I was just reviewing an article on a female poet from the Phillipines for the DYK section when I noticed she had been added to two categories that seemed to imply a sexual bias: "Filipino poets" and "Filipino writers". Now, a female person from the Phillipines is properly referred to as "Filipina", NOT "Filipino". I have, therefore, changed the categories on the article on [[Ivy Alvarez]] to reflect this and inserted appropriate redirects - but they still take one to the pages [[Category:Filipino poets]] and [[Category:Filipino writers]]. I believe these category names should be changed so they don't show a sex bias - to something like: Category:Poets from the Phillipines. Do others agree with me? If so, can someone please either make the change or tell me how to do it? I can't figure out how to move the pages. Many thanks, [[User:John Hill|John Hill]] ([[User talk:John Hill|talk]]) 10:43, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I understand that there are a lot of immature individuals out there that abuse Wikipedia by using their own ideas and place them as fictional statements for their own enjoyment under different profile works. I have been for sometime now editing assorted Wiz Khalifa (Guest appearances, Videos & Tours) while there being no protection for the page. I have then as of today (2/28/11) decided to create an account for Wikipedia with hopes of continuing to edit this page.
Okay, so on the 3RR page, it says that one exception to the 3 revert rule is for Removal of clear copyright violations or content that unquestionably violates the non-free content policy. What I'm wondering is, does a close paraphrase that mostly uses the original author's wording count as a copyright violation? --- c y m r u . l a s s(talk me, stalk me) 02:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a legal question ("substantially similar", originality, etc. in the US). You might want to tell us what you're looking at. In terms of 3RR, I'd err on the side of caution.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thinking of the page Spirited Away. The two reverts I made: 1, 2; the two edits that added the close paraphrase: 3, 4; the discussion on the userpage of another editor: here. The other edit is claiming a ref (just a typical footnote citation, nothing more) is enough to justify close paraphrasing, but that isn't what I'm reading on pages like WP:PARAPHRASE and WP:COPYVIO. I'm currently at two reverts; the editor has yet to revert my last revert, but I'm wondering if s/he did, would a subsequent reversion by me be a violation of 3RR? Thanks! --- c y m r u . l a s s(talk me, stalk me) 02:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Without looking in too much detail on the issue, if an editor such as yourself challenges some text then the defending editor should gain a consensus that it is not a copyright violation before reverting, the burden of evidence would be on him. As to whether this is a "clear" copyright violation, it's probably a matter of opinion, it would appear to be close enough to me. Personally I believe it's close enough that any neutral party would agree with you if 3rr would become an issue. Such wording should be kept to the reception section anyway. Rehevkor✉ 03:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okie doke, thanks! I don't really specialize in copyvios, so I don't have much confidence in the area. This really helped :) --- c y m r u . l a s s(talk me, stalk me) 03:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hope it helps, please be aware this is just my opinion.. I'm not an expert on much of anything. Rehevkor✉ 04:09, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have a couple of comments. On the issue of copyright violation, I think the wording of the Wikipedia article, when compared to the NYT review, is susbtantially similar. Also, bear in mind that WP:COPYVIO states that material should be removed if it "appears to be a copyright infringement". (For many reasons, the copying here probably qualifies as fair use, but based on my understanding of policy, we're not supposed to take fair use into account in this context.)
On the 3RR issue, 3 reverts does not violate 3RR; it has to be 4 (or more). You could always be accused of edit-warring, which is more subjective than the bright-line rule, but you wouldn't violate 3RR. Also the four reverts have to take place in a 24-hour period, and your second revert was more than 24 hours after your first.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong information.
Hello,
The Valley Beat was never formerly the pulse weekly. Can you please the picture associated with The Valley Beat? Somone changed the information to state that this was formerly the pulse weekly which is out of business. Can you please update this page. I changed it when you click on it, but when it is in the search engine page it has a picture of the Pulse Weekly and information that states this is formerly the Pulse Weekly. Thanks Don J The Valley Beat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.102.164.87 (talk) 04:12, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You could of edited it yourself.~~AwsomeEBE123~~(talk | Contribs) 19:48, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was lied to!
If you look on my talk page, you can see an admin said he would give me one day to keep my articles, but it hasn't even been one day, and he deleted them! Why did he lie? MickWithoutGlasses (talk) 05:04, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like the deletions (example log entry) were made about 16-17 hours after the warning post to your talk page. I see that you have posted at User talk:DragonflySixtyseven. You are more likely to get a polite reply if you assume good faith yourself; this could just be a confusion caused by differing time zones. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you take this up at User Talk:DragonflySixtyseven, and if you do not get satisfaction, see WP:DR. Forum shopping and accusing people of bad faith (even if it were not for the point that John of Reading made about times, changing one's mind is not the same as lying) will not help your case. --ColinFine (talk) 09:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I said I'd give him "1 day", not "24 hours" - and it was indeed the next day. He had responded to my earlier request to get rid of the stuff by telling me that this Hugely Popular Band he invented is Really Real: "Oh no, no, no! They are not my friends or a garage band. They are an established musical group with a hit single" (they're not). If he really wants it back, it can be e-mailed to him -- except, of course, for the stuff that had to be oversighted. He's still got one user subpage left; that's because that one's real. DS (talk) 13:59, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
did the HTML source code of Wiki recently changed?
Hi.
I did read and get lots of infos from Wiki pages in past few years.
Thank you folks.
But on the contrary I'm a newbie for writing so it seemed to be quite difficult to participate in editing.
so never done yet
and so writing this question is my first shot I think.
If I'm violating the writing code(form) a little bit now please understand I didn't really mean it.
I prefer to copy(Ctrl+C) the words of wiki and paste(Ctrl+V) to my favourite word processing programme
and then analyze and edit a little bit by my own taste and make a summary and then save it in my own PC.
Because for me it's more easy to read.
But there's a strange feeling the HTML source code of wiki pages have been changed recently.
I'm not sure but I mean the "line changing" part thing.
did the HTML source code of Wiki recently changed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.125.176.246 (talk) 06:58, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Don't abbreviate Wikipedia as Wiki! There are other wikis out there. Wikipedia is just one of them.I don't know the answer to your question; but it is irrelevant to editing. Even if you wish to edit in an external program, you must not copy and edit the displayed page but the Wiki markup. Pick 'Edit', and then copy the text from the editing box, not from the displayed page; and finally copy the text back to the editing box.
Rather than using an external program, you may find it more helpful to create an account, and then set your preferences to use WikEd, which is a much richer editor available within some browsers. --ColinFine (talk) 09:09, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(e/c) I don't think the OP intends to paste the edited version back into Wikipedia.
Your third screenshot, the one you don't want, shows that you are somehow losing the "newline" at the end of the section heading, causing the paragraph text "Tilly, the third..." to follow straight on from the heading "Early life".
I don't think there has been a change, despite the software upgrade a week ago. I've had a look at the HTML text of the current Meg Tilly page, and at an archived version from 2009. Both end the heading with a "</h2>" tag followed by a "<p>" tag.
Can you tell us which browser and operating system you are using? And which word processing application you are copying into? I'm using Windows Vista, Firefox, and either Notepad or MS Word; I haven't been able to make that newline disappear. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi folks its me again. Thank you for your answers.
To ColinFine, thank you for your tip about "le Wikipedia" account. And picking 'edit' means click, not drag, right? I'm not sure.
To John of Reading, thank you for checking the 2009 one, and that's the expression I've been looking for. Yes, I'm "losing" it. Reading your words, it seems nothing of the Wikipedia is changed much, So I think I've got to think about the word processor. Maybe I messed up the configuration.
I'm using Windows XP, Internet Explorer 8.0.6001.18702, and Hangul Word Processor made by Hancom. I don't think you're familiar with south Korean made HWP. of course there's a Wikipedia page about the programme and the company. I can ask the company by phone. Thank you again for checking the old page of Meg Tilly and making the fact sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.125.176.246 (talk) 10:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I do lose the "newline" when pasting out of IE8 into Notepad. But I can work round this by viewing the printable version of the article, and copying the text from there. That's an option on the left hand side, under "Print/export". Any good? -- John of Reading (talk) 10:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah well that's some kind of a way too. Lovely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.125.176.246 (talk) 10:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But pasting from IE6 to Notepad 5.1 I don't lose the newline. Fascinating. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:39, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After adding articles to the book, and following links, the book creator automatically resets the article count to zero and removes all pages from the list.
I started over again, several times, using Opera Browser. After the page count goes up and the books are listed, at a certain random point all pages are just magically erased and the page count of my book goes back to zero. I clicked on view the book, and sure enough, the list of pages was empty. This happened several times.
I logged in with Firefox browser, and got the same problem several times again. All the pages I included in my book just disappeared.
Please advise. I wasted two hours browsing and trying to compile the book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alleghenia (talk • contribs) 08:00, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How many pages are you trying to add? I just did a 33 page book without any problem. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Could this be anything to with the OP not being autoconfirmed? The right side panel at Help:Books says that some book functions are disabled for new users. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:10, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
I have some errors with book creator. I never had this problem before, but since the past few weeks, whenever i create a book and hover the mouse over a link the "Add page to Book" option doesn't come. It does comes for some links. I am using chrome latest version. Is this a known problem/update to newer version of book creater that is causing this?
CHROME: Same issue here. I logged in to my Wiki account using Chrome, added several pages to a new book. What I did in some cases was directly hover over the link until it gave me the option to add the page, and in some other cases, opened the page in a new tab to ensure that they contained the content I wanted. I got some to add, got a chapter made, went back to add some more, and it LOST my book (didn't even save it in my directory). I lost the book three times. I finally started keeping a text list of the pages, and will try again from another machine and a different browser. It seems Opera, Firefox, Chrome are having this trouble, I'll try IE (much to my unmitigated disgust). I am not a new user; I have been here for years although I'm not a high-volume contributor, and almost exclusively for minor spelling/grammar/syntax errors. Dianaramadani (talk) 12:25, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Who closes the AfD?
Out of curiosity (well, not entirely, since I'm participating in an AfD, see contribs), who closes the AfDs, as in decide to delete, keep, merge, etc? I know (from the AfD mainpage) that it's either an admin or highly reputable non-admin, but just who chooses them and who are they? By who are they I mean do they have to have some kind of knowledge of the subject? Zlqq2144 (talk) 09:35, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(non/admin comment) Admins are volunteers too. If admin X closes AfD Y, it is because he/she chooses to do it; and the same goes for all the administrative tasks. Expert knowledge of the article subject-matter is not needed, since the decision must be based on the agreed Deletion policy. There's more at Deletion guidelines for administrators. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:53, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-admins can only close under certain conditions, generally non-controversial keeps, as described at Wikipedia:Non-admin closure. Whether an admin can be trusted to close deletion discussions sensibly is one of the key things people try to determine when evaluating someone's suitability to become an admin; anyone who shows poor understanding of the deletion policy or poor judgement during a deletion discussion is unlikely to be elected. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 14:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you've !voted in an AfD, then you should not close it. The closer needs to be someone totally uninvolved in the discussion. Mjroots (talk) 15:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nobility
I am writing articles on English Wikipedia with lists of legislative speakers. Some of them, especially in the German Landtage, belonged to the nobility. Shall I add the peerage to their names? Shall I write Günther Graf von Versleben or just Günther von Versleben. Some German Wikipedia articles list their names, while other list both their names and titles. In the Portugese Wikipedia article about the Speakers of the Brazilian House of Representatives full titles are included. Please help me. Best wishes Mbakkel2 11:19, 1 March 2011 (CET)
As a rule of thumb, link to the article about them, if there is one already, using the format that article uses. We're not big on honorifics in the English-language Wikipedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:26, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Some of the German article titles contain information about their peerage, while others don't. Best wishes! Mbakkel2. 22:10, 1 ;arch 2011 (CET)
Looking for a template
I'm looking for the template that goes at the top of an article to notify readers about a move proposal under discussion on the talk page. Roger (talk) 10:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For whatever reason the main templates used for this are not listed at the page linked above (though they should be). They are {{movenotice}} and {{move header}}. Note that placing such notices in the article is completely optional.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Sign me in globally" feature
What does the "Sign me in globally" checkbox on the login page do?--Mikespedia is on Wikipedia! 10:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it means that you sign in your accounts on other language wikipedia as well (e.g. French, German, etc) Zlqq2144 (talk) 11:17, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
could you please help me, im looking for the above name of my watch but can not find it anywher, many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.185.138 (talk) 19:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of surviving veterans of World War I made me think about this. What happens when there is a list of "Last surviving veterans of something", and even the last remaining person on that list dies? Has there even been such a case previously? At least for famous wars, there are still plenty of veterans of World War II left, but all veterans of the American Civil War, or the War of Finland, or the Napoleonic Wars, or the Hundred Years' War, etc., died long before Wikipedia was invented. Is this article therefore to set a precedent? Should we then simply delete the article, or edit it to mention "there are no living veterans of World War I", or what? JIP | Talk 20:01, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned a couple of times in that Afd, when all the survivors have died, the list should be made into a redirect to the most relevant article, so that the edit history is preserved per the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and GFDL. – ukexpat (talk) 20:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
From List of last living war veterans#Mexican Revolution onwards there are several wars where the last veteran died in Wikipedia's time, but I don't know whether any of them had articles for surviving veterans. They are smaller wars with less interest in English speaking countries. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:36, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
inquriy
Dear/Madam,
l,Mrs Jessica, l,m a Registered Nurse from Nigeria,i want verify if my registered nurse certificate can be acceptable here in Berlin Germany for work.can you please give me details or information how it can be used here. contact me through my mail address.email address removed Chzz ► 21:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
thanks God bless.
Jessica. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.186.105.17 (talk) 21:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry. This page is only for questions about how to use Wikipedia. Chzz ► 21:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've written a page for "Motty Perry" a year ago, and it received a note saying:
"A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. "
Everything on the page has references and links, there is nothing there that is not supported by facts.
How can I get the note deleted?
Reference 1 is a CV, a primary source. Ref 2 does not work ("The requested page could not be found"). Ref 3, fmep, requires a login so I could not check it at this time. Ref 4, ref 5, ref 6, and ref 7 do not seem to mention Perry. The final reference is a directory listing.
Therefore, at this time, the article does not seem to show "Significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the source", which is the general notability guideline. If you are able to provide more references (which are reliable sources, and show substantial coverage), please detail them on the talk page of the article, which is Talk:Motty Perry, and please put {{Request edit}}, which will alert others to check it.
Hi, sorry to annoy you, I just have a problem with the Main Page in the last week, in the search field with firefox 3.6.13.
The problem is sometimes when I click on search to look for an article, the greyed word doesn't go away and if for example i'd look for chicken, I get searchchicken,
it does not happen
that often with firefox 4 beta 12; I didn't test internet explorer myself.
I'll check back later, maybe it's a browser problem and someone can help me make it work.
Thanks in Advance, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.31.235.40 (talk) 01:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
edit by me, sorry, forgot to sign.190.31.235.40 (talk) 01:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I did get the same with a rusty old IE6.0, but only once when it was FAR from finished loading the page . Maybe that helps some techie locate the root of the problem. It is definitely not a pure FF issue. Hope that helps. User.Zero.Zero.Zero.One (talk) 16:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, I see. The last time Miszabot archived it was October 23, and someone's been doing it manually at intervals since then. Someone's altered the archiving configuration in the interval since the last successful bot archive; I have just reset with what I believe to be the correct settings; let's see if that fixes it while I look further into what happened. Gonzonoir (talk) 13:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The bot archived the board last night, so it's working again. I've left a note on the noticeboard's talk page in case my fix overwrote any desired settings. Gonzonoir (talk) 08:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How do expand on an existing article (i.e. add to an existing article)
How do expand on an existing article (i.e. add to an existing article)
That's a new one on me. Since no one has an answer yet on this general board, if the problem is still occurring, it may be worth asking this question at the Village Pump#Technical, for input from users better versed in the site's technical operation. Gonzonoir (talk) 13:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Reset your browser cache! maybe this helps. mabdul 13:22, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would suspect that you have malware on your machine. I may be wrong, though. --ColinFine (talk) 18:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Turns out it was something with my hosts file. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.8.177.110 (talk) 05:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, what you have there is personal and completely inappropriate for the User area on Wikipedia: WP:UPNOT.Naraht (talk) 13:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If I were to become a WP:N person, which I hope to be within the next year and a half (I submitted my first script to a production studio last week), I think my online poker career may be notable. I use my userspace to maintain biographical content, until I become notable.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:18, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You aren't currently a notable person and Wikipedia doesn't deal in "If"s like that. WP:CrystalNaraht (talk) 15:09, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Userfication is the common solution to biographies of currently non-notable people. I see it suggested at WP:AFD all the time.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What you have isn't a biography, it is a technical analysis more complete than those of Chris Moneymaker (just to pick someone who is notable for poker) as well as issues about WP:AUTOBIO.Naraht (talk) 15:48, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The tabs at issue are not the biography, but rather a compilation of detailed statistics. If I were to have a biography, only small portions of that might be relevant. Yes the analysis is more detailed than career summaries of all notable poker players, but much of the information is publically available to those wishing to dig through www.sharkscope.com and www.pokerprolabs.com. The full bio is on a different page and this is a subpage of the full bio. I am not here to argue about what portions of my content might or might not be excised should I become notable, but rather I am here looking for help on technical matters.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and the compilation of detailed statistics doesn't belong on Wikipedia *at all*, even in the user area. What you have on your userpage is "Writings, information, discussions, and activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals" to quote WP:UPNOT. I'm not doubting whether it is referencable, I'm doubting whether it is relevant". You are correct that you aren't here to argue whether those should be excised, the proper place for that is an MFD. Naraht (talk) 16:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If I were a notable person, poker performance could be an encyclopedic topic well within the realm of wikipedia's goals. Many people who are notable have content related to poker performance. This is not a list of Xbox high scores or intramural football results.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't even related to how you *want* to be famous. If the screenwriter for Toy Story 3 got a wikipedia page, then their poker stats wouldn't be notable for that either. And yes, I believe that it does fall into the category with Xbox high scores or intermural football results.Naraht (talk) 18:04, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are lots of people who are notable for things in the movie and TV industry who have poker content in their articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Name one with anything *close* to the information that you have in your pages. (Not that this means anything about information for someone who isn't notable, but I'm curious)Naraht (talk) 21:38, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The point is not what is in other articles. I could point to numerous articles that I have authored that are uncommonly detailed for their subject matter. E.G., for a sports agent, Rob Pelinka is uncommonly detailed. If I become a credited creator and screenwriter of TV shows, my own bio will be uncommonly detailed if I can source anything.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:45, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Odd problem
I'm not sure how to approach this problem, so I'm throwing it out there (I hope).
I'm not an experienced wiki-editor, so please bear with me.
My problem is with the "frozen dead guy days" site (FDGD) and a proposed new site "frozen dead guy" (FDG).
(BTw...I'm the caretaker for the FDG and Director of the IC Institute)
THese are two distinct topics, although at this time the "FDGD" site sort of covers both.
One is a Festival, put on by the Chamber of commerce in Nederland and celebrates Neds most famous dead guy....been going on for 10 years now.
THe other is Bredo Morstoel, AKA the Frozen Dead Guy, who has been dead and cryonically preserved for over 20 years.
THe FDG is much more than the FDGD....although they are related.
I tried to create a "FDG" wiki-page, but it re-directed me right to the existing FDGD page.
My questions:
1. Should there be two separate pages on this? and, if so, how to set it up (in the usual way, I assume) and remove the re-direct.(no idea how to do that).
2. Should I set up a page for "Bredo Morstoel", and just tie it in to the festival page? But, should the info relevant to the FDG be removed from the FDGD site?
Not sure how I can hear about this....feel free to contact me
Bo the Iceman
Iceman (talk) 07:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Iceman (talk) 07:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Q: Should there be two separate pages on this? Depends on how much information about each topic has been published. The Frozen Dead Guy Days article main topic would be the annual celebration, but it could discuss the Frozen Dead Guy as well. A Frozen Dead Guy article main topic would be the frozen aspect of the person, but it could discuss the annual celebration. A Bredo Morstoel or Bredo Morstøl article main topic would be a biography on Morstoel (childhood, career, death, etc.), which also could bring up Frozen Dead Guy and Frozen Dead Guy Days. Q. remove the re-direct.(no idea how to do that). If you type over the re-direct text "#REDIRECT [[Frozen Dead Guy Days]]" inside the Frozen Dead Guy page, it removes the redirect. Q: Should I set up a page for "Bredo Morstoel"? It depends on what the reliable sources have chosen to write about. My gut feeling is that all this can be covered by the Frozen Dead Guy Days article. However, when there is enough text in a given subtopic to merit its own article, that text can be summarized from the present article and a link provided to the more detailed article. See Wikipedia:Summary style. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy deleted from my User Space within hours!
Hi
I was working on an article (my first) in my user space, which was deleted by an administrator within hours named RHaworth.
The help text says" Consider creating the article on your user page first. If you have a user id, (which you must have if you are considering creating a new article), you also have your own area to start working on a new article; you can get it in shape there, take your time, and only move it into the "live" Wikipedia once it is ready for prime time. (Note: the Article Wizard has an option to create these kind of draft pages.)"
So I did not expect a work in progress to be deleted in this way, as it was not publicly available.
Admins such as RHaworth are a sure fire way of putting off any new contributors to wikipedia. (probably his cause I would suspect).
The page was deleted because it was deemed to be unambiguous promotion. It may have appeared that way as it was by no means finished.
Is there a mechanism for complaint about this issue?
I see that RHaworth restored User:Mattgallop/Cakeboy. Your post to his talk page was a good way to go. —teb728tc 09:35, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tarique Mustafa's Page Recreation
Hi Wiki Help Desk,
I have a few questions regarding to my article that has been deleted. I was trying to recreate that page 2 times with some updated references from many different "reliable" sources that I had from doing google search. However, it keeps being deleted. Now, I plan to create the "brand new" article which I want to name "Tarique Mustafa"; however, Wiki administrator offered me another astonishing obstacle about locking that article's name. I tried to contact the administrator that deleted my article but it seems like he is busy and does not have time to take a look on my problem.
So would you please to help me to solve this problem in order for me to post this article?
As the OP appears to have found already, Cirt is apparently unavailable at the moment (and hasn't edited since Feb 18th), but please note it's only worth proceeding to DRV if you really think Cirt *did* misinterpret consensus, since that's all the DRV investigates. Since the AfD was unanimous and apparently uncontroversial at the time, I'd suggest it's not typical of those that are overturned at DRV. The OP didn't seem to be objecting to the original deletion, but to the deletion of attempts at recreation. For that issue, teb728's suggestion of developing a userspace draft seems to me like the best approach. Gonzonoir (talk) 12:56, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for all your helps. I have done 2 things: creating a draft in my user space (Q: How long does it regularly take to be censored and moved to article space? ), I also have posted my request to DRV. Heomap1983 (talk) 19:31, 2 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heomap1983 (talk • contribs) 19:11, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When (if ever) you demonstrate the notability of the subject, it should take only a few minutes to get the attention of an admin and have him review the article and move it to article space. So far, however, I can’t find any indication of why he would be important or significant—much less demonstrating how he would meet the criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (people). Beside that, the only inline notes merely identify companies mentioned, which make him seem all the less notable because they point up that those companies do not have articles on Wikipedia. Meanwhile the items in the “References” section have no apparent connection to assertions in the article body, and those references that are not by Mustapha or nexTier Networks appear to be based on nexTier Networks press releases—and so are not independent. —teb728tc 07:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have a question right here. All the press and achievements have been made for nexTier Networks and published by Tarique Mustafa, and he is the founder of nexTier Networks, Inc. So all of the nexTier's products and achievements should belong to Tarique Mustafa legally, shouldn't they? Thanks Heomap1983 (talk) 18:48, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, how can I get this article's title unlocked?I was trying to move User:heomap1983/TariqueMustafa into "Tarique Mustafa" but its title has been locked by administrator and I can not move it. Heomap1983 (talk) 05:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The title is protected to prevent you from recreating it without demonstrating notability. Only an admin can move the article. —teb728tc 07:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So what should I do now? I have tried to contact the one who deleted my article? but it seems like he is busy now. Can you show me the process and whom I will contact? Thank you Heomap1983 (talk) 17:57, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How can I prevent archiving of a box at the top of my talk page?
I want to set up MiszaBot for archiving of my talk page. I have an ambox template at the top of my talk page to inform readers about how they should talk to me. Now my question is, how can I prevent the bot from archiving the template? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:12, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo says that the bot won't archive anything before the first second-level heading (i.e. ==Heading==) so you'll be fine. BencherliteTalk 13:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I don't think it archives without a date of some sort on it. CTJF83 13:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you're interested, you can put the contents from the ambox template in User talk:Toshio Yamaguchi/Editnotice to provide a message box shown above your talk page edit window when a user edits the page. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:28, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just another question. I set up MiszaBot to archive any threads with no replies in 28 days. Will this count from now on or will it archive old threads soon, as I have some messages already much older than 28 days? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:45, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It will work on old threads (i.e. ones on the page now), not just threads started after you add archiving. BencherliteTalk 13:47, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to all of you for your help and the quick replies. Its much appreciated. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you make a user sub-page, such as User talk:Toshio Yamaguchi/Talk header, and put it all in there. Then, at the top of your talk page, transclude that by just putting {{User talk:Toshio Yamaguchi/Talk header}}. For example, I'm currently using User:Chzz/talkheader3 on my talk page. Chzz ► 15:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is anyone else noticing a general slowdown of Wikipedia over the last few days? Are there any known problems in that regard? 86.184.108.192 (talk) 14:44, 2 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Hi
Me and a few mates started a Wikia page so that we could easily record our F1 2010 PS3 Championship results as we thought we wouldn't be able to do it on here. The only problem is they dont have the FLAGICON template for adding flags and this is a vital part of our pages. Could you inform me of all the templates i need to copy across for this to work? Or if there is an easier way of doing this?
Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradley1314 (talk • contribs) 15:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is hard to really help, for two reasons;
Firstly, because complex templates are often dependent not only on other templates, but also on the configuration of the specific wiki. For example, I do not know if Wikia uses the CSS class "flagicon" which that template employs.
Secondly, because we're here to develop Wikipedia, and not other wikis.
Still, whilst I cannot supply a comprehensive answer, I can perhaps point you in the right direction, if you wish to do the digging yourself:
This search shows the sub-pages of that template, and
I wrote a user subpage on another wiki that tells how to port templates from Wikipedia to other wikis. See Appropedia:User:Teratornis/Template porting: theory and practice. Since I have not ported the particular template family you mention, there may be additional wrinkles I have not seen before. But I've ported enough templates to have seen most of the possible snags and gotchas by now, probably. --Teratornis (talk) 20:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The great difficulty of template porting is one of several factors that reduce the probability of success when you start a new wiki. That's one reason why Wikipedia's self-imposed content limitations have large consequences. You can start your own wiki to publish some subset of "the sum of human knowledge" that Wikipedia refuses (such as procedural knowledge), but it takes an astounding effort to replicate the same editing environment you take for granted here. WikiProject Transwiki is an attempt to reduce that effort, but they haven't gotten far yet. Template porting is a hassle even within the various Wikimedia Foundation project wikis. If Jimbo wants his Wikia to succeed, I'd recommend he try to produce a turnkey solution - if a Wikia user wants to use a template from Wikipedia, they should only have to click a menu, not embark on a research project. A wiki without a big library of useful templates is rather spartan and frustrating for anyone used to editing on Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 21:08, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For that, you would just transclude the page by putting the name of page in two brackets like this: {{name of page}}. There are problems, though, because you would transclude the entire page and not just the list of Millionaire shows. Also, using transcluded pages in the mainspace is probably not allowed except for templates.-RHM22 (talk) 13:56, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like there are two separate tables containing similar information. If articles would make use of an identical table about WWTBAM, you could use things like "<noinclude>" to exclude things from transclusion, but you might just want to create a template consistent with Template:WWTBAM question and Template:WWTBAM series, such as Template:WWTBAM varients. Then you need only add {{WWTBAM varients}} to the article to have the information appear. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 16:35, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it's not a problem for me that the whole article is transcluded, because the article consists of 1 sentence and a table. The problem is, using {{List of national variants in Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?}} doesn't work... Kubek15write/sign 15:59, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's because when you transclude by just putting a name, with no namespace prefix, it assumes you are referring to a template - and of course there is no "Template:List of national variants in Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?"
You can force transclusion an article page, using a colon prefix - such as, {{:sausage}}.
However please note that it is generally a bad idea to transclude one article into another. It makes things very confusing, for readers and for editors, and doesn't really serve a purpose; we can easily just link to another article using a template such as {{main}} (which would display "Main article: List of national variants in Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?). It is far preferable to simply link to other articles, possibly using summary style. Chzz ► 18:49, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The primary exception to this are the *truly* humungous pages where they are so large that having the entire thing on one page makes editing difficult. However these are few and far between (assume page size > 100K)Naraht (talk) 21:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) You can transclude a mainspace page by putting a colon in front like {{:List of national variants in Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?}}. This is however not a good solution for List of television game show franchises#Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? It would be better to omit the long list and link to the main list instead with {{Main|List of national variants in Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?}} which renders:
How do I add source and license information on a file?
I'm really sorry: I've done a bunch of searches and can't seem to find it out, and can't figure it out from the few pages I found.
I've tried to look at other files, pressed edit, but can't see how they put in the information.
One of my files is marked for deletion, so I am a little pressed for time, and trying to figure this out before the file gets deleted--I apologize for cluttering this up, if the information is easily found somewhere and I am just failing to do so.
I don't have time to respond but it looks like the OP is talking about adding license info to File:Matthewfeiner.jpg. Dismas|(talk) 17:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, they are...I already pointed them in the right direction and notified them. Thanks! —ASPENSTI—TALK—CONTRIBUTIONS 17:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot folks: this is very helpful. I've got it now!--Davidstreever (talk) 18:42, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Uploading Non-Free, Copyrighted Images
I work for an educational institution in Nevada and we recently developed a new publication on Fire Adapted Communities. This publication includes a graphic which we designed depicting a Fire Adapted Community and is possibly the only one in existence. The graphic is copyrighted by us and would be a helpful visual aid for anyone visiting the Fire Adapted Communities page. My question is how do I upload this image? As far as I can tell this image would meet all the requirements set by Wikipedia for allowing non-free content. Further, I'll be sure to provide all the supplemental information required by Wikipedia to post this type of image. However, I can't figure out how to post the picture. Thank you for any help 18:31, 2 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grantnejedlo (talk • contribs)
If it is the only one in existence, then it is likely to be original research; also I suspect it would not meet the non-free content policy. It is hard to judge though; can you supply a link to the specific image? Chzz ► 18:38, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively, why not just donate the image freely, see WP:IOWN? – ukexpat (talk) 18:45, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Chzz, a copy of the publication and copyrighted image we'd like to post can be viewed on page 3 of this link - www.unce.unr.edu/publications/files/nr/2010/sp1010.pdf. I'm not certain if this qualifies as original research, but this is a university publication that has been peer-reviewed and approved by a broad range of experts. Any help wading through Wikipedia's rules on non-free image posting would be greatly appreciated 19:55, 2 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grantnejedlo (talk • contribs)
Releasing the image under a free content license (such as {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}) would be simpler and more beneficial than wading through the fair use rules. See Commons:COM:OTRS for the procedure to obtain permission from the copyright holder and document it properly. Not all Wikipedians like the idea of fair use images on Wikipedia, since it contradicts Wikipedia's stated mission to provide reusable content. (Even within Wikipedia, fair use images are irritating because we usually cannot display them in more than one article, and some of the other language Wikipedias forbid fair use images altogether, which would complicate translating the article in question to other languages.) The fair use rules could change at any time, or fair use images could disappear from Wikipedia entirely. Therefore freely licensed images are more desirable. If the copyright holder of this image is unwilling to license the image freely, another option is for someone to draw another image that conveys the same ideas in a sufficiently original way. See Idea-expression divide - a particular expression of an idea is copyrightable, but the underlying ideas are not. I am not a lawyer, but I think if it is possible to draw an equivalent diagram to convey the same ideas, then there is no fair use rationale for the original image. That is, for us to claim fair use for the original image, there must be something unique about that particular image that we cannot convey with a replacement image. That can apply to images of particular people, or artistic works, for example. But for a mere technical diagram, it would seem many equivalent diagrams should be possible. --Teratornis (talk) 20:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In answer to your question of how to upload: When you have 8 more posts you will be “autoconfirmed” and thus able to upload files as described at Help:Files. —teb728tc 20:49, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
n-dash or hyphen
In my articles I write about office-holders and dates. Is it compulsory to write n-dash between two dates? For instance September 1 [n-dash] September 2001. I have written several articles using hyphens. Hope you can help me. Best wishes! Mbakkel2 22:09, 2 March 2011 (CET)
An en dash is the first item in the "Insert" menu bar beneath an edit window; clicking on that will insert an en dash where your cursor is positioned in the edit window. And yes, you should be using en dashes rather than hyphens. Deor (talk) 21:21, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am writing from the New York Public Library (NYPL.)
It appears all our IP addresses have been blocked.
No one on site can edit or add content.
Please advise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.88.146 (talk) 21:04, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, deleted contributions are removed from my watch list and contributions page. For example, I tagged two "articles" for db-a3 this afternoon. They have both since been deleted and both disappeared from my contributions. I only know their fate because I searched for them and saw they'd been deleted. Is there a way of keeping track of all of my contributions; deleted or otherwise? — Fly by Night (talk) 21:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Did you want the edit count, or a way to see all your edits? CTJF83 22:02, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to see the pages themselves, and not just am edit count. — Fly by Night (talk) 02:33, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t believe there is a way for non-admins to see deleted contributions. But what you may be looking for is: When a page on your watch list is deleted, a deletion entry shows on the watch list; the edit is gone, but the deletion shows. —teb728tc 22:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I see. Thanks for that. — Fly by Night (talk) 02:33, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
March 3
Spaces
In two different articles today, I saw different editors change a space to  . I've seen that done for non-keyboard characters like em and en dashes, but never for a plain old space. In one instance, I changed it back (see here), not because it mattered in terms of the article's appearance, but because it needlessly cluttered the underlying code and edit window, and because I'm anti-clutter. Is there something I'm missing here?--Bbb23 (talk) 01:07, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Non-breaking spaces (in particular the second subentry under the first bulleted entry). Different browsers and window widths will cause lines to break at different places when articles are viewed, and the judicious use of nonbreaking spaces prevents the awkwardness of something like "3, 2008" appearing at the beginning of a line, when the preferable break would be after (or before) "December 3". Deor (talk) 02:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It relates to 'wrapping' of text, over lines. A 'nbsp' is a non-breaking space, that means the browser will not split the word onto a new line.
For example, if you wrote "I am 2 m tall" it might appear (on some very narrow screen) as;
I am 2
m tall
If, however, you put "I am 2 m tall" it would put either;
I am 2 m
tall
or
I am
2 m tall
...ie, it will not 'break' the line on the space in-between the number and the unit-of-measure.
There's lots about this in WP:MOSUNIT - but frankly, it is best avoided by using {{convert}}, which does the hard work for you :-) Chzz ► 02:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, multiple plain spaces will collapse into one in HTML, and if one needs multiple spaces, nbsp does that, too. For example, in an article about malware, the need to mention files named like "me.gif .exe" may arise. These used to trick casual users into ignoring the "exe" tail of the malware and thinking that the file name was "me.gif" . User.Zero.Zero.Zero.One (talk) 15:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, everyone, that was a lot more information than I thought I'd get. Looks like I should not have reverted the edit. It also looks like it would be a lot of work to fix all the dates in Wikipedia with non-breaking spaces. Not worth it, either, in my view. I'm not sure that {{convert}} would help in this example, although I honestly admit I didn't have the patience to read all the documentation.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:11, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dude, where's my talk page archive?
I've been tempted to WP:BOLDly prematurely archive a discussion at the talk page for Food and Drug Administration which falls afoul of WP:NOTFORUM, but there's nominally an archive page already, which is a redlink. I know that there's been more discussion on that page in the past, so it's clear that there should be something in that archive, but where is it? SDY (talk) 01:54, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are actually two archives, but they don't have the "United States" qualifier. See here for the first. I'm not sure how to fix it, but I'm sure someone else can.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, I figured it out. Apparently the last time the page was moved the talk page didn't follow. I put in a request for a move. SDY (talk) 02:28, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Adding a summary section to a wikipedia article
I am writing an article about a company and want to add a section with the logo and short summary about the number of employees, headquarters, Year founded, etc like here for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MicroConstants - the one in the upper right corner. How do I do that? Could not find the info in any of the help pages. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buhtelka (talk • contribs) 02:07, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The first time I tried to change an article, you said I needed to have my citations- even though a conversation (as seen in anthropology) acutally counts as a credible source (i.e. "From the horses mouth" counts in some circles if not on Wiki).... I have DONE THAT- and yet the change I made is STILL being called into question--
doesn't NME count as a credible source? why not make a list of WHAT DOES count then!!?!
"Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." and if it is it doesn't seem to matter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.30.221 (talk) 02:48, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It may help a bit to provide links to those edits that you made so that we can see if maybe we can figure out exactly what the issue was. Dismas|(talk) 12:30, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians. The revert from the IP editor was made by ClueBot NG, an advanced anti-vandalism robot. Unfortunately, these techniques sometimes generate odd false positives for some edits, and this is such a case by the IP editor. I apologize for your frustration with the robot's removal of your work; however, if the bot makes such false positives again, you are free to revert ClueBot NG himself to keep your work on the Wiki, and ClueBot NG will not revert you on that article again while you continue editing. -- SnoFox(t|c) 16:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How ..
Hi. You Know How People Do Done With CheckMark. Or Put Up Tags For Improvement. How Do You Do That.173.178.93.250 (talk) 03:17, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In general, templates are transcluded by enclosing them in double braces {{ }}. The "done" check mark can be added by typing {{Done}}. For the article-improvement templates, see the links to such lists as "Sources / citations / references", "Cleanup", and "Maintenance" at Wikipedia:Template messages. Deor (talk) 03:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yay. Now I Know How To Do It. Thank You.173.178.93.250 (talk) 21:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How much traffic comes from outside U.S.?
Many friends of mine visit English Wikipedia, not our own language due to the quality of the content. I would like to know how much traffic comes from outside U.S. How can I get the data on that? cooldenny (talk) 03:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look through those myself and as far as I can see none quite answers the question. Alexa's site info for Wikipedia does include a list of the ten countries generating the most traffic and a breakdown of the total proportion of traffic coming from each (see here), but that's for the domain wikipedia.org, not specifically the English-language subdomain. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - Some useful docs are linked to from this Wordpress Blog: [2] which you might find useful... although, I don't think that is exactly what you are looking for. Darigan (talk) 09:58, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And edits on English Wikipedia by country of origin English Wikipedia... still not traffic though :( Darigan (talk) 10:01, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like also to urge you and your friends to work on improving the Wikipedia articles in your own language(s) as a matter of love for your own language community. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:34, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There's plenty of native English-speaking traffic from outside the US! I notice that today (3 March) six out of the seven did you know entries on the main page relate to the UK. --ColinFine (talk) 23:18, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorting Tables with MMM DD YYYY dates
I'm trying to create a stortable wikitable with a bunch of dates that go like "Jan 01 2001" (MMM DD YYYY). However it doesn't sort properly; sorts the months in alphabetical order rather than everything in chronological order. How do I make a sortable table sort this arrangement of dates properly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabe A (talk • contribs) 05:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for helping, but I've already put in 400+ dates in my table, and going back in and wrapping each one would take ages. Is there no way to add a command that would tell the table to sort the format style of my dates properly?
Example of problem:
I gave it a try by copying the table onto a unix box and using sed to alter the dates. Unfortunately, this lost the chinese characters. Anyone got any other ideas? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naraht (talk • contribs) 11:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Inputting all the Chinese would be much easier to do then rearranging all the dates. I would be glad to settle with that if it left me with sortable dates, because I don't want to change the dates nor my style of date formatting 68.224.145.95 (talk) 17:55, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I wrote about 'Secured by design' a while ago and I need to update links and would like to add to it, however i have missed placed my log on details, would you be able to help?
Kind regards
[name and content details removed for your own good] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.36.215.89 (talk) 12:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The history page for the article concerned will show the user names of those who have edited it. WP:Passwords tells you how ro retrieve a forgotten password. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:57, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed your contact details, since we won't contact you that way, we can't use that information to check your log on information, and other people might use the information for nefarious purposes. Try reading Help:Logging in#What if I forget the password? Let me know if you need further help (click "talk" on my signature and leave me a message that way). BencherliteTalk 13:01, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to get images from other wikipedias moved to commons? This file doesn't appear to be in commons, and the equivalent English article Leona Florentino lacks a picture. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 14:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If an image on another Wikipedia complies with Commons licensing requirements then it can be moved to Commons. However the image information page for that image does not appear to contain any information as to its copyright status and without that, it is not eligible to be moved to Commons. – ukexpat (talk) 15:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It has often been the scene of performances, as guests, of several world champions in various types of magic and, moreover, it has been an important element of dissemination of magic, magicians and Iberian congregation and also as a privileged site of discovery , launch and promotion of new talents. It is held annually in September and includes various aspects, including contests, galas with guests, conferences, magic shows, street shows.
It is organized with the support of the Municipality of Valongo by an experienced and qualified commission headed by António Cardinal and also composed by Fernando Castro, Salazar Ribeiro and Manuel Alves counting still with a set of several collaborators. Members of the organizing committee have devoted decades to the art of magic, such as being magicians but also in the qualities of lecturers, association leaders in magic, members of boards and specialty authors. Some members have previously been linked to organizations like MagicPorto, Festival of Saint John Bosco and the International Festival of Figueira da Foz.
Besides being the oldest magical event in the country, it presents itself as the reference event in Portugal, and has increasingly assumed a major role in the international magic with its merits being praise on several industry publications and blogs.
The MagicValongo has relied on the qualities of the guest speakers and competitors from Spain, USA, China, France, Argentina, Germany, Macau, Netherlands, Brazil, Sweden, Japan, East Timor, Belgium, among many more. They have also participated in the annual magic show booths representing dozens of houses from different magical places in Europe, Asia and the Americas. There is also the usual share of foreign associations accredited by FISM, and also including the official participation of several senior leaders of that world federation of magic.
In an official newsletter - which is provided in the link below - the FISM (International Federation of Magic Societies), November 2005, was MagicValongo symbolically considered 'the wonderfull small scale convention. "
It is an event with a life close to two decades and it has been conducted continuously since 1992 and has enjoyed every year with approximately two hundred participants, which, as already seen, come from a multitude of countries from almost every continent.
Several of those who were awarded in the MagicValongo competitions came later to be honored with important titles, such as for example, FISM world champions (Helder), or vice champion (David Sousa) or national champions, for example from Spain (Rubiales).
The MagicValongo takes place in the town of Valongo, and several of its parishes, Ermesinde in particular, which is located a few kilometers from Porto and also a few kilometers from the internationally airport.
On 17, 18 and 19 September 2010, held the 19th edition of this event with international prestige. Once more with a world champion, Soma. And again with great success.
In September Valongo has more magic!
External sources
Site oficial
A Voz de Ermesinde, 30-09-2008: Grande Gala Internacional II do MagicValongo
At the top of this page it says: "This page is only for questions about how to use Wikipedia. Are you in the right place?" Please read and take note. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Question about signatures
As of now, my signature "User.Zero.Zero.Zero.One (talk) 14:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)" is a bit on the lengthy side (although not illegally long) WRT what Wikipedia:Sign calls length 'in display' and 'in markup'. My question is if I may shorten it to "User.0.0.0.1" for an IP-like look.
- 0.0.0.1 is far from a believable IP address, so I think it can't be called IP forgery.
- The "Never use another editor's signature" paragraph states that I may not use a different user's name or signature, and AFAIK, no user 'user.0.0.0.1' exists. Is there a way to check that?
- Would it look 'substantially' like a different user's sig in the sense of that paragraph? (I know that one wikipedian's callsign is 'UserOne' but IMO the 0's make a substantial difference. Don't they?)
- Is there a shorter way to link to my talk page, e.g. some internal user ID which expands to "User:User.Zero.Zero.Zero.One", to allow for a shorter signature 'in markup' ?
- Of course, I don't want to change the way the links work. That would constitute disruptive signature in the sense of Wikipedia:Sign.
- Will changes to my signature affect my sig retroactively? I.e. will for example this instance of my signature change? --> User.Zero.Zero.Zero.One (talk) 14:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks in advance.[reply]
Two firm answers: Special:ListUsers confirms there is no user named 'user.0.0.0.1'; and a change to your signature won't affect any posts that are already signed with the old signature.
One comment: since you haven't created a user page, you could shorten your signature by linking to your talk page only; User.0.0.0.1
One opinion: I think that 0.0.0.1 is clearly not a real IP address, and with "user" on the front as well there would be no confusion. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note however that User:User0001 was blocked indefinitely eight minutes after creation for "Inappropriate user name, vandalism". PrimeHunter (talk) 17:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've changed my sig and added a notice to my talk page. If somebody's wikiname is too close to my new sig, he/she can ask me to change it.
I hope the linked digits aren't too confusing.
As of the appropriateness of "user0001", I can only guess that that was not the name he chose, but that the name he chose was too inappropriate (a personal attack, maybe?) and these names have been changed to "userxxxx" to remove the inappropriateness once and for all.
But that's only guessing on my part, mainly because of the quick banishment and the fact that my name didn't justify a similar reaction. Is there a page where I can see if he was actually renamed after being blocked? - User.0.0.0.1) 17:30, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If that user had been renamed before or after blocking, it would appear here; it doesn't, so that's the name as originally chosen. BencherliteTalk 17:44, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can't there be a now-invisible name change? I know for sure that an oversight process can be requested, e.g. that if a personal attack is put into an edit summary, regular contributors can't change it, but oversighters can edit the summary towards something more civil. Is there a similar process to remove inappropriate names? (In my experience, there are a lot of attempts to create accounts which insult Bill Gates or more recently Steve Jobs.)
The only other 'bad' thing I could imagine is impersonation, i.e. pretending to be one of the founders of WP, or a Very Important Contributor. That would explain why the number 1 was deemed inappropriate by a WP staff member. - User.0.0.0.1) 06:20, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PS. That case keeps puzzling me. There isn't even an associated contribs page, so I gather that there has been at least some WP:oversight.
PPS. Would it be considered good style to "usurp" user0001 anyway, even if I want to keep my current name? 13:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by User.Zero.Zero.Zero.One (talk • contribs)
IP address inserted instead of my username!
I edited an article, and for some reason while I was editing it I got logged out. So the log gives my IP address instead of my username for that edit. Well, can that get straightened out? I don't particularly want people knowing my IP (the edit was obviously from me!). Thanks, Interferometrist (talk) 15:01, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Occasionally a registered editor will edit while logged out. While not usually an egregious issue, there can be some concerns about attribution and privacy.
If you made an edit without logging in, you cannot go back and directly tie that edit to your account. If your desire to account for the edit overrides your desire for anonymity, you can log in, make a dummy edit, and add a note in the edit summary about the previous edit.
It used to be possible to re-attribute edits from IP addresses to named accounts, but not since 2005 (see this page). However, as that page says, you can list your contributions made with the IP address(es) on your user page.
If you make a comment on a talk page without logging in, then your signature will include your IP address. You can log in and edit the comment by replacing the signature. Be aware that the WikiScanner tool will retrieve these actions from the database and record them at the Poor Man's Checkuser, thus connecting your username and IP address.
Wikipedia does show a message box when an unregistered or logged out user edits a page. This may not be obvious— as a visual reminder you can make the Save page button green when logged in by adding this rule to your CSS page:
/* Turn the "Save page" button green when logged in */INPUT#wpSave{background-color:#88ff88;}
If you use FireFox, you can disable the Save page button while logged out by installing Greasemonkey and the MediaWiki: Prevent anon editing script. This must be applied to each computer you use and will not be available on public computers.
Thank you VERY much. I realized that there might have been such instructions somewhere, but searching for it would have been laborious (my initial searches didn't find it). Cheers, Interferometrist (talk) 17:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
City of Benton Harbor
To whom it may conscern...
My Name is Welbii,
I am contacting this site in regards to the picture Wikipedia has displayed for the City of Benton Harbor, Michigan...
To whom do I direct my issueus in the matter of a better pictorial Picture than the plain BLAH picture that now represents our city?
Can we atleast get a Picture of the Beach / Lake front or the Pier or a land mark for a Pictorial Representation of our city??
To whom do I seek to help make the nessecary adjustments?
thank you so much
Welbii <redacted>
16:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)16:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)16:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)16:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)GuitarPlayerII (talk)
We can only use the pictures that somebody has provided for us; have you made any photos you'd like to offer for use? --Orange Mike | Talk 16:39, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. If you are in the city yourself, the answer is very simple - go and take a picture you like with your own camera, then log on to the Wikimedia Commons website and follow the instructions for uploading your photo. It is then available for use on Wikipedia or any other Wikimedia project. I should point out that there are two copyright related points to this, however:
The picture you upload must be your own. Do not upload a picture found elsewhere on the web, and do not use a picture taken by someone else, as that would violate copyright restrictions.
By uploading the picture to Commons you are giving up many of your own rights to the copyright and others will be free to replicate it. This may not be an issue for you but check for further details on this on the Commons website if it concerns you. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 16:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
when i click on a link in an article, how do i get it to open in a NEW window? (right now it goes to the link in the current window; so i have to hit "back" everytime i want to go back to the original article.)
64.136.26.235 (talk) 19:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What browser do you use? In Firefox, I simply right-click on the link and choose "Open link in new tab". Not sure about other browsers though. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 19:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
With a mouse, you would right click on the link. With a keyboard, you can hold down the Control key and click (Windows) or hold down the Command key and click (MacOS). Dismas|(talk) 19:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How do you "Update" pictures? (again)
I asked this question several days ago, I was given some answers but not enough that I could actually understand what to do. My original questions and responses are here Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 February 26#How do you .22Update.22 pictures.3F. Basically I wish to know how to update an already existing image file on Wiki Commons (without erasing the copyright info and change history). Specifically this picture File:Sus_scrofa_range_map.jpg. How do I do this? Do I have to install some sort of software to do it, or is their some easier way? --Hibernian (talk) 19:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The easiest way (I think) would be to click this link. You can then download and alter the file. After you are done you can click "Upload a new version of this file". This should do it. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 19:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's the only way that I know of and assumes that Hibernian has image editing software installed on their computer. – ukexpat (talk) 19:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! I think the advice given before was assuming you had a Wikimedia Commons account already. It would be easier if you are intending to update more images, to create a Commons account ( the new sign in global feature might allow to sign in automatically) . Once signed in you will see under the History box a new blue link appear that says: *Upload a new version of this file... As Toshi says, follow this linkand sign in or create a new account (you can use same name and password) and then this extra blue link will appear. Does this now make sense? --Aspro (talk) 20:14, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Edit Tab not visible
Hi, I have noticed that two articles that I have contributed to no longer appear to allow edits. I am not logged in. What is going on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.252.10.85 (talk) 20:52, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can you tell us what articles you are talking about? The IP address that you used to post this has made no edits other than this one. ~~ GB fan ~~ 20:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See the M-sigma relation. I am the sole user who contributed to the discussion section. The login name I used there seems to have been deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.252.10.85 (talk) 21:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I seem no protection on this article so I'm not sure why you'd not be able to edit it. When viewing the page logged out I am able to edit it. Are you able to edit the talk page? Rehevkor✉ 21:05, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Amusing - my laptop now appears to have edit permission - it didn't before - while, it is still not allowed from my workstation! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.252.10.85 (talk) 21:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Might be a long shot, but your workstation browser might be infected with some kinda malware that redirects it to a mirror site that is not our own. There's no way to block specific computers from editing, just IP addresses. Rehevkor✉ 21:12, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There have recently been cases (see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#No edit buttons) where unregistered users saw "View source" instead of the "Edit" tab on certain unprotected pages, but if you click "View source" (which has exactly the same url as "Edit") then you may be able to edit anyway. Is that the case? PrimeHunter (talk) 01:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WHY! I provided the sources of back up ask to support this persons significance and importance and STILL my page was deleted!?
Hello!
Please help me out! I have tried to create a page last night about Tonia Szafir, which is a public figure. I cannot seem to get a page about her up because an adim deleted in on the topic saying that is page is about a Real person not saying why they are significant. However, I don't understand how much evidence need I supply to support their significance!?!?!? They're not Shakira, or Didem Kilani, but they are very popular in several cities. Many people whom which I personally know/have met have a wikipedia page and they're pages are simply with hardly any sources of back up or description. I cannot understand why my page was deleted!?!?
I have copied the code from my page work, please view it and please help me! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BDobrowols (talk • contribs) 23:53, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You asked this question using the helpme template at your talk page and received an answer.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
March 4
The Earth
what is the difference between Earth and the world? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.46.132.161 (talk) 02:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Earth (uppercase) refers only to the planet, while world can refer to the planet but can also be used in many other ways. It can refer to the whole universe, or often for all of, or particular classes of, people or things or animals or genres or perspectives and more, e.g., music is her world; the ancient world; a child's world, the vegetable world; the world of the microscopic; and so on. By the way, this page is for asking questions about using Wikipedia. A general knowledge question such as yours belongs at the reference desk, which has a section on language.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I wonder If I just got tricked into answering a {{DYOH}} question? Well, no matter, a dictionary is all that was needed.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think you did, but it happens to us all. – ukexpat (talk) 16:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Adding an article to tomorrow's selected anniversaries
I'd like to add ZX81 to the list of tomorrow's selected anniversaries. 5 March 2011 is the 30th anniversary of the ZX81's launch, and I've rewritten and expanded the article to commemorate the anniversary. The Register has already published an anniversary piece which draws quite heavily on the Wikipedia article (see [4]). The proposed line would be:
However, I can't work out any way of editing the selected anniversary page, as it seems to be locked. Can someone please help? Prioryman (talk) 12:46, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I posted here in hopes of getting you an asnwer on the Selected anniversaries/March 5 talk page before March 5th. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 16:13, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
crosswiki-creation of very short articles by user 89.128.216.95
Thank you for your answer, I'll remmeber it for any future situations. YoshiDaSilva (talk) 14:08, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Florescu
Hello,
I encounter a problem in editing an article. The point is that after I finish editing integrally, when I press the button Save the page and then Show preview. I see the surprise that the text is being chopped so it is not added integrally. What do I do so that the text to be published integrally on the wikipedia ?
Thank you,
I wait for your answer as soon as possible,
Dana Gliga
Dana83art (talk) 18:42, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is caused by placing leading spaces at the beginning of sentences. I've removed them from John M. Florescu, the article on which you were working. TNXMan 18:47, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The space causes the text to be formatted to show code samples. Please use the "new discussion" tab to start new discussions. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)talk 18:49, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As I mentioned when the creator asked at WP:EAR about the original user space draft, this urgently needs sources. In the meantime I have proposed it for deletion as an unreferenced BLP, in accordance with policy. – ukexpat (talk) 19:01, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Non-free book image
I'm headed to the library to get some non-free images of torn down historic buildings, under the tag: Template:Non-free historic image. What info from the book do I need? Just the title? or do I need like title, author, page, publisher, etc? CTJF83 19:17, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As much as you can. I would use the {{Cite book}} template parameters as a starting point. – ukexpat (talk) 19:47, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dang! I was afraid of that...ok, thanks, CTJF83 19:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Like all cite templates, it's not as bad as it looks. You probably won't need much more than title, author, publisher, location, year, page and ISBN. Mjroots (talk) 06:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How to get an photo's source retagged?
How would I go about getting a useful picture on Commons retagged to remove a "Source" field that is basically a spam link to the photographer's website? The photo is here, discussion on my talk page here. Thanks, CliffC (talk) 19:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Hopefully I will never need this knowledge. :-) CliffC (talk) 19:59, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
cannot log in on a ps3
I am a Playstation 3 user and I access Wikipedia on a daily basis but when I went to create an account on it the site would not let me click on it. I went to the library to create an account to find that the library computers are blocked until November 2012. I finally got an account by requesting one (thank you very much) but I can still not log in using my Playstation 3. I request that something be done to help in this funcionality issue. Thank you.TacfuJecan (talk) 20:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Might be a technical issue. Have you tried turning it off and on? Phearson (talk) 00:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
User:Lucianjapan copied and pasted content I had in my sandbox to create the article Don Nomura. Is there anyway I can be credited for that article creation or the content that I had written? --TorsodogTalk 23:46, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well the user didn't really "steal" your content, as all of your edits are released under free licenses. Although they are suppose to give you credit in that situation. Something could've been done closer to the creation date, but now with subsequent edits, if an admin deleted the page, it would remove other user's contributions. CTJF83 23:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For all intents and purposes, the user stole the content. Disappointing. Oh well. --TorsodogTalk 23:59, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, it happened to me too, one of the downfalls of sandbox usage. Sorry, CTJF83 00:05, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I'll get over it... with time :( --TorsodogTalk 00:06, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing I can say you can do, is what the 4th from the bottom is, have that user say it was copied from your sandbox. CTJF83 00:09, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia was broken. It's a little odd that this was the only edit of an account made the minute before, but if you are credited then rules are satisfied. I would make a dummy edit to the article with this edit summary: "The first version of this article was written by User:Torsodog and copied from User:Torsodog/Sandbox3." I can make the edit for you if you prefer, but I suggest you get at least one edit into the page history. You can also place a note at Talk:Don Nomura, but please don't say "steal" in it. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:25, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
March 5
Issue
What should I do if I have proven things wrong and found clarification through Original Research? Us441(talk)(contribs) 01:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can you be a bit more specific? Wikipedia:No original research is a policy and an important one at that. If you have to resort to OR to prove something there's little chance it can have an effect on an article. We can only use information published in reliable sources, be it true or not. Rehevkor✉ 01:21, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How do you know your research is original? If you have found a result independently, you could search for published instances of it. Needless to say that can sometimes be very hard. Lots of people have published lots of things, not all of them are visible to search engines, and you may not be using the same terminology that other people used, which may make it difficult to find the right search terms. If you can't find any published sources to cite, you could ask on the Reference desk if anyone has heard of the result you believe you found. --Teratornis (talk) 03:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're missing the point here. We should be bringing public knowledge onto the pages of the encyclopedia. Ideas presented should be relatively well known. If you're having to search for published sources to justify the fact that your inclusion is not OR then it probably should not be included. After all: Wikipedia is not an academic journal. Even if you do find three or four papers about what you want to add; you still have to meet the notability criteria. For example, I'm a mathematician, I contribute to the maths reference desk, and I create maths articles. Every article I've ever created covers a mathematically well known topic. I see maths articles getting deleted all the time because they don't meet WP:N. — Fly by Night (talk) 03:46, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Without knowing what the questioner claims to have found, all we have is conjecture. It's true that only a small percentage of all random facts are suitable for Wikipedia, but who knows whether the unknown tidbit is or isn't in that subset? Let's open the box before ruling on Schrödinger's cat. --Teratornis (talk) 06:07, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Report SomeBody ..
Hi . Where Can I Report AnyBody Besides Notice Board For Vandalism. 173.178.93.250 (talk) 02:22, 5 March 2011 (UTC)__[reply]
I know the rules are different for every Wiki...but, in the case of non-en-wikis, do editors there ultimately have to abide by US Florida law as far as legal things, like copy vio, libel, etc? Or do local and national jurisdictions override this -- David Able 04:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think so since the Wiki servers are based in the US. But I'm not sure. Zlqq2144 (talk) 05:24, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Take over" a username?
Hello, is there any way to "take over" a user name that has no contributions or history. Basically an unused account. I'd like to change my user account from User:David Able to User:Quinn, but the latter already exists, though has no edit history that I can see. Is there anyway to request an usurptation of this account name? -- David Able 05:22, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PS-I don't care one way or the other about retaining edit history on my account. Either way is fine. David Able 05:27, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article in question is Kelly Monaco. Given the nature of Monaco's work with Playboy, I'm hesitant to check the recently added source due to the fact that I'm at work. I'd rather not set off any alarms with my company's IT department.
So, could someone check this edit and the source to which it is referenced? The URL of the ref seems like one that would be used at a fan site. And given the editor's colorful talk page, it seems like they've had some trouble in the past in determining what is and is not a suitable reference. Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 08:24, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
cheque
I want to reissue refund order of Moil IPO against second holder ,As It is being issued with name 1st holder,AND BANK A/C is of 2nd holder only,there is no joint a/c in bank and now it is not possible to for joint a/c in bank for ,I am facing problem during it's deposition in bank. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.240.6.144 (talk) 09:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.5 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck.Template:Z25 -- John of Reading (talk) 09:43, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked IPs
So, I came on this morning and was surprised to discover that my IP address had been blocked for something that was nothing to do with me. It took me a while to find that out too, I noticed some of the edit tags had disappeared, but others were still there, and discovered the block only whilst attempting to ask why. Now, it says on the message that comes up that I will have a post on my talk page explaining everything, including how to argue against the block, but there isn't one. So, I have no idea how to go about contesting this.
A few moments research has led me to believe that all IPs begining 148.197 have been blocked here, I know that extends all the way up to 148.197.120.206, and beyond, which seems to me a rather large number of people, a sizeable portion of the city, or at least the entire building, which by strange coincidence has the same name as the person administering the block. I begin to suspect some sort of conspiracy.
So, I would like to ask, how am I to go about fixing this, and why is it that perhaps hundreds of people are forbidden from editing this site for what seems to be one offence?
For the record, I was actually intending to create a new username here some time soon, but read that this is considered bad form whilst blocked, so I dug around a bit and revived my old username, that I had hoped to have nothing more to do with. It doesn't say anything about that, at least not anywhere I have seen.
I was just reviewing an article on a female poet from the Phillipines for the DYK section when I noticed she had been added to two categories that seemed to imply a sexual bias: "Filipino poets" and "Filipino writers". Now, a female person from the Phillipines is properly referred to as "Filipina", NOT "Filipino". I have, therefore, changed the categories on the article on Ivy Alvarez to reflect this and inserted appropriate redirects - but they still take one to the pages and . I believe these category names should be changed so they don't show a sex bias - to something like: Category:Poets from the Phillipines. Do others agree with me? If so, can someone please either make the change or tell me how to do it? I can't figure out how to move the pages. Many thanks, John Hill (talk) 10:43, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
.png)
Resolved
Done173.178.93.250 (talk) 21:44, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Editing without logging in:
