added by Finally, a username that wasn't taken! (talk • contribs)
    I'm going to assume that wasn't malicious sarcasm. If you'd like to know how to fix such accidental edits in the future, please see WP:REVERT to see how an article may be reverted to a previous version. Dismas|(talk) 21:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    No, it was malicious sarcasm. That person could've done what you just did, point me in the right direction. Finally, a username that wasn't taken! 21:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Take a look at WP:CIVIL. Adrian M. H. 21:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Take a look at WP:LAZY. I asked how do fix it, they didn't tell. Finally, a username that wasn't taken! 21:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    You asked how to fix the damage done - I told you the damage had been fixed - and surely that is pointing in the right direction? Maybe I should've put the revert link in, so I apologise for that. x42bn6 Talk 22:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    See WP:REVERT. Answers to most questions like this are somewhere on this page: User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia. --Teratornis 22:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Reminder to Help desk volunteers: see Wikipedia:Help desk/How to answer. It's always good to look up the document or documents that explain the answer, and provide links. This takes a few more seconds that just writing something off the top of one's head, but the links are essential so questioners can find the complete answer with all the background explanation. --Teratornis 22:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    How to block a user

    I don't know how to report this, but user 142.156.1.223 has a lot of vandalism. Last on the Beowulf & Grendel film. If it hasn't already been done, will someone please block him or her? --Steinninn 22:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I think that WP:AIV (Admin intervention against vandalism) is the place to go. Adrian M. H. 22:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have blocked the user. // PTO 22:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Roger Davison

    I have photographs to add to my inclusion in Wikipedia,if you wish. If you give me your email address I will forward some for selection.

    My email address is (e-mail addresses removed to reduce your exposure to SPAMmers)

    Thank you

    Roger Davison

    Thank you for your interest in helping to improve Wikipedia. See Help:Image for instructions on how to upload images, and read the part about copyright and choosing a license. All images uploaded to Wikipedia must be free from copyright restriction (an exception being some fair use images, but it's best to have photos with no copyright restrictions so they can be included in more than one article). If you upload a photo of yourself, you or someone else can display it in an {{Infobox Politician}} template in the Roger Davison article. Wikipedia does not use the method of file exchange via e-mail. All the editing and file upload features are fully accessible right from your Web browser. The idea is that this is the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The whole system is set up to make individual users very self-reliant. Let us know if you have any questions about uploading your image(s), or if you need help putting them in article(s). In addition to photos, the Roger Davison article also needs references we can cite. If you know of any reliable publications providing biographical information about the article's subject, or information about his career, please list the references on Talk:Roger Davison to assist other editors. While I do not question your self-identification as the article's subject, be aware that it is not easy to determine true identities here, so the most important thing is to have reliable sources for our information, such as reputable publications known to check their facts. --Teratornis 00:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    RefDeskBot... Broken?

    It's doing funny things. [10] [11] x42bn6 Talk 23:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Urgh - that seems very strange. I'll fix it up tomorrow. Martinp23 23:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Images

    How do you embed a picture into a page? Locke Kiyoshi 23:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    See: Help:Image. What page do you want to edit? --Teratornis 23:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    April 12

    Angry Video Game Nerd

    Why is Wikipedia not allowing an entry for The Angry Video Game Nerd? -Paul6743 00:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Please see WP:N and WP:RS. The subject isn't notable and not covered by any reliable sources. -Wooty Woot? contribs 00:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Objection. There exist multiple sources including YouTube, ScrewAttack.com, GameTrailers.com, AngryNESNerd.com and MySpace.com.
    It's only a matter of compliling the facts and all that other good stuff...
    So Paul6743, I can sympathize with you... I truly think he deserves an article here on Wikipedia.
    I look at it this way... The more stuff it has, the more popular it becomes... Wouldn't you agree!?!? --WIKISCRIPPS 07 WED APR 11 2007 9:03 PM EDT (THU APR 12 2007 1:03 AM UTC)
    None of those sources are reliable. — MalcolmUse the schwartz! 01:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Right. I can make a video about my cat, that doesn't make him notable or reliably sourced. -Wooty Woot? contribs 02:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Doesn't matter, it is still media that people can get around, not to mention he's only going big... Have you forgotten that GameTrailers is owned by Viacom through MTV Networks??? Besides, let's talk about his interview at GT, shall we??? Also, GT supplies programs for Spike TV, such as Game Head... What do you say about that??? --WIKISCRIPPS 07 WED APR 11 2007 11:37 PM EDT (THU APR 12 2007 3:37 AM UTC)
    It doesn't matter who they're "owned by". Please see WP:RS. -Wooty Woot? contribs 05:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    In addition to Wooty's links, I suggest you study the Attribution/FAQ. Adrian M. H. 12:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Centralized Discussions

    Are there any pages/lists of centralized discussions of commonly discussed issues, such as blanking user talk pages, removing warnings, etc.? Not a dog 00:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes, see Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Conclusions. For the examples you noted, see:
    Mediation case regarding removal of warning templates (Page was deleted, but the placeholder currently there has some links detailing the incident)
    A rejected proposal regarding warning removal
    And the {{uw-tpv}} series of templates at WP:UTM.
    Hope that helped. Hersfold (talk/work) 01:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Perfect, thanks. I think this page should be linked to more prominently somewhere. Not a dog 01:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    UN image policies?

    I received an email from the UN Photo Librarians (the copyright holders of all UN images) stating the following:

    UN Photo Usage Guidelines


    UN photos may be used to further the aims and work of the United Nations. They cannot be used for advertising, marketing or in ways which are inconsistent with the Organization’s mission.


    UN photos cannot be altered, sold, redistributed or used to create derivative works.


    COPYRIGHT United Nations photographs are the property of the United Nations, which holds all rights in connection with their usage.

    PERMISSION Prior written permission is required to reproduce UN photos in print or electronic format, including CDs, DVDs, web sites, videos, exhibits, etc. Such permissions are granted on a one-time non-exclusive basis and may be renewed.

    Written permission is, however, not required for reproduction of photo material as allowed by statutory exemptions (e.g. UN-affiliated non-governmental organizations and United Nations Associations, UN system organizations, including Specialized Agencies) or Fair Use. It applies solely to scholarly, academic, non-profit, or journalistic use of properly credited UN photos.

    The standard UN photo licensing permission form is available for download. (Pre-generated permission forms for online photo requests can be found in Your Account.) Third party permission forms are not accepted.

    How would one apply this to WP policy?--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 01:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    It says if they're used for a scholarly/non-profit purpose, you can use it with written permission. Fair Use is OK but permission is better. -Wooty Woot? contribs 02:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you know what template that would be?--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 02:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, I get what you're asking now. What you need to do is ask them for permission to license it under GFDL, because we can't use images only granted to WP and I don't think we can do the whole "image can be used for noncommercial purposes only" template (though that's an option in the list). If they don't want to do that, you need to just tag it as fair use. -Wooty Woot? contribs 03:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    You should probably use an applicable Fair Use template, and mention in the source section that the image came from the United Nations and very clearly specify the rationale under which the image is being used (identification of such-and-such or whatever). All Fair Use policies apply - it can only be used in that article for that single purpose, etc. and so forth. Hersfold (talk/work) 03:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Super Mario Bros. 3 suits

    I came across a small stub today entitled Hammer Brothers' Suit, and after doing a little bit of work on it, I decided that it really isn't enough on its own. So I got an idea. Would it be a good idea to merge this Hammer Brothers' Suit article, as well as the slightly better Tanooki suit article into a new article called "Super Mario Bros. 3 suits" (or "Suits of Super Mario Bros. 3")? I think it would be better than having separate articles for the Frog Suit (which I don't think has an article), Tanooki Suit, Raccoon Suit, and the Hammer Bros. Suit. The only thing is that it still might not be good enough for a separate article. That is why I am asking here if I should go ahead and start this off, or if it is a waste of my time and effort. --LuigiManiac 01:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Okay, I'm working on a prototype for the article in Notepad, but I realized that the raccoon powerup is called the Raccoon Leaf. Here is what I propose instead. I could still do a "Power-ups exclusive to Super Mario Bros. 3" article (or something like that) if it is deemed worthy for an article. --LuigiManiac 03:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe not the best person to reply (about as unfamiliar with the subject as I could be!), but it sounds like you are on the right track. Merging and moving pages may offer some guide as well. Adrian M. H. 12:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm worried that it may be too game guide-y (I had no idea how to put that, so I made up a word) for inclusion into Wikipedia. I now have the prototype uploaded on my new sandbox, and I am now working on it directly in Wikipedia, instead of in Notepad. I have expanded the idea further to include all Super Mario Bros. 3 exclusive items that could be used from the inventory. It is almost to the point where I would feel comfortable putting it in the article mainspace with the green light. --LuigiManiac 15:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Currency

    Where is each currency is made (dollar)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.18.227 (talk • contribs)

    You should ask factual questions at the Reference Desk - they're the ones who know everything, we're just geeks who know how to use Wikipedia pretty well. However, you might try looking at the article Dollar. :-) Hersfold (talk/work) 03:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    See also Mint (coin). Dismas|(talk) 03:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    In the United States, the United States Mint makes coins, and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing prints paper currency. However, you only specified the dollar and not the country. (Several countries call their currency the "dollar;" see the {{dollar}} template for a great-looking list.) You can look up any country name on Wikipedia to find out about its currency. For example, the Australia article has an {{Infobox Country or territory}} template which lists Australian dollar as its currency. If you want to find out about currency, you came to the right place, because Wikipedia has excellent coverage on the subject. --Teratornis 03:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Guidelines to "References in Popular Culture" Sections

    Do guidelines exist anywhere? I've got some proposals to offer but I'm not sure where to initiate discussion. Rocksong 03:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I've asked in Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) now instead. Rocksong 07:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Need to access a reference list.

    I found a citation for a reference that corroborates information stated in an article, but when I edit that section of the page where the references are located, I find {{Reflist|2}}. How do I get to the page with the references on it?Lottamiata 04:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    See Help:Footnotes for a full explanation. Basically, when you want to add a reference to an article, you can use the tag <ref>some references...</ref>. Then, your reference text will appear at the bottom of the article where you find the rest of the references (i.e. the section that says {{Reflist|2}}). Wikipedia:Footnotes provides the guidelines as far as how and when to use footnotes, and Wikipedia:Citation templates gives you a list of all the different templates used for citations. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 04:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    bibliography

    how do I make a bibliography on wikipedia? Which page should I go to?

    Are you trying to cite an article for the bibliography of a paper you are writing? If so, see Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. Dismas|(talk) 03:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Boldly add extended Colbert summaries?

    I'm not sure if this is the right forum, but I'd like someone's take on this before I act too boldly. Lately, I've been contributing to List of The Colbert Report episodes (2007). Last night after jotting down a few notable quotes from the show, I wrote-up a long summary for that show. Today another contributor, User:Lugnut215 edited it down, which I appreciate, since it really was way too long for that page. However, I'm no wondering if it would be unreasonable to create one page for an extended summary of each episode. This system would be conducive to organizing segments with headings, including a few choice quotes and germane references. Is Wikipedia an OK place to post extended summaries, or is it too obscure and irrelevant? I'd a appreciate feedback from anyone, but esp. from admins who may be in a position to delete or protect pages. Thanks. Rosenbluh 04:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I think the first question to consider is: what is the source here? Is watching a TV show and reporting what you see considered original research or a valid use of a primary source? (I don't have an answer, but I'd like to see opinions). Notinasnaid 07:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    (Just my interpretation) I would call it OR, I think. If you watched a documentary and wrote about its subject, that would (I assume) by legitimate (someone else has done the actual research), but writing about the program itself without using third party sources would be more likely to be considered OR. But like I say, I'm not 100% sure. Might be a grey area or open to question, given that it is essentially a published work. Adrian M. H. 14:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Using fair use images in biography articles

    A recent exchange with another wikipeadian has come to a head, and he has sent me here for resolution. He removed two images from an article stating they were in violation of "policy." I inquired about this, and he told me this: "Fair use images...are not allowed in biographies of living persons per order of Jimbo Wales himself. It is a legal issue." I asked where to find this "order" and he sent me to Wikipedia:Fair use, which of course mentions nothing of the sort.

    When questioned further he told me that the location of the "order from Jimbo Wales" was unimportant, as it was a policy, regardless of how it came to be one.

    After reviewing Wikipedia:Fair use again, I came to the conclusion he had misinterpreted portions of the policy and suggested such. His reply was

    "There is a general MoS, be it official or not, that we do not use fair use images in biographies for any reason. I believe that it is official due to how widespread it is, and I will continue to enforce this until it is shown to be invalid because I have read Jimbo's statement, though I cannot find it."

    Someone please resolve this issue. I find it extremely hard to believe that any fair use image is simply not allowed in the text of a biographical article of a living person. That makes absolutely no sense from an academic, encyclopædic or legal (at least in this country) standpoint. --JohnDoe0007 04:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    You are correct. There is no guideline, policy, or essay that says biographies of living people can't have fair use images. And "general MoS" things that nobody else knows about aren't enough. However, keep in mind that you still have to use free images where they are available. -Amarkov moo! 04:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Exactly my point. My guess was he was confusing the idea that non-free images are not to be used as the subject-identifier image at the top of the article (as they would then not be qualified as fair use), but he replied with what I last quoted. So where do I go from here? He told me to come here to basically be told I was wrong, and that he would continue "enforcing it" (i.e. removing fair use images from biographies of living people) until he is proven wrong...which is essentially saying "I will continue to enforce a law that I cannot produce documentation for, until you prove that it doesn't exist."
    Is there any admin that can confirm this? --JohnDoe0007 05:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not an admin, but I Googled and found a user (User:Yamla) who claimed this policy, but gave no citation I could trace. However, his wording of the policy led to a better Google search which found something that looks like a possible source for the policy being alluded to above:
    And let me tell you, I had to read that several times to see how it could be construed into a general ban on fair-use images of living persons, since the order of presentation is not the clearest. The key seems to be that if a person is living, it would be possible to take an uncopyrighted photo of that person, thus undercutting the fair use rationale that no alternative free image is "available or could be created." But don't take my word for it, read that Signpost page yourself a few times and tell me what you think. It would be nice if Wikipedia:Fair use criteria spelled this out more explicitly, rather than relying on such a subtle inference from the general criteria. --Teratornis 05:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Nice work Teratornis...Yes, the user I spoke of also mentioned User:Yamla as a reference...but I figured the community of the help desk is more reliable than simply one other user (despite said user being an admin). As I told the user that originally brought it up, I haven't exactly passed a bar exam, but I have a working knowledge of business law (through experience as well as instruction), and although I read the entire signpost, I could tell after the second paragraph it had little influence on the subject at hand. In no way does it even hint at the idea that "no fair use image shall be placed on a biography of a living person." The signpost refers to the issue of the the use of publicity photos of living people (which is a decent discussion to be had, for the reasons mentioned in the signpost itself)...but it has nothing to do with the suggestion the original user I mentioned or (allegedly) Yamla have given.

    As far as the ambiguity of Wikipedia:Fair use criteria, that stems from the ambiguity of the laws themselves. You'll find that most laws (in the U.S. at least) are written in such a way that they may be interpreted and (for lack of a decent euphemism) manipulated to fit many different cases and situations. That and the endless appellate system are what most attorneys would tell you is what make the country great...(and what keeps them employed) but that's another story.

    I am feeling more and more that the whole idea of this no-fair-use-image "policy" is a big misunderstanding.

    Still looking for further clarification...Response, admins?? --JohnDoe0007 06:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I believe that current policies should, if applied properly, result in a large number (perhaps most) fair use pictures being removed from biographies, most album and book covers. (I am not an admin). Don't just take my word for it, read Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Kat Walsh's statement. Notinasnaid 07:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Where can I find out how to use the Reflist template?

    I am trying to fix a citation in a reference list in an article that simply states {{Reflist|2}} in the markup code for the reference section. I assume this is a template of some kind, but I am having trouble locating it in the template help pages. Lottamiata 04:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    The template page: {{Reflist}} shows some usage notes. --Teratornis 04:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Possible edit dispute - how do I approach it?

    Hi there! I have a question about the good faith policy and ownership of articles. Starting in early January, I started making a lot of edits and changes to the Pomona College article. I overhauled the first half of the article into new intro, history, campus and academics sections. I followed many of the guidelines and ideas from the WikiProject Universities, following Duke University and Cornell University's articles especially because they are featured. Recently a user has been making edits to the article that don't seem constructive (they aren't properly sourced) and gives no particular reason for them. It appears this user has only edited articles for Pomona and Claremont McKenna College. These colleges have a history of not always getting along (the students at least) and at times may do things to try to damage the other's reputation. I feel that the edits that this user has been making to Pomona's article are in this vein. I know this seems long-winded, but I just want to make sure I am following the right actions. I haven't yet reverted the edits made to the article today (which are at points unsourced and others stray from the Duke/Cornell template for college articles) for fear of starting an edit war. Also, I want to make sure that I am not disregarding the Good Faith Policy or the Ownership of Articles policy. Certainly I am attached to this article, but only insofar as I want it to become more encylcopedic and accurate. I haven't yet contacted the user, and have the unchanged (without this user's edits) version of the page in my sandbox, but wanted to wait until I could possibly get another opinion on the matter so that I won't be acting rashly to this or starting an edit war. Thank you very much for your help. --Vter4life 04:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    This is a tricky situation. I had a similar situation happen on an article I was trying to improve to featured. Another editor added some info that was not written too well and unsourced. However, it that case the info was not bad. I cleaned it up and sourced it myself. If that is the case (decent info, just unsourced) leave a friendly reminder on the user's talk page and see if he sources it himself. If not, try to source it. If you can't source it, remove it as it is in violation of WP:ATT. If there are sources for everything, there isn't much you can do besides keep it. Unless it is a copyvio or totally unhelpful and irrelevant info (which you should still discuss with the user and on the article talk page). If it is too detailed for trivial info, condense it and move it to the end of the article content or disperse it into the rest of the article. You are right though, you don't OWN the article and have little control over new additions. You can "police" any new additions to make sure they meet policy. (Don't just remove any unsourced statement immediately as a violation of WP:ATT though). Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 04:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Baton Rouge Skyline pic "Outdated"

    Why were the more recent Baton Rouge skyline pics changed for a outdated 1999 pic?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.254.41.138 (talk) 07:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    • The picture may be older but it's of a higher quality and shows more of the area. Did anything geographically change to make what you see in the image outdated? If not, there's no reason to replace the older image. - Mgm|(talk) 07:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, Wikipedia isn't a news service, and articles about places are about the entire history of a place. Pictures from any era may have relevance as illustrations. Notinasnaid 08:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • True, which is why I would find an old image perfectly acceptable in an article history section, but this question discussed the image in the infobox. - Mgm|(talk) 09:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Why should an infobox use a contemporary picture? Is that one of the rules of that template? Notinasnaid 09:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, that's just me assuming that would be useful. I still think this particular replacing was not useful because the older image had a better quality (perspective and resolution) and showed more of the area. I am totally against unexplained replacing of images with a lower quality one. - Mgm|(talk) 10:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    when replying - pink box

    Hi all,

    when replying to questions on the ref desk, sometimes my text appears in a loooonnnggg pink box, i've noticed it with someother people's answers as well. i have tried different ways of typing an answer such as 'return' as i come to the edge of the reply box, but this sometimes works sometimes does'nt. I could continue to 'fanny around' to find the solution, but hey thats what the help desk is for (hopefully) 

    Perry-mankster 10:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    or like now !!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Normally the text goes into a blue or other coloures box if you indent it from the line without using  : Your sentence . I have corrected it here, is that what you mean, if not follow up either here or on my User talk Page, thanks. Tellyaddict 10:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) You mean like this?
    Text appears in a 'pre' box (which shows grey for me, and presumably pink for you) if the line starts with a space. This is so you can do ASCII art, and write program code with indentation, for instance. The box preserves spaces between characters (normally, two consecutive spaces are condensed into one). So if you want to avoid the box, don't type any spaces at the start of a line; start right at the margin. (You can use colons at the start of a line for indentation.) Hope that helps! --ais523 10:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    See: Help:Wikitext examples#Just show what I typed. --Teratornis 16:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    where exactly

    do you know where exactly can i find where to find the biography about Louis Latimer(Louis Howard Latimer)? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.94.88.237 (talk) 11:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    Removal

    How do you get unwanted pages about you removed from wikipedia.

    • First you should see if whatever is wrong with it (assuming that's the reason you want it removed) can be fixed. The next step is reading WP:BLP#Dealing_with_articles_about_yourself. - Mgm|(talk) 11:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • (Edit conflict) If it's a blatant attack page or doesn't assert your notability, you can request speedy deletion by adding {{db-bio}} to the top of the article (see WP:CSD, particularly G10 and A7). If it's a more complex problem, you can contact Wikipedia. -SpuriousQ (talk) 11:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Citations to sources with changing URLs to articles

    I thought that I may have read that some news sources were not recommended because the URL tends to change. I can't find the guide that may have said that. Yahoo news is what I have in mind as not recommended as a citable source because of this. Can you point me to a guide on this issue. thank you. -- Yellowdesk 13:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    In a preliminary search, I have only found What to do when a ref link goes dead. If the longevity is in serious doubt, maybe you could use one of the free archival services that are around on the web. Adrian M. H. 14:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Continuing numbered lists after some explanatory text

    Using "#" is there a way to continue an already started numbered list if there is a break between the entreies?

    I.e.:

    There are four kinds of frooble

    1. Bar

    2. Zarble

    Bar and zarble are yada yada ... which is the opposite behavior of the last three:

    3. Boogle

    4. Zarkonkle

    5. Jubsy

    If I use

    1. Bar
    2. Zarble
      Some explanatory text, followed by
    3. Boogle
    4. Zarkonkle
    5. Jubsy

    then the last three are again numbered from 1. 66.252.24.130 14:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    You could number them manually, with colons to position them:
    6. Boogle
    7. Zarkonkle
    and so on. Adrian M. H. 14:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Amend that. I just tried adding a break tag to your edit, and it worked as you want it to. Even easier, if you can put up with the indent. Adrian M. H. 14:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    A wiki way (without a br tag) is using a colon after a # to append comments below a number as in:
    1. Line 1
    2. Line 2
      Some indented text
    3. Line 3
    You can see that the third line continues at number 3. --Kainaw (talk) 14:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    If you want to insert something complicated between list items which is not another kind of wiki list, you need to use an <ol> tag, or maybe two of them (Help:HTML in wikitext). This gives you maximum control over item numbering and you can also control the numbering style (using letters instead of numbers, for example). Here is an example of a numbered list with a "just show what I typed" block inserted between list items, to demonstrate the flexibility of this method:
    1. A list item.
    2. Another list item.
    3. This might be an example of a program command.
    4. Try getting this item to number correctly with a wiki list.
    --Teratornis 16:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Creating a redirect

    How can I create a redirect for a common misspelled word For instance Streching redirected to Stretching? -Czmtzc 15:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    See WP:REDIRECT, there is a section about redirects from misspellings. -SpuriousQ (talk) 15:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, Streching and Strech now redirect to Stretching. Czmtzc 15:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Underscoring Spaces

    I was working on an idea for a template and I ran into a problem. I need to replace the spaces of {{{$1}}} with underscores so I can use http://xx.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{{$1}}} (note, the "xx" means that I'll be replacing "en" with different letters). Is there a temlpate or function that does this? --Kainaw (talk) 16:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    See: Namespaces and URLs for the {{urlencode}} and {{anchorencode}} magic words. --Teratornis 16:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. --Kainaw (talk) 16:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Getting My Book Listed on Wikipedia

    Dear Sirs,

    I have recently self-pubished my book, Another Day, Another Dog. Details are at www.trevor-rowe.com and I am giving 75% of net profit to Cancer Research so I wondered whether you would be able to feature the book in Wikipedia. I have already sent Cancer Research UK £300 in memory of my sister who died of cancer in 2005 but hope to donate substantially more if the book gets wider publicity.

    Many Thanks,

    TR 16:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

    Wikipedia is not a publicity site. When your book is notable for some award, sales record, or inclusion in a respected list of outstanding books, someone will certainly add it. --Kainaw (talk) 16:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Good luck with your commendable intentions; I hope your book does very well. But the above reply is correct; notability is the primary governing policy for inclusion or rejection and, for obvious reasons, it has to be applied strictly and fairly (notwithstanding some content that slips through). Conflict of interest also applies. Adrian M. H. 16:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    See WP:BK#Self-publication. If your book has been written about in reliable publications, that could be evidence of its notability. The idea behind Wikipedia is that we write about what is already famous; we do not create fame. Thus you would need to promote your book by other means, and if you succeed, the book will be notable enough that someone will start an article for it on Wikipedia. --Teratornis 17:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Strange new behavior for HTML ordered lists

    Recently I noticed HTML ordered lists behaving strangely on Wikipedia. When I insert a "just show what I typed" block of text between list items, the block appears before the item it is after. For example, here is some example list code: 

    <ol>
<li>A list item.</li>
<li>Here is a program command:</li>
 This might be an example of a program command.
<li>Try getting this item to number correctly with a wiki list.</li>
</ol>

    and it formats like this:

    1. A list item.
    2. Here is a program command:
      3. This might be an example of a program command.
    3. Try getting this item to number correctly with a wiki list.

    The only way I have found to get the code block to stay where I put it is to insert a blank list item ahead of it: 

    <ol>
<li>A list item.</li>
<li>Here is a program command:</li>
<li></li><!-- dummy item thrown in to get the following line to appear where it should. -->
 This might be an example of a program command.
<li>Try getting this item to number correctly with a wiki list.</li>
</ol>

    which formats as:

    1. A list item.
    2. Here is a program command:
    3. This might be an example of a program command.
    4. Try getting this item to number correctly with a wiki list.

    I do not observe this problem on another MediaWiki wiki I use (which runs version 1.9.2). Is this a bug in MediaWiki? --Teratornis 16:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I believe a new version of HTML tidy was recently installed, causing numerous problems. As I don't know HTML very well, I can't help much more than that. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 16:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. That led me to the manual page: mw:Manual:$wgUseTidy and to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Tidy upgraded (permanent link). The latter asks if anyone knows of any bugs, so I'll ask if what I'm seeing is. --Teratornis 20:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Help trying to add information on website

    I am having issues trying to add information to wikipedia. For some reason every time I add info, it rejects it. I am not sure if i am doing it wrong or if it will not allow the content I am trying to add? It is just a write up on a clothing company but I don't know where to start or where it will allow me to add content about them.


    AngeloM24.233.132.231 16:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Help trying to add information on website 24.233.132.231 16:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

    I am having issues trying to add information to wikipedia. For some reason every time I add info, it rejects it. I am not sure if i am doing it wrong or if it will not allow the content I am trying to add? It is just a write up on a clothing company but I don't know where to start or where it will allow me to add content about them.


    AngeloM24.233.132.231 16:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    If you're trying to add a new article, you have to have an account. Accounts are free and you don't need to release any private info to get one. If you are trying to add info to an article that is already present, could you specify which article? Dismas|(talk) 16:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    See WP:ACCOUNT. --Teratornis 17:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Please make sure the clothing company is a particularly notable one. See WP:CORP for guidelines. If the company isn't notable, the article will be deleted. Your article needs to explain why they are notable too. You have also been adding links to articles: these will be removed as adverts, sorry. Notinasnaid 17:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    vfd

    what kind of fruits and vegetables are grown in san joaquin?

    This is for questions about editing Wikipedia (as it says clearly at the top of the page). You can ask at the Ref Desk, under Miscellaneous. Adrian M. H. 17:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    There are several San Joaquins. One that is notable for agriculture is San Joaquin Valley. --Teratornis 17:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I messed up two AfDs. Help!

    Ashes in the Fall and Socialese. I really don't know what I'm doing here, and I don't have the time right now to figure it out. Somebody please step in and fix whatever steps I missed. Sorry! Eleland 17:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    In once case you soemhow never creadted the AfD sub-page at all. In the other you created it, but dailed to include the header that makes it a separae section in the AfD log. I've fixed booth, but you need to visit the afd page for Socialese and provide a nomination reason, as I had no way to guess what your reason would have been. DES (talk) 17:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Picture upload

    I'm trying to upload a picture of Fort Monroe but I am an idiot and I'm not at all understanding the instructions on how to make it happen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Waggss (talk • contribs) 18:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    Go to Upload File over on the side, click the browse icon, select the image you wish to upload, add its source, and add its copyright, such as tv-screenshot, GFDL, film-screenshot, etc... Click upload, and you're done--$UIT 18:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    It turns out it's also a National Historic Landmark, so I put the picture inside an infobox. (See Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places if you're interested in such things.) --Elkman (Elkspeak) 21:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia article of the day

    Hello friends! I am interested in creating a Wikipedia article of the day video blog on youtube for the purpose of encouraging education, learning, and use and editing of wikipedia. It would include particularly interesting articles, featured articles, interesting pictures on wikipedia, and more! Where should I go to on this? How will I let people on wikipedia know about it so they can help or even maybe be linked out from wikipedia? Thanks guys. [Mαc Δαvιs] (How's my driving?) ❖ 19:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    en.wikipedia.org dns problem

    Dear wikipedia!

    Please review situation with your zone file wikipedia.org especially in part of en.wikipedia.org. 

    Your current practice:
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
en.wikipedia.org.       3600    IN      CNAME   rr.wikimedia.org.
rr.wikimedia.org.       600     IN      CNAME   rr.knams.wikimedia.org.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Multilevel redirect 'A' request is poor and do not improve reliability, more useful using easy 'A' record for manage moving webservers between IP, if need.

    Some time I do not resolve en.wikipedia.org, see for instance: 

    host -v en.wikipedia.org 145.97.39.158
Trying "en.wikipedia.org"
Using domain server:
Name: 145.97.39.158
Address: 145.97.39.158#53
Aliases:

Host en.wikipedia.org not found: 2(SERVFAIL)
Received 34 bytes from 145.97.39.158#53 in 44 ms

    Best regards —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.237.168.50 (talk) 19:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    Poetry

    I remember one time I stumbled upon this poetry sandbox on wikipedia where users could just post their poems. Now I can't seem to find it. I am not referring to the "world's longest poem". Help! NIRVANA2764 19:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    It may have just been the main Sandbox. It gets emptied every so often, so you won't be able to find it--$UIT 20:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I think he/she may be right. I think I saw something like that recently, but I can't remember where. NIRVANA; if I find it, I'll let you know on your talk page. Adrian M. H. 21:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, not much luck from a search. There's the poetry archive, but that's probably not what you were thinking of. Might it have been a user's subpage? About 28000 results... Adrian M. H. 21:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Article

    The famous people at South Park studios, such as Matt and Trey, have articles. If this is fair, I think I should have one too, because:

    1. I made and drew the designs of a LOT of the characters, and 2. Token Black is based off of me, in fact I was originally going to do his voice.
    Judt wondering. FictionH 20:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    See WP:N to find out if you meet notability requirements. If you don't, then you can't be the subject of an article. Then see WP:COI to find out why it is best that someone else writes it. Adrian M. H. 20:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Okay, I've read it, I think I meet the requirements, so I'm gonna make an article about me. If any problems please delete it. FictionH 20:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    If you can be confident that you can write about yourself without bias and include only attributable and verifiable facts, then you'll be OK. Be sure to cite it properly from the get go, to avoid any deletion nominations. Adrian M. H. 21:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    "How do I add an image to an article?"

    "How do I add an image to an article?" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RM1995 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    See Wikipedia:Image tutorial. Dismas|(talk) 20:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Did you want to add an existing image to an article or upload an image? Two very different things. Adrian M. H. 20:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding map coordinates to articles

    How do you add map coordinates (appearing at the top right)to articles?

    --Slwllng 20:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)slwllng[reply]

    See {{Coor title dms}} for documentation. Basically, you need to know the latitude and longitude (in degrees, minutes, and seconds) for this particular template. The documentation on that template also lists other templates, like {{Coor title dm}} for decimal degrees and minutes, and it has a link to the Manual of Style entry. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 20:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    code

    I need code assistance to make the wording and pics on this page fade in order. Eg you press the button the alert image shows up it then fades then wording shows up it too then fades, more images show up then they too fade. It then stops at the red button waiting for you to click it and start the process over again. Thanxs in advance, «razorclaw 21:25:31, 04-12-2007»

    Maybe I'm missing something but what does that have to do with Wikipedia? Dismas|(talk) 21:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Um no it has nothing to do with a page in the namespace but one in my userspace. «razorclaw 01:12:31, 04-13-2007»
    What you want is not possible. You cannot embed scripting code into a particular page on Wikipedia that will work for other users. Mike Dillon 01:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Inappropriate use of userspace?

    I'm not really familiar with the limitations of userboxes in user subpages/namespace. I stumbled across User:Black_Flag/Userboxes/anti_macro_evolution and it seems a bit needlessly inflammatory. Is this something that should be MfD'd? -Wooty Woot? contribs 21:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I have seen userboxes enter MfD before (and successfully, I think). That might well be a candidate (although at least it's not anti-religion or something). Adrian M. H. 22:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    rick holden

    I was trying to up dste the informstion on myself and found when I went back in that it wasn't there! What did I do wrong? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rick holden (talk • contribs) 22:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    Your contribs show this as your only edit, so you haven't actually edited another page yet. What do you mean by "about yourself"? Writing/editing articles about yourself or your company is discouraged, for obvious reasons. See WP:COI for more info. Adrian M. H. 22:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you talking about these edits?. Corvus cornix 22:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    WWW disappearing from page link

    I've just had a go at installing Wiki onto my website but have one problem.

    Whenever i type out the domain name i.e. http://www.mydomain.com/wiki/ the page loads but it removes the www from the title so that the link shows as http://mydomain.com/wiki/index.php which is really putting me off from working on this any further as I cannot find any way of stopping this.

    edit: If i change the url to www.mydomain.com (by adding in the www) all the links work fine, but if i try to create a new page by changing the page name at the end of the link, it does the same as above, it creates the empty page but removes the www from the domain name again....which php page is doing this?

    How to find new pages I created

    Is there a special search type or tool which can help me to find all the new pages I've created because I want to review the redirect pages I've made, to ensure they're properly tagged/categorised among other reasons, and searching for new pages I've originated would seem to be the easiest way to find them? Random Passer-by (talk) 22:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    When this was asked recently (trawl the archives if you're not short of time) I think that the answer was basically "not really". I have never found a way, but that certainly doesn't mean that there isn't one. It pays to keep a long watchlist, though, or keep a record of your creations. Adrian M. H. 22:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    user:Interiot will run a tool on request that does this (looking at an offline, often not very current, copy of the database). -- Rick Block (talk) 22:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    How to create a forum in wiki?

    I am trying to create a forum in a wiki I'm creating. I want it similar to Answers.Wikia. Is this do able in wiki or only wikia? I believe I need to create a Forum:Index page. If so how do I do this? Please point me in the right direction. 68.7.64.158 22:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.7.64.158 (talk) 22:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    Biographies

    I have twice now run into a biography page that was clearly copied from a website closely associated with the individual. Massoud Rajavi was quickly fixed, but it seems that Maryam Rajavi has had this issue before. Is there an appropriate template to flag such an article? The articles are not truly autobiographical, and although the content is not copied verbatim from the websites, the similarities are overwhelming. Thanks a lot. Dchall1 23:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    See WP:CP if the material is a copyright violation, or else you can tag them as "db-bio" if you feel the people are not notable enough to have their own articles. Corvus cornix 23:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    The people are definitely notable enough to stay, but I'll give this a try. Thanks! Dchall1 23:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Actaull, a copyright violation (direct copy-and-paste) should be tagged with {{db-copyvio}} Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 23:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    April 13

    i need help

    how do i find other users —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HoneyBeeBABY (talk • contribs) 00:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    If you know their username you can find them by putting User: followed by their username into the search box at the top left of the page. Or if you know what articles they have edited, you can look through the history of the article to find a link to their user page. If you're thinking that Wikipedia is some sort of social networking site like MySpace, you're mistaken. Dismas|(talk) 01:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    how to create a page

    how do i create a page of my own that people can see —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Almightycreator (talk • contribs) 00:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

    Would this be the article for "Brian Walsh" that you have created twice and has been deleted? Dismas|(talk) 01:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    how can i find the author's name and the date of publication

    to whom it may concern i am using wikepidia for a research and i need to write down the authors name and the publication date.. can u please help me?4.68.248.65

    Hi! For each particular article you are researchong, click on "Cite this article" from the links in the toolbox on the lower left hand side of the screen. This will provide Bibliographic details and preformatted citations in various styles for each article.--Fuhghettaboutit 01:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Hey! I want to write an article on wikipedia how do i write that.... And secondly when i try to upload a file, it says that its not in the correct format, plz tell me what should i do... help me

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=122384975"