Wikipedia:Help desk

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

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

April 30

Wikicode annoyance: specifying whitespace in code without rendering in the page or (without using nowiki)

Is there a way to include whitespace inside the wikicode itself without it

   showing up in the final rendering of the output?

Such as above? The rationale: sometimes it makes it easier to read the raw wikicode if you can space it out a little bit. dr.ef.tymac 01:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, just add <nowiki></nowiki> tags before and after the code. Of course, this would be a problem if you had other wiki-format in between the tags (such as an internal link using "[[" and "]]"). →EdGl 01:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I knew I should have said in my original question "oh, by the way, nowiki is not adequate" (for the reasons you indicate) ... but I didn't ... oh well, now I am. ... anyone know a solution *besides* nowiki? dr.ef.tymac 01:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed while mixing some HTML tags in with wikitext that sometimes the normal "every leading space matters" rule seems to relax. For example, this code:

<ul>
  <li>This is some text.
      Notice that I have some freedom
      to space it as I please.</li>
</ul>

renders as:

• This is some text. Notice that I have some freedom to space it as I please.

You can also get the MediaWiki parser to ignore leading spaces if you put text in a <blockquote> tag, and you can remove the indents with CSS style parameters, I think. If you monkey around with other HTML tags and style them, you might get the effect you want. But I don't know that it would be easier for other people to edit (since the extra tags might create more ways to break things). --Teratornis 01:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the old "simplicity versus flexibility" trade-off. What I am trying to do is standardize the items in a list article, so your suggestion might be the perfect solution. Thanks. dr.ef.tymac 01:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Of course, that doesn't fix the annoyance when attempting spacing out "ref" tags ... :( dr.ef.tymac 02:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone tell me what happened to "list of advertising cliches" article?

n/t. dr.ef.tymac 04:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Due to a large amount of unsourced information it was trimmed down to it's lead section and merged into Advertising. It's history can be seen here. --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 05:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Page Recreated

John Taylor Bowles has been recreated even after it was voted to be deleted in late Feburary (I myself voted in it's Deletion Review). What is the procedure for when this happens? Has the article in question been allowed to be recreated? Cheers. Zidel333 04:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

You can put a speedy delete tag on it. See WP:SPEEDY, General criteria #4. Dismas|^(talk) 04:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, I've already done what was suggested. Zidel333 04:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Trouble logging in

I cannot log in. My user name is DataGeek1.

My email is DO NOT WRITE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS HERE! or you will be invaded by spam 15:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks,

Dave

69.209.198.203 04:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

If you gave an email address when you set up your account, you can get a new password sent to that address. Skittle 15:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Sidebar printing

How do i print just the bar on the side of the screen. I want to print just the bar on the side of the screen for the War on Terrorism page. Below is the source for this. Please delete it if it takes up too much room. Thank you very much for any help.

You could put the source code on your userpage, click printable version on the toolbar on the LHS of the screen then print from there. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 05:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

How to ask help about verrifying an hoax

Sometimes during an anti vandalism patrol using VP I encounter some... strange edit to say the least, from anonymous user, that report really odd fact, but that could possibly have been true. In those case how can I do to get some help about verrifying the hoax (if the allmighty google don't give me anything about it). Remove then watch if it is reposted later ? Revert then ask on talk page a rationale or source ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Esurnir (talk • contribs) 05:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

Mostly it's a matter of taste. If it's something that looks fairly innocuous, it might be enough to put {{fact}} next to it, but if it looks likely to cause some BLP problems or similar, then yes reverting and asking for a source is probably a good plan. Confusing Manifestation 06:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Impartiality

How do I question the imparciality of an article, or any other shortcomming thereof, without editing it?

If the point of view is hideously non-neutral (see WP:NPOV), add {{POV}} to the top of the article and explain your concerns on the Talk page. If the article just doesn't quite seem to pass Raul's Razor (Rule #13 on the list), then it's probably enough to voice your concerns on the Talk page. It helps if you have some evidence backing up your assertion that the article isn't neutral. For other possible shortcomings, such as uncited statements etc, again the Talk page is often the way to go, and there are also some other boilerplates you can put up at Wikipedia:Template messages. Confusing Manifestation 06:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yearbook a valid reference?

I'm not sure this is the right place to ask, but just in case... for an article of a high school, is it acceptable to use the school yearbooks as references for information? --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 06:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

They are published for the general academic community for the schools by a publisher that specializes in yearbooks. The yearbooks in question are considered to be some of the top of the their field (per competition). Zidel333 15:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Are yearbooks "published" in a real sense? That is, could anyone in the world readily buy that yearbook, and will they be able to (perhaps finding it used) in years to come? Notinasnaid 06:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes. It's the published ones. It's for a GA/n I've put on hold. The question was brought to me, but I'm not sure. I would assume it would be, but I don't know how easily one can order an archived yearbook. I'll have them check with the publisher. Thanks. --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 15:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

wikipedia copyrights

hello, i am working in a company developing educational materials. i would like to use some wikipedia entries for one of our lesson plans, mostly short biographies of historical characters. i would like to upload my lesson plan and the wikipedia bios to my company website, adding wikipedia references when needed, as people usually do when they quote from a reference material. am i allowed to quote wikipedia in my company website, or is there a copyright that forbids me to do so? i couldn't find wikipedia policy in this regard. thank you for your help, 192.117.182.168 07:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is licenced under the GFDL. If you're planning to reuse it, you probably want to read (or ask your lawyers to read) the full legal details of Wikipedia's copyright. I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is that if what you want to do is reupload Wikipedia's material verbatim, you need to also upload a copy of the licence under which the material is licenced (which I've linked above), and provide a method to access the page history (see the 'history' tab), as well as mention on the page what licence it's licenced under and give links for the history. See Wikipedia:Copyrights#Reusers' rights and obligations for the Wikipedia policy involved, and Wikipedia:Verbatim copying for an essay about reusing Wikipedia's content. --ais523 07:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

User can't log-in

Have been a registered user on Wikipedia for over a year, but the sign in page is telling me that my password is incorrect even thought I haven't changed it. What do I do to change it? User:Escaper7 132.185.240.122 10:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

If you have your email enabled, you can click on a link asking Wikipedia to email you a new password. ElinorD (talk) 10:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Your password's probably the same as your username; all such usernames were blocked by developers recently to prevent them being compromised. As you haven't set (or possibly haven't confirmed) an email address (which would be needed to recover your password), your options are to create a new account or to persuade a developer to give you back access to the old one. (The developers are quite busy; in addition, they won't reset an account without uncontrovertable proof that you own it, and if your password is your username everyone knows it now, so it can't be used as proof. You're probably better off creating a new account.) --ais523 11:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't really want to create a new account, so how do I go about asking to to access my existing account? Short of that, I think I'll probably give Wikipedia up as ll my editing history, comments and discussions will be lost. If it's supposed to be so easy for anyone to edit, why is it the case that someone who goes to such efforts to register is effectively treated the same as someone with a permanent block ie for vandalism. If a password needs to be changed, why no warning or prompt? User:Escaper 7132.185.240.120 11:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC) BTW, doesn't having a second account then make me a sockpuppet or something? 132.185.240.122 11:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Alternate accounts are allowed as long as they're not used for purposes like double-voting; see WP:SOCK. The last person who had the same problem as you emailed a developer (brion at wikimedia.org, in particular); they could prove their identity by using their account on the Italian Wikipedia (which had an email set), but you haven't linked to any other-language accounts on your userpage so I'm not sure if this method is open to you. The reason for the block, I think, was that a vandal was guessing the passwords of established accounts and using them for vandalism; this was done at the technical level, and has nothing to do with most Wikipedia users (this is way above what administrators can manage). --ais523 11:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

If you can prove who you are somehow, perhaps a checkuser? You could go to requests for change name, and have them rename your account, which would effectively mean that your username and password wouldn't be same anymore. The problem with that is now everyone here knows what your password is, so the chances of your account becoming compromised might be too high, therefore a bureaucrat might reject the request. But you can try anyway if you think it might work. Alternatively you could use a checkuser to prove who you are, and they might be willing to change your password for you, if you do this through email --VectorPotential^Talk 13:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

problems with image sizes

Hi, the images I have had added to my various pages have gone a bit weird and resized themselves to original sizes. For example on my user page I have used the code

[[Image:Sydney_harbour_bridge_dawn.jpg|right|thumb|150px| frame|Photos I have contributed - The bridge just after sunrise (with no boats on the harbour)]]

which has for a long time shrunk a large photo to an acceptable size, for some reason (in the past month perhaps) stopped shrinking the photo..

Does anyone know why? Thanks in advance for your help!!

Cheers Actuarial disco boy 11:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you're supposed to use both 'thumb' and 'frame'. Try using just one or the other; at least one of them will probably work. (The meaning of one of those words changed recently, but I can't remember which.) --ais523 13:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Excellent - it worked, thanks for that !!!!!! Actuarial disco boy 19:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Old messages -- supposedly to me (critical)

Hello, I just signed up for Wikipedia. I have made one comment on one subject - "Junk DNA" (made last week, when I signed up for an account). I made some comments on the talk page, not an actual edit.

When I look up an article I am notified I have messages waiting. When I view them there are several criticisms from 2006 that say I was guilty of invalid comments, and other bad behavior, when I tried to edit articles which I don't think I ever even viewed, let alone edited.

I want to participate in Wikipedia according to the rules and I try to use a sensible, constructive approach. I certainly don't mind it if others write comments about my actual comments, etc.

Is there some way to clean this out so I can start with a clean slate and I can get accurate feedback in the future, if and when needed?

Also, if there is a case of mistaken identity, can you correct it?

Thanks, Martin Denker 13:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I suspect the messages that you saw were seen by you while you weren't logged in. When a user isn't logged in, Wikipedia has only their IP address to use to determine who they are and send warnings and messages. So the warnings probably went not to you, but to someone with a similar Internet connection (for instance, someone who uses the same ISP as you if you're at home, or someone at the same workplace or school). There are no warnings on your username talk page; while logged in, you should be able to avoid irrelevant messages. Hope that helps! --ais523 13:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

List of Extensions used by Wikipedia

Where can I find a page that lists the extensions used by Wikipedia? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.190.205.92 (talk) 14:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

If you're referring to MediaWiki extensions, see Special:Version. --ais523 14:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes .. this information is very helpful. Thanks!

Finding name of pro who taught tennis at Armory on Chicago's north side in 1960s

That's the info I seek. His first name was George. He was Irish. He said he had been a world champion in amateur competitions - in the 1920s or 1930s, I guess. Anyone know? How would I find out? Rhsnew 14:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)§

Try asking at the Wikipedia:Reference desk; this page is for questions about editing Wikipedia. -SpuriousQ (talk) 14:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalistic redirect - cannot figure out how to fix it

User:Moironen has decided to redirect Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted? to DOMINATION BLACK. The history at the redirect shows only his edit, so how can it be reverted? He had already vandalised the page by replacing all its content, then made this redirect while I was reverting his vandalism. Can anyone help to sort this out? Adrian M. H. 14:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it was a move rather than creating a redirect, and the history moved with the page. I've deleted the redirect (an admin power) and moved it back and then deleted the redirect that move created. RJFJR 14:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

And I've move-protected the page (another admin power) to prevent this happening again. --ais523 14:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance. Adrian M. H. 14:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I need wikipedia

is it ok for me to copy an article and put it on my own site if i state that it is from wikipedia and put a web link to that page from my site? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.193.19.136 (talk) 15:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

See WP:GFDL. The link is also in the footer of each page. Adrian M. H. 16:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Namcorules - I appear to have forgotten my password, or somebody has changed it

I am User:Namcorules, editing Wikipedia with an IP account because somebody appears to have changed my password, or I have just forgotten it. I don't have an email address, so if I have just forgotten it and somebody who has direct access to the database is reading this, could they please retrieve it for me? Namcorules 16:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, retrieving passwords is not possible. If you don't know your password and didn't set an e-mail address, you can register a new account. Notinasnaid 15:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

• If you choose your password to be the same as your username, it has been blocked automatically. In that case, contact a Developer for assistence. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

HowToOpenThings is a valid entry

HowToOpenThings is marked as a questionable entry. It is a new business that belongs in Wikipedia as much as any other Web base business. Perhaps you marked this entry becuase I created the Wiki entry before the site launched. We launched last week, so can we have the HowToOpenThings entry removed from the 'questionable' content category?

Check the page, I've added press releases about the site, blog entries from others, etc.

Thanks

Rien Heald co-found, HowToOpenThings (Removed e-mail address as noted above). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Howtoopenthings (talk • contribs)

New businesses do not belong in Wikipedia, nor do established businesses, unless they are notable. Wikipedia is not a business directory. For the criteria we use, see Wikipedia:Notability. Have their been multiple non-trivial newspaper articles about your business for example? If so, the article needs to give them. The article, in other words, has to prove that the business is notable. Blogs do not count at all, and press releases, while they are useful as references, don't prove notability. In addition you should never create an article on your own business or one you are connected with. If a business is notable, in time other people will do this, perhaps after some years. I hope this helps you understand why your article may be deleted. Notinasnaid 16:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Does it pass notability standards for companies? As you'll see from those links, it requires that a subject be covered in multiple, independent, reliable sources. There is also the obvious conflict of interest involved when you create an article about your own company. Adrian M. H. 16:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Data-driven list article (e.g., List of advertising slogans from a central table)

After having done a considerable bit of tedious tinkering and re-organization of List of advertising slogans (which probably no one really cares about anyway) it occurs to me that maintaining this content would probably be *much* easier if the entire list could be stored in a single, central "table" somewhere, and the separate articles generated from the table, instead of editing them and separating them all by hand.

So for example, the central table could have the following fields:

   slogan_category ;; slogan_text ;; slogan_company ;; slogan_years ;; ad_agency ;; notes

and then a page could be generated by transcluding subsections from the table based on category:

   
    {{SloganTable|FoodCategory,FashionCategory}}
    

I'm sure it is not feasible to allow WP contributors to edit a database table but is there a way to do this using just transclusion and a central 'flat file database' (xml or whatever)? This would make managing the content much easier. Thoughts? Comments? dr.ef.tymac 16:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

What you want is a structured wiki which MediaWiki is not (see TWiki for what you're missing). There are many situations where structured wiki features would come in handy, so the topic comes up often. --Teratornis 23:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

hgdkhkdgjgfjgfjhgj

How do you know the autor of a wikipedia page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BEWARE of kristin (talk • contribs) 17:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia:Who writes Wikipedia. Or view the very first entry in the history if you want to find out who created an article. Adrian M. H. 17:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

• If you want to know the author because you need to cite a page, please use the "cite this page" link on the left instead. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Adjusting the value produced by a template variable

I was thinking about adding the local time (which is currently 1 hour ahead of UTC) to my user page. Is it possible to add 1 hour to the value produced by the {{CURRENTHOUR}} template variable by adding something to the transclusion, ie: {{CURRENTHOUR|+1}} or something like that? Or is that a feature that has to be already present in the template itself? I'd be quite happy to make my own if that's the case. Adrian M. H. 17:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

• You might be interested in m:ParserFunctions, towards the bottom of the page, not quite what you're looking for, but it will do what you want it to, if you play around with it enough--VectorPotential^Talk 20:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for that. Looks promising. I'll study it in depth when I have more time. Adrian M. H. 20:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki transclusion

Is it possible to transclude pages from another Wikipedia or Wikimedia project? Specifically, I would like to transclude pages in my Wikimedia Commons user space into parts of pages in my user space here, using links like {{:commons:User:Seattle Skier/Images}} or {{commons:User:Seattle Skier/Images}}. I have tested those links already, they do not work (nothing is transcluded).

I have read Wikipedia:Transclusion, Wikipedia:Sister projects, and Wikipedia:Interwikimedia link, and can not find the answer. Thanks for your help. --Seattle Skier (See talk tierS) 18:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

• I don't think it's possible. Suppose you want to transclude a page from an obscure project. If it gets vandalized, we here at en-wikipedia can't do anything short of deleting the page to fix things. Particularly with small projects it can take quite some time to get a local admin to jump in. I think the inability to transclude between projects is a security measure. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

MediaWiki has the feature; see: mw:Manual:$wgEnableScaryTranscluding. However, I am pretty sure this feature is disabled on Wikipedia, for the reasons Mgm states. --Teratornis 23:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

wikitionary template?

hello, i am trying to find a template i think i came across once. it states that a section is better moved to wikitionary, or something of that sort. does it sound familiar to anybody? thanks, trespassers william 18:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I haven't checked through them all, but you might find it here: Wikipedia:Sister projects. Adrian M. H. 19:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you mean Template:Copy_to_Wiktionary. I found it quickly by searching for wiktionary at Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup. S Sepp 19:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

That one is listed in the second section of my earlier link. It looks like the one that you need. Adrian M. H. 19:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Yep, i suppose it is. and the cleanup list is useful too. thank you both. trespassers william 19:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Email question

The E Mail address you gave me was [removed] however it stses that this does not exist.Have copied and pasted from your E Mail so cannot uderstand -John Forsyth, secondary E Mail address is [removed] 82.39.129.48 19:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Using wiki for coursework

I'm currently working on some biology coursework. I've managed to get some information from Wiki which I can use in my coursework. However - my problem is this - at the end of my c/w I need to give references for information which I have gained (much like Wiki articles) - when using Wiki articles for information, do I need to reference to Wiki...or do I need to specifically reference to the sources from which information in the Wiki article is gained? In other words, do I reference wiki, or do I reference the sources which are found at the bottom of the Wiki article?

88.105.187.51 19:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

• You should ask your teacher. They may say (a) cite Wikipedia, that's fine: if so use the "Cite this article" link at the left of the article or (b) you may not cite Wikipedia: if so, you must use the original references. That means reading them, not just copying the citations. So teachers will remove some or all marks for Wikipedia use, so don't guess! Notinasnaid 19:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

• • Ok, thanks...that's helped!

88.105.187.51 19:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Batch changes ("is comprised of" -> "comprises")

I know this can be a controversial operation, but is it possible to perform batch edits across the Wikipedia corpus?

I specifically would like to replace all instances of the annoying "is comprised of" with "comprises", and there should be no exceptions. Is there an easy way to do this?

Thanks Steven 20:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

• Actually, in some cases "consists of" might be a better substitute. You can ask the creator of User:Humanbot to jump in, but I suspectthere's already another bot in operation suitable for such a task. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

In fact, to say that "X is comprised of Y" is to give a list of ingedients or subdivisions Y which togehter make up X, while to say "X comprises Y" is to say that all Y are included in X, but does not inmply that the list is complete. In any case, making pruely stylistic changes en masse across the whole project ought to at least have the support of a reccomendation in the Manual of Style and even then might well be considered controversial. Bots should not be sued for controversial tasks, IMO. (Personally i find the form "X comprises Y" far more akward ans annoying than "X is comprised of Y"). If revert wars are bad, bot wars would be unthinkable, so please don't do this without obtaining consensus at the MOS page first. DES ^(talk) 21:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm not trying to start a war, nor will I litigate against bots :)

However, I do disagree with your distinctions. The very usage of comprise as a direct synonym for compose, although widely used, is incorrect IMO and disputable in all dictionaries at the very least, especially the passive form "is comprised of". "To comprise" means to "to be composed of", not "to compose". Therefore "to be comprised of" actually translates to "to be to be composed of of". If "X is composed of Y", then the equivalent is "X comprises Y" or "X consists of Y".

Therefore, no instance of "is comprised of" is valid and instead should either become "comprises", "is composed of" or "consists of". The universality of this rule makes it a good candidate for a mass change, since there is no danger in altering the meaning of a sentence. Steven 02:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

See: List of frequently misused English words#Comprise. --Teratornis 16:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

One of my hobbies is correcting "is comprised of." I just use Google and some convenient features of the Opera web browser, but Autowiki supposedly helps too. BUT: you cannot automatically edit. "comprised of" is used to mean multiple things; an editor must decide which one. "composed of" is probably the closest to a universal replacement, closely followed by "consists of." Often, the phrase is actually a superfluous complication of the sentence and you can replace it with "is" or "has." "is made up of" is sometimes best. "comprises" is actually subtly different from "is composed of." "comprises" indicates taking in or encompassing things that have an independent existence as opposed to being separable into those things. A good example of "comprises" is "the company's Pacific Northwest division comprises Washington, Oregon, and Idaho." "Consists of" would suggest the division is the states themselves, while "is composed of" would suggest the states are nothing but pieces of that division. Bryan Henderson 17:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I have read that the Oxford English Dictionary supports (actually uses) "comprised of." But I believe all American dictionaries, and probably modern British ones as well eschew it. It is not consistent with the rest of English grammar or the etymology of the word "comprise." Bryan Henderson 17:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Vertical Line

How do I get a vertical line in my article? Please respond fondly, Meldshal42 20:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

• You mean this one? "|". There's a box below the edit screen, the second item in wiki markup is this symbol, it's called the pipe and it's also on your keyboard. On some keyboards it's shown as having a break in the middle, but it's the same one. _ Mgm|^(talk) 21:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thnak you so, so much!Meldshal42 21:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Airco DH.6

I uploaded a picture to complement this article - on closer inspection I realised that the picure of the aircraft concerned is a mirror image (note the number on the tail). When I tried to resubmit a corrected version of the file (identical except for being "flipped" round the right way) it seemed to accept the new version but still displays it reversed!

Please either fix this or advise me how to do it - I cannot delete the existing file of course.

Soundofmusicals 22:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Now it's gone and corrected itself, I think - all I needed was patience!!!

Soundofmusicals 22:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Adminship

Hi. I had a question about adminship? How do you apply for it? Thanks Meldshal42

See Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. PrimeHunter 22:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.  Meldshal42.

No such section

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This is a talk page. Please respect the talk page guidelines, and remember to sign your posts using four tildes (~~~~).

You tried to edit a section that doesn't exist. Since there is no section 21, there's no place to save your edit.

Return to Main Page.

I got this funky error on a page with 21 edit sections and I tried to edit the 20th & the 21st. The talk page in question is, (Talk:List of Warriors characters). Regards, «razorclaw» 22:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I've seen that before when I clicked a section edit link on an instance of a page that had been sitting in my browser for a while, and sometime after I had downloaded that page from the server, someone else had deleted some sections from the page. Thus the number of the section I was trying to edit had actually been reduced to a smaller value by the deletion, but the section edit link I clicked referred to the original larger number. The solution is to refresh the page in your browser; if that does not help, try purging. --Teratornis 23:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. In this case, the problem was that someone had put in a section header with text on the same line, and this seemed to screw up the section formatting, there were a few other formamttign errors, which i also fixed -- no content changes made. DES ^(talk) 23:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

James Bond Girls

What has happened to the categories of "Actresses who played Bond Girls" ? and "James Bond Cast Members" ?

These were extremely useful categories but they seem to have disappeared.

Is there anything to replace them ?

--Tovojolo 22:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

There is List of actresses who portrayed Bond girls but it looks like its up for deletion. You could also check out Bond Girl for list of actresses who have been bond girls. —Mitaphane _?|! 23:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

front page html

How come all the side bars are at the end of the page now??? This is a real problem, I don't like scrolling down - or using a hyper link to get to the search function. PLease revert to the original front page! JP MacDonald —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.68.171.60 (talk) 22:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC).

Which version of Wikipedia are you using? Lemonflash(Talk)

Editing

Where do I go to make a new contribution? Amartin26 23:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC) Amartin26

That question is, "Where do I not go?" You've made one contribution here already - that edit of yours. I tend to go to Random article to look for stuff. Or you can clean up a requested article - loads of things to do. Wikipedia:Community Portal might give you ideas. x42bn6 Talk 23:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Try joining a WikiProject that specializes in what you are interested in and see what they need done. The easiest way to find one is to go to the most broad page and find the Wikiproject banner near the top of the talk page. (Ex. to find the USA Wikiproject, go to the talk page for United States). Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 00:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

If you mean how to make a new article, see Help:Starting a new page and Wikipedia:Your first article. PrimeHunter 01:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

How do I report a user?

How to I report this user to get him banned or something? What he does is he's replacing articles with things like "my butt" and so on... Is there any warning-template I can use or something? - Aki 23:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Post the user's name on WP:AIAV. Make sure you warned him/her first. BuickCenturydriver (Honk, contribs) 23:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

(EDIT CONFLICT)

Can you tell us who is doing this to you? Here are some warning templates for vandals [1]. If you need to report someone for blatant and persistent vandalism, use WP:AIV otherwise post a message to WP:ANI. -- _Hdt83 ^Chat 23:59, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

May 1

Pictures

How do you put pictures on a page?CrocGator

Free Death Certificate Information

Can Wikipedia direct me to a site whereby I can obtain a Death Certificate of my deceased father who resided in Santa cruz NM?

email removed —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.95.163.111 (talk) 00:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

I'm not sure that there's anything on Wikipedia that can help you with that, but I'd try the Coroner's or Medical Examiner's Office in the city or county. WODUP 00:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, don't post your email address, it's a good way to get spammed. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 02:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Customizing Signatures

How can I Customize my signature?--thebearguy 02:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

In your preferences (the "my preferences" link up top), add the wikicode you want your signature to be in the "Signature" box, and check "Raw Signature". If you only want to change the name that appears when you sign your name, just type that in and leave the box unchecked. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 02:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

See: User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia#Sig. --Teratornis 16:48, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Changing Sources?

Chris Benoit's page, for example, how do you edit the sources? I click edit, but that takes me to a template. Any help? Kris Classic 03:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

You'll have to find where each reference is used in the article and change what is included in the <ref> tags. The References section doesn't contain the references themselves, only a template that allows the article to display them. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 03:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! Kris 03:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Article "Hits"

Is there anyway I can check how many times other people have viewed my article (e.g "hits") Justice League of America (1997 film) please? Ryan4314 04:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

No. The feature to count how many times a page has been visited has been turned off for performance reasons. For more details please see Wikipedia:Technical FAQ#Can_I_add_a_page_hit_counter_to_a_Wikipedia_page?. You can, however, see how many people edit a page by clicking on the "history" page. An alternative to see viewing statistics is WikiCharts, see Special:Statistics#Other_statistics. You can also see articles with the most edits at Special:Mostrevisions.--Commander Keane 04:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou very much Ryan4314 07:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The MediaWiki setting that controls "the feature to count how many times a page has been visited" is: $wgDisableCounters, in case anyone wonders. Despite Wikipedia's setting of that option, someone has managed to obtain page-view statistics for some of the most viewed pages. Also see the links under User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia#Sta (scroll down a few lines to the "Statistics and reports:" entry) for some other possibilities. In general, frequently-viewed pages are also frequently edited, especially articles which have obvious needs for further editing. As a rough rule, there may be about 100 views per edit (that is, the number of people who merely view a page will usually be much larger than the number who edit it). Also check the "toolbox | What links here" for your article, to see what other articles link to it. If many other articles link to your article, that probably means many other editors are aware of it, and those links may direct viewers to your article. In the case of an article about a film, there could be potentially many links to it, for example in the filmography sections of articles about the film's actors and director. If the film won any awards or nominations, it could be listed and linked in articles about those awards. --Teratornis 14:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

User ignoring AFD and 3rd opinion

An editor continues to revert a redirect on Rolan Bolan that was decided on by AFD. Other editors concur that the redirect should stand, and the editor seems to be associated with the subject. What's the next step? Ckessler 04:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Well I have protected the redirect and left a note on the talk page, Talk:Rolan Bolan. You could have requested protection at WP:RPP, and/or Wikipedia:Resolving disputes has info on resolving disputes.--Commander Keane 04:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism

When we are using copyrighted literature as a source of our information (such as that of another encyclopedia) to what extent does the information need to be rewritten and restated in order to avoid plagiarism or a copyright violation?

For an example, here is an excerpt from The Columbia Encyclopedia:

Tradition holds that the bay was named by the Spanish explorer Alonzo Alvarez de Pineda, who found it on Corpus Christi Day in 1519, but there is evidence that it was named instead by the first settlers, who arrived from the lower Rio Grande valley in the 1760s. In 1839, Col. H. L. Kinney founded a trading post, and traders and adventurers collected in a raffish colony on land claimed by both Texas and Mexico. The small port and terminus for overland wagon-train traffic boomed during the Mexican War. It was briefly captured by the U.S. navy in the Civil War. Corpus Christi developed industrially after the discovery of oil in the area and the completion (1926) of a deepwater channel past Mustang Island.

Based on this text, I composed the following:

Spanish explorer Alonso Alvarez de Pineda is said to have named the Corpus Christi Bay upon discovering it on the day of the Corpus Christi feast in 1519. However, evidence suggests that that the name was given in the 1760s by its settlers from the lower Rio Grande Valley. In 1839, a trading post was founded by Colonel Henry Lawrence Kinney, which formed a raffish colony on land claimed by both Texas and Mexico. During the Mexican War, the port and terminus for wagon-train traffic experienced a boom. It was captured by the U.S. navy for a brief period of time during the Civil War. Industrial development began after oil was discovered in the area, as well as the 1926 completion of a deepwater channel past Mustang Island . The city is protected by a 3,749m sea wall.

Using the facts from the copyrighted text, I composed the rewrite with the following things in mind:

• (1) Delivering the facts without distortion
• (2) Reorganizing sentence structuring to differ from the copyrighted text as much as possible, while maintaining the proper overall organization by the date of said events
• (3) Using available words that both differ from the original, and convey the correct meaning.

However, some words or phrases such as that of terminus have no conceivable replacement without degrading the quality of information inferred.

I haven't yet merged this into the article in concern, as I thought it would be more appropriate to get some advice on the subject first. --CMBJ 04:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I am not really happy with the concept of the rewrite; it is probably free of copyright law, but still: I expect an enclopedia to distill facts from sources, and hence for our articles to be much shorter than the original source. Indeed, I think I read somewhere that a general enclopedia is not an acceptable source. Notinasnaid 06:50, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, the article in concern is completely lacking a history section, so for the most part, it would probably not be sensible to prune any of those facts in the rewrite. I would like to clarify that my intent was not to deliberately plagiarize the other material, rather to rewrite a version suitable for Wikipedia which would not neglect to contain those facts. Regarding the usage of a general encyclopedia as a source, I had thought that I had seen a similar policy at some point as well. Although, I have seen numerous articles that sourced the Encyclopedia Britannica. Most/if not all of the facts included in the rewrite can probably be sourced elsewhere in addition to that encyclopedia, if necessary. --CMBJ 20:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Photos

I have photos I've taken of musical figures with Wikipedia articles. I'd like to upload them. 1) would they be welcome? 2) how do I do it?

I Put the cursor in the article, hit gallery, but from there I'm confused.

Thanks.

Leo

Leomunter 04:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they would be welcomed! See WP:IMAGES for info on how to upload the images and put them in articles. By the way, I also suggest uploading them to the Wikimedia Commons so that they can be used in the Wikipedias of other languages as well as the English language Wikipedia. Dismas|^(talk) 05:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, upload them just to the Wikimedia Commons, as images stored there can be used here on Wikipedia without a problem. See commons:Commons:Upload for instructions (you need to create a username on Commons separately from Wikipedia). --ais523 14:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

cricketer michael clarke

Where did he grow up, live and go to school —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.49.228.130 (talk) 04:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

Try Michael Clarke (cricketer), or factual questions can be asked at the Wikipedia:Reference desk.--Commander Keane 05:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

talk page notificatios

Is there a way to get 'new message' notification for sub talk pages? I have created sub talk pages for the users I have adopted and dislike having to check my watchlist all the time. Can the adoptees also get a notification when I add a message to my sub talk page that is created for them? Thanks!--killing sparrows ^(chirp!) 04:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

That cannot be done.--Commander Keane 05:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe with the tools listed in User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia#Wat. --Teratornis 16:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Higher attention necessary

I post this after an user reverted my edit on a page. As I've already written, I am experiencing alot of issues with this specific one. In the end, a month ago i decided to leave it to its own. Yet I notice users being ... "a bit too bold". I fear I'll have the need for an higher attention as soon as I upload the new version (being written offline). What are the options in this case? I know there's an "arbitration comitee" but this seems a bit too excessive.
MaxDZ8 talk 06:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Have you taken this up on the other editors' talk pages? And on the article talk pages? Are you using edit summaries? And are you proposing your major changes for discussion on the article talk pages? Are you sure there is a consensus for your changes? All of these things can help to stop a difference of opinion or a misunderstanding becoming worse. It is a normal process to try something, see if it is reverted, and if it is reverted, discuss. Also, make sure everything you add is sourced. Notinasnaid 06:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

By the way, if after using all of these avenues without reaching consensus, you find yourself in a dispute with just one editor, and they consent to the process, consider Wikipedia:Third opinion. Notinasnaid 07:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I am not well aware if Wikipedia:Third opinion is a viable way. There seems to be a much more rooted issue with the conventional wisdom agains the documented evidence... a more involved discussion below.

• Have you taken this up on the other editors' talk pages? I believe I've contacted a few but in general I didn't - the average user seemed to lack the technical know-how to understand a well behaved discussion. I actually have a discussion on my talk page about another article - it weights a few screens of text... just to remove a 'D' from the article!
• And on the article talk pages? Yes, plenty and more than that. I have asked multiple times to define with good approximation user's needs with scarce results. For example, some users actually helped me figuring out the notion was too broad and to turn the page in a disambiguation, providing more general info on another. When I did that, the version was reverted. An user complained that the new pointed article was a redlink... looks like no one really wants to spend more than 2min on fixing this.
• Are you using edit summaries? Yes, but considering how this does evolve, I'm not sure I obtained the correct result.
• Are you sure there is a consensus for your changes? I am sure most of the time there is consensus AGAINST the changes, however as far as I know, consensus isn't needed if a trustable and verifiable source is provided. This actually happened in previous revisions. Right now, I don't care for sources since no one seemed to care anyway. There's a serious issue here: the well-known sources (hw sites and such) sperficially collide with the more authoritative, less known sources. With the next major revision there will be a split of contents so this will hopefully go away but who knows what will happen.
• It is a normal process to try something, see if it is reverted, and if it is reverted, discuss. Indeed. I have done this a few times with no reply. I have also seen a few users do that with replying (mostly by me alone, but a few other users helped) but with scarce results on the understanding. In general, discussions don't live much.
• Also, make sure everything you add is sourced. As already stated this was. IT isn't now - no one seems to care anyway. Also, for a lastly-issued concept, providing a readable source is considerably difficult. There's strong evidence from the documentation sustaining my proposal but there's no explicit evidence of the other. At the same time, the unfeasibility of the other proposal CAN be INFERRED from the references but this requires skill and effort (similartly to what it takes to understand chemistry or quantum physics).

Here's a "summary" of page's history.

1. The page is originally created as a redirect. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shader&oldid=9758952
2. Various users work on it for roughtly an year producing http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shader&oldid=24170102.
3. My first major edit provides restructuring, rewording and references (seeing the result, I understand there weren't enough references) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shader&oldid=26619240.
4. Various edits up to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shader&oldid=35001139.
5. A confusing tag is added http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shader&oldid=36103020. In the meanwhile, various people on the talk page complains the article to be too technical. It becomes evident the audience is consideraly broader than originally intended - lacking the time for radical changes, I leave the thing to other authors.
6. Other various edits. On http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shader&diff=42508162&oldid=42220265, a first split happens, taking some information to another page. I hoped other editors would have been encouraged by this.
7. Various evolutionary edits till http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shader&oldid=101999706.
8. Various edits (mostly by a single user) up to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shader&oldid=104070666. Note the references added in (2) are gone... and I wouldn't need to write more. However, the user asked for discussion on the talk page and he/she actually got it Talk:Shader#COMPLETE ARTICLE REWRITE. You can actually check a detailed rationale for the RV I operated. I think it is very interesting he/she writes to have spent a week on this. I have 10 years of experience and it took me more than a month for (2). The offline revision is being worked since January... Also note that not all the changes were RV: a few did make sense and were kept.
9. After that, it has been a mess. A few... very weird edit summaries ("...this looks stolen from somewhere..." - over 2000 pages to check! Too easy to say!) and the removal of the proposed intro redlink (I know it's a redlink, but someone shold write it!) made me realize this was doomed to death no matter what. Note the article is essentially a stub now! Even worse, the "references" are actually "unused"... guess why. You can track those two to one of my revisions...

The last few edits are interesting - take care starting from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shader&oldid=123185398. The rationale: after searching for references for the offline edit, I have come to this conclusion. People however felt this wasn't right... the problem here is that their knowledge of the issue does not allow them to figure out those are two differents meaning for the same word!

Now I've told you a little of story about this stuff, I hope you can help with the issue because I'm not sure of what to do - people seems to not be interested in the authoritative sources. It would be just easier for me to leave it to their own but... well, you get the problem. ;)

Something easier to understand: if you go buy a car and the engine is marketed as "The Most Powerful Ever" you are impressed and this provides a reference. However, if you have the power/torque curves and compare them to other engines, you figure out this is not true. Now, that's marketing VS tech specs... what wins?

While we're at it, you can see that there are a few people feeling the old version were ok: Draconins, BobtheVila, Tarinth MaxDZ8 talk 09:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• I can sense, and on occasion share, your frustration, but I wanted to pick up on one thing you said. "I am sure most of the time there is consensus AGAINST the changes, however as far as I know, consensus isn't needed if a trustable and verifiable source is provided." Absolutely not; if you are working on this principle, frustration and conflict is certain. The contents of the article is decided by consensus. There is no higher authority to add "better facts" against consensus. Consensus is a crude tool, and often an annoying one, but it's the one we have. See Wikipedia:Consensus: worth a detailed read because it certainly doesn't work the way I intuitively felt it would. Notinasnaid 10:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I still don't get it. Does it means that WP:NOR, WP:V and WP:RS are second-choice policies? In other words, if the consensus contraditcs NOR, V and RS does consensus wins? "Consensus decisions in specific cases are not expected to override consensus on a wider scale very quickly (such as content-related policies/guidelines like Wikipedia:Verifiability or Wikipedia:No original research)." The other way: if there's consensus on something, is it enough?

It's also a bigger problem than that. I guess you also heard Jimmy on the "quality" and "audience" issues... Even in that way, I still don't understand how to act to fix this... and yet deliver information.

MaxDZ8 talk 12:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Those are indeed policies, but much of what you are describing doesn't really come under those headings. I honestly don't know what is the correct procedure when dealing with an article where one believes that the consensus violates policy. There are particular cases like WP:BLP where Wikipedia tends to encourage its immediate application by anyone, but you do seem to be describing something more under the heading of content dispute. Multiple contradictory sources are only a problem if you view the editor's job as synthesising facts from them. Rather, view your task as reporting in a balanced way that multiple sources contradict each other: it is especially not an editor's job to pick the winner, even if they have inside information about reality. For instance a person has no automatic right to change sourced facts in an article about themselves, even if they know the source is wrong. Notinasnaid 13:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Mh, I think I get the point... If I get it, the point is that it's very complicated. I'll try asking somebody in the wiki mailing lists.
Thank you for your attention! At the end, you helped in reaching this conclusion! MaxDZ8 talk 15:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

If you do come up with an answer, please share it with us (perhaps as a new post if more than a couple of days pass). The problem of "how to improve articles when there is consensus not to" has, I am sure, vexed many. Notinasnaid 03:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'll copy this title adding [solved] and putting a permalink to the old (this) stuff. It will probably take a few weeks.
MaxDZ8 talk 06:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Great Wall of

Great Wall of China. I wish to —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.149.33.114 (talk) 06:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

• I don't know what you wish to do at or with the great wall of China, but it looks like you haven't finished your question. 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. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Look up the Great Wall of China article, read it, and if it does not answer your truncated question, try on the Reference desk. --Teratornis 13:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Sign up and then...

I've just secured my account on the French and Spanish Wikipedia and I found that they redirect people to the introduction after a succesful signup. Where are users with a new account directed to here? - Mgm|^(talk) 10:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

It's a special page that's identical to MediaWiki:Welcomecreation, apart from the title (I think). --ais523 10:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• See MediaWiki talk:Welcomecreation for a discussion of what information newly registered users should get on this page. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Can one link to wikipedia entries in other languages?

Nzattitude 11:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC) Can one link to wikipedia entries in other languages? Several times, reading up on a topic which relates to the spanish speaking world, I have found subsequently a much better entry in the spanish version of wikipedia - but it is too long to simply translate.

• Links to an article in another language can be done using Interwiki links which will make a link to that language appear in the bar to the left of the page. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Interlanguage links. I looked this up in: User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia#Int. --Teratornis 16:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

C

Can Anyone please help me by solving the C Projects?

I want a help for solving this project. The question is: I want to write a program on Client-server program using OLTP i.e., Online transaction processing. a) Using Centralized solution. b) Using Decentralized solution. c) Shared memory, message queues, fifo, Communication Channel, socket using Centralized solution. d) Semaphores using Decentralized solution. e) A simple program on clent-server program using oltp.

• This sounds an awful lot like homework, please rephrase your question to something more specific and try at the reference desk. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Reformatting the question would be a good idea too, as a look at your wikitext shows you were trying to make an ordered list with items beginning with letters. To do that here requires using HTML, namely the <ol> tag. Let's try reformatting the question, and linking all the jargon terms to their definining Wikipedia articles (which you should read):

I need help with a C programming language project. I want to write a computer program on Client-server program (sic) using OLTP:

1. Using Centralized solution. (sic)
2. Using Decentralized solution. (sic)
3. Shared memory, message queues, FIFO, Communication Channel (sic), socket using Centralized solution (sic).
4. Semaphores using Decentralized solution. (sic)
5. A simple program on client-server program (sic) using OLTP.

I marked with (sic) every phrase or term that makes no sense in your question, and needs restatement or clarification. The entire question is vague, as is the OLTP article itself. Your instructor probably refers to some specific type of OLTP system, and your question won't make sense until you specify the OLTP system you are talking about. The phrase "write a program on Client-server program" is not grammatical in English (we would speak of writing a program in a given programming language, or to run on a given operating system, but we do not speak of writing a program on a program, although technically an operating system is a program (or a collection of programs), as is a compiler, so the way you wrote could sort of make sense, but that's not the way we say it). If you are not a native speaker of English, or if the original problem statement is not in English, you might try babelfishing it from a coherent statement of the problem in whatever language it can be stated coherently in.

And now for the harsh reality check: according to C. Gordon Bell, "...in software engineering, it is understood that different programmers vary in their productivity by several orders of magnitude." In my personal experience working with programmers and attempting to teach programming to various people, I have noticed something similar. When it comes to programming, there are a few people who just get it, and a whole bunch of people who do not. And I don't mean to be unkind, but the undeniable reality is that the people who get it tend not to ask questions like yours. Either they figure things out for themselves, or they ask questions that are sufficiently well-formed to admit answers. See: How To Ask Questions The Smart Way. --Teratornis 16:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Watchlist–edit-history anomaly

In my watchlist, it says for an article that two changes have been made to it today (1 May 2007) (00:00 – present), but in the edit history it shows several revisions (10+) made today. This is the first time I've come across this. What on Earth could be the problem? Christopher Connor 12:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd never expect to see an article twice in the watchlist, for me it only shows the very latest edit. Are you sure it isn't two articles with very similar names? Notinasnaid 13:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

It may have been due to lag between the various servers (the lag that causes a database lock on occasion that lasts a few seconds). You can check the current lag value with this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?maxlag=-1. (From 0 to 20 is typical in my experience; it's recommended to not run a bot if it goes above 5). --ais523 13:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The articles are one and the same. The two edits that appear in the watchlist appear as the last two edits in the edit history – only the edit history shows several more revisions not shown in the watchlist. The lag value says 0s and 1s. Christopher Connor 14:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Are they still there? Check your preferences to make sure that 'expanded watchlist' isn't on by mistake, and try bypassing your cache to see if that solves the problem. --ais523 14:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the article was deleted and restored today so I guess that is the problem. Imagine it'll work as normal from now on. Christopher Connor 17:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

account

how do you start an account 74.255.64.35 13:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Register a new account. x42bn6 Talk 13:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

See WP:ACCOUNT. --Teratornis 13:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

How to wikilink at the same page with the same section titles?

For example, I'd wish an in-page link to the "Help" section; however there are 2 sections entitled "Help", so how would I like force the wikilink to the second link? --Howard the Duck 13:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Help

• #Help for the first title
• #Help 2 for the second title

Hope that helps! --ais523 13:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

YAY! Thanks!!!! --Howard the Duck 14:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Columns and numbering

When I tried creating a list, using '#', with multiple columns, it kept resetting back to 1 with each new column. Is there a way around this? Never mind. I'll just number manually. Clarityfiend 14:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

deletion of image

Please i would like to know how to delete an image that i uploaded.

I dont want that image there anymore. Kindly assist. cheers

My user id is damolat —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Damolat (talk) 16:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

get rid of image

Please how can i get rid of an image I was never to upload it and it was a mistake.

also how long does it take for my contributed articles to register on wikipedia, because when i search for it, it doesnt display. but it shows on my contributions page. the article is precisely evans brothers (nigeria publishers) limited Damolat 16:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

You can access articles and images from your contributions page. Just click on the link. Your article on Evans Brothers (Nigeria publishers) Limited shows up in my Wikipedia firefox search box. There may be some issues with alternate capitalizations not finding a page through search.

To delete an image that you did not mean to upload, the easiest way is to edit the image and add {{db-author}} to the summary. That will put it into a category for an administrator to speedy delete the image. ~ BigrTex 16:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Search facility is a little slow on the updating of new article creations. It may take a week or so before the article shows up. If you use Google search and search for the title with "site:en.wikipedia.org" (minus the quotes), you should see it in a few hours. Corvus cornix 18:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Website Pages

I want to create a page about a website, not as an advertisement for it, but so there is a record of it and it's history. Is that wiki-worthy? I didn't want to create something to have it deleted because it seemed to be to advance the site or because it lacks sources (I'm planning on getting some, but as it's a website, it's a bit difficult side from the site-link). Thoughts, comments, interpretive dances? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mazzic Cron (talk • contribs) 16:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

See Wikipedia:Notability (web). Jacek Kendysz 16:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

If there are no reliable sources about the site then it cannot satisfy the guideline, and an article about it will likely be deleted. Your stated purpose is not by itself considered "Wikipedia-worthy" (our wiki is for other things), but it might be "wiki-worthy" at other wikis. See for example List of wikis which includes AboutUs.org. PrimeHunter 16:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Another perspective: if you want to create a record in Wikipedia "so there is a record of it and it's history" then this is certainly not Wikipedia-worthy. Wikipedia exists to collect information already recorded somewhere else, so this can never be a motivation for an article. Notinasnaid 18:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Creating new article with duplicate title

I've been randomly learning my way through Wikipedia, mostly working on articles listed as needing clean-up. I'd like to try my hand at creating an article on an individual referenced in an article I've already worked on. He is a video game producer, one of the "top 100" on various industry lists, and I think satisfies the notability requirement for a small entry. I have verified that other producers on the list have pages. The problem is that he shares his name with a musician who already has a page. I've read how to retitle the musician's page (perhaps dropping "drummer" after his name) so that I might create a "disambiguation" page, but I'm a little nervous about being so bold. The drummer Steve Reid has a long list of credits. I would list the producer Steve Reid with his middle initial, but it's not given. Is there a forum where I should ask more experienced users how I should proceed with this? (Maybe this one?) Or am I meant to just take the initiative? Sorry if this question is answered in bold print on some perfectly obvious page; I can't find it. As a newbie, I worry about overstepping proper bounds. Moonriddengirl 17:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

You should probably create your article at Steve Reid (gaming). What to do next depends on which would be the primary topic (how likely it is that someone will look for each one).

If they're about the same, then a disambiguation page is in order at Steve Reid; move that page to Steve Reid (musician) and create a disambiguation page in its place. Because this involves significantly changing the existing page, you may want to discuss it first on Talk:Steve Reid.

If the musician is more likely to be searched for, just add disambiguating links to the tops of Steve Reid and Steve Reid (gaming).

If the gaming Steve Reid is more likely to be searched for, move Steve Reid to Steve Reid (musician), move Steve Reid (gaming) to Steve Reid (over the redirect), and add disambiguatin glinks to the tops of the articles. Because this involves significantly changing the existing page, you may want to discuss it first on Talk:Steve Reid.

I hope this helps. If you have any other questions, you can ask here, on my talk page, or you can place {{helpme|your question here}} on your talk page, and someone will be around to help. Cheers! WODUP 17:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• Remember that if you move the existing page, you need to fix all the articles pointing to it. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

It would be cool if we could settle the issue with a Steel cage match: Reid vs. Reid. This time it's personal. All seriousness aside, I have nothing to add to the complete replies above. --Teratornis 02:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, except to say that if "you need to fix all the articles pointing to it," you will want to read Help:What links here. --Teratornis 02:23, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

statically saving and viewing

I'm on the road a lot. Is there a way to statically save and view the topic (including all contents, links, etc) of my interest and view it while I'm on the road? Please reply back at <email removed - see guidelines about posting>

Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MoebiusNu (talk • contribs) 18:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

Well, you could save the webpages, as you would with any website. Or you might be interested in RSS. Adrian M. H. 18:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

See WP:DUMP and m:Wiki on a stick if you are technically inclined and you want to set up your own offline instance of the real Wikipedia. An easier but less capable method might be to run TomeRaider. --Teratornis 02:35, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

capitalizing the name of my contribution

To Whom It May Concern:

I created an entry for the Green Highways Partnership. However, the title of the entry is "Green highways partnership," with the "h" in highways and the "p" in partnership in lowercase. I would like it to read "Green Highways Partnership" with all three of the words capitalized. How do I do this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Getf (talk • contribs) 20:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

There should be a 'move' tab at the top of the page (alongside 'edit' and 'history'). If there is not, then someone will likely see this and move it for you. It requires having had your account for 4 days. More information can be found at Wikipedia:How to rename (move) a page. ~ BigrTex 20:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

If your account is over 4 days old, you can move it yourself, since it doesn't look like your account is that old, I've done it for you--VectorPotential^Talk 20:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I really appreciate it.

HOW DO U TALK IN SUM1 ELSES SECTION????????

HOW DO U TALK IN SUM1 ELSES SECTION AND START A CONVERSATION??????????71.2.38.191 21:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia's talk pages are not for starting conversations. They are for communication that relates to Wikipedia. If you want to chat, MSN might be more appropriate. Adrian M. H. 21:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• To respond in an existing section, you click the edit link next to the heading for that question. Starting a article-related conversation is done by visiting the talk page and hitting the + tab at the top of the page. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Text colour has changed

For some reason most of the text on my Talk page has turned blue. Anyone got any advice on how to fix this? Thanks in advance! EyeSerene^TALK 21:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

All sorted now. Be careful with your markup; you left out some closing font tags and a closing paragraph tag. Check the diffs to see the details. Adrian M. H. 21:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

That was quick! I thought it must be something to do with the markup, but I didn't know what I was looking for. I can't take the blame though, I've never edited that page! I'll have a look at the diffs anway for my own enlightenment ;) Much appreciated, thank you. EyeSerene^TALK 21:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, actually, it was in a Welcome Template. Didn't look too closely at what it was. I might check that template's source in case it's still broken. Adrian M. H. 21:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The template must have been changed fairly recently as it was OK up to a few weeks ago. The diffs were very helpful - I'll know what to do if it happens again. Thanks again EyeSerene^TALK 21:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• Changing the template would only matter if the message was transcluded, which it wasn't. My guess is that it was all fone until additional messages came in. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think anyone would have had a reason to change the substitution on your talk page (as Mgm wrote, it wasn't transcluded, because welcome templates should always be substituted), so I expected the original to be broken at some point in the past. But I haven't been able to locate it to find out if it's fixed. Hopefully, it was fixed long ago. Adrian M. H. 13:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

How to squish rows in a table together?

Recently, I've had problems with sizing issues of tables. You can only make the text so small, but that does almost nothing to reduce the size of the row, or the free space left in it. For example, I have this template (see this revision in case I've since changed it) for which I have made an example on the talk page. If you look at the bottom two lines, they are awefully far apart, too spread out for my liking. I would like this template to be as compact as possible. How can I squish these rows together to make the "table" tighter?

Another example which I would like to fix is 2008 Summer Olympics calendar which is too long and should probably be squished up, if at all possible. Could someone tell me how to do this?! _└^Jared_┘^┌_talk^┐  21:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't know the exact answer to your question, but if I were trying to solve it, here is how I would search for the answer:

• Start with Help:Table.
• A quick scan leads to Help:Table#Setting parameters, which mentions cellpadding, etc.
• Try searching Wikipedia for cellpadding.
• The search results contain a link to this interesting page: User:Dcljr/Tables.
• User:Dcljr/Tables#Alignment, width and height gives some clues you may be able to use.
• If you don't find your answer on User:Dcljr/Tables, try searching Wikipedia with new keywords you find in your research.

--Teratornis 15:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Inserting Images

How does one go about inserting images? --LtWinters 21:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Try reading this page. Wikipedia:Images. That may be of some help. _└^Jared_┘^┌_talk^┐  21:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks--LtWinters 22:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

WP-Commons image uploading

I have uploaded 22 images, all but 2 of which are free-liscensed. I now think that I should have uploaded them to Commons instead of Wikipedia. Should I re-upload them to Commons then request their deletion here on Wikipedia? J Are you green? 22:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes please do that! You will need to set up an account at Commons. All free images should be on Commons (there is Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons and even a WikiProject). Re-uploading is the only way, so please go ahead and do that. You can use the same filename when you upload to Commons. To delete the images on Wikipedia, you could place {{db-author|I have uploaded this image to Commons under the same filename}} on the Wikipedia image description page for each image, or if you don't feel like adding that to 20 image pages just post at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents with a list of the images that should be deleted.--Commander Keane 05:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Since this isn't really an incident, I'd say WP:AN is better suited than WP:ANI. Anyway, make sure you use the exact same filenames so the links in the articles using the images don't break. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I have posted them to WP:AN since the template gave the wrong reason. Thank you for your help. J Are you green? 20:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

making a new page on my current userpage.

How do i make a new page on my userpage? like, a private page where i can do stuff in. dposse 22:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• See WP:SUBPAGE--VectorPotential^Talk 22:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks!! dposse 22:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Keep in mind, that subpages aren't actually private, and that other users can of course see them too--VectorPotential^Talk 23:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

References?

I am currently trying to add some references to the page for Scotty 2 Hotty, so I added the automatic sourcing template under "References", but nothing is appearing. I see it works for another article, Chris Benoit. Any help on why it isn't working?

Thanks, Kris 22:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

You forgot to format the links. in order to appear the References section, the links must be formatted with <ref>link</ref>. Try that :) Cheers, Phaedriel - 23:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! Kris 23:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

helpme template

If you add the template {{helpme}} to your talk page, an editor will help you shortly. How can I be that editor? Jac _roe 23:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

If someone adds the {{helpme}} template to a page that page is categorized into Category:Wikipedians looking for help, so you could look there for active help requests. Also--and this is how most requests are answered--you can go on IRC on the Freenode network into the channel #wikipedia-bootcamp which reports when someone adds the helpme template, or when a question is added to the Help desk, and people come in there sometimes asking for help, etc. —Centrx→talk • 23:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Jac _roe 23:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I wonder why you didn't post {{helpme}} on your talk page.. :) --Kjoonlee 17:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I use a script (User:ais523/catwatch.js) to monitor the helpme category, and I quite often get to helpme requests first. (No IRC needed!) --ais523 17:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Baseball

Looking for the distance from home plate to second base??

Thanks

Connor (Little League Player)

For that type of question, try posting it here. This help desk is only for Wikipedia-related help. →EdGl 01:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

The playing field diagram in Baseball#General structure implies that the distance from home plate to second base is twice the distance from home plate to the pitcher's mound. I will let you do the math. --Teratornis 15:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

There's also more information in the Baseball field article. Mike Dillon 15:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

The bases are on a square with sides of 90 feet, and the line from home plate to second base is a diagonal of that square. Square (geometry)#Properties says the diagonal of a square is the length of a side times ${\sqrt {2}}$. Plugging values into Google Calculator gives: google:90 * sqrt(2) = 127.279221 feet. --Teratornis 15:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

main page

I really enjoy checking on news headlines and featured content on the main page, but it takes a long while for me to find the related article for detailed content. Is there a reason that these excerpts have no direct link to their origin? I would suggest incorporating a link perhaps bound to the bullet point of each feature.150.182.165.190 23:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Um... the words in bold included in each of those passages should link to the relevant articles. If the bold links in the current events articles don't lead to a page about that specific event, there probably isn't enough detail about that event to merit an article of its own, but the link provided should give sufficient background information about the subject. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hersfold (talk • contribs) 02:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

May 2

Starting a new page

How do I make a new page on wikipedia? <email removed> Dalton1016 01:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

See Help:Starting a new page. The answer is also in the Very Frequently Asked Questions list which is linked at the top of this page. Dismas|^(talk) 01:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't be in a rush. You would be wise to do some reading first. Start with the above pages, then use the links in the welcome template on your talk page. Adrian M. H. 13:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Your contributions show only one edit (this Help desk question). Did you edit extensively on Wikipedia before you created your account? If you have little experience editing on Wikipedia, any new articles you create right now would probably be at risk of getting deleted, because Wikipedia has complicated requirements for articles which tend to baffle new users. Wikipedia is probably unlike anything you have used before, and most new users start off with misconceptions about how Wikipedia works, and what sort of content Wikipedia wants. Wikipedia deletes about 2,000 articles per day, many of them from new users with little editing experience. See Wikipedia:Why was my article deleted?. A more prudent approach is to spend some time making small edits to existing articles which interest you, and start reading everything under Help:Contents. Read the Wikipedia:Tip of the day each day, and read the Help desk as well to see what sort of problems other users are having, and the solutions. After you have 100 edits or so, and you have read some of the manuals, you will be much better equipped to create new articles that "stick." --Teratornis 15:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Links

How can you find out how many links there are to a particular article? Clarityfiend 01:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Go to the article, then click on the "What links here" link in the toolbox on the left side of the page. Then count. Dismas|^(talk) 01:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser

Hi, I discovered an edit on "my contributions" that I honestly can't see how could be mine. It's not vandalism or even a mainspace edit. It's this edit. Would it be okay for me to ask for a checkuser action to be performed on my own account, and could this help me discover if any ip address unfamiliar to me was used for the edit? Could this be a database error, or has someone been using my account? In advance, thanks for your time. Delta Tango • Talk 02:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

For a single, non-vandalism edit, I'd say no. The valid reasons for requesting a checkuser can be found on the requests page at WP:RCU. You might be able to file a request under code G, but I doubt it would be approved. Checkuser is intended to be a last resort for troublesome cases only. I recommend you be more careful about where you log in and ensuring that you successfully log out when you use shared computers. Even if you don't think that's the problem, some browsers hold onto session cookies a little longer than you intend them to, and grant people access to accounts they shouldn't. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 02:31, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Userpage syntax

After discovering the ribbons page tonight, I copied the three ribbons to which I was entitled, along with the journeyman award. However, now that I have those stacked on the left and my userboxes on the right, the actual text of my userbox doesn't begin until several lines down. Any idea on how to fix it? If you know for sure how to do it, feel free to change my page: I don't care who edits it as long as it looks like what I want :-) Nyttend 03:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

How's your CSS? You need to create some divs for each section in order to influence its position. I might have some time to help you out with it later today or tomorrow. Leave me a message if you get really stuck. Adrian M. H. 12:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

No license on Commons image

What can be done about this image? It's on the Commons but I don't see a license, copyright info, source, etc. for it. Should it be tagged with something? Dismas|^(talk) 04:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I notified the owner and they placed a licence there. I'm not sure what the Commons procedure for untagged images is, but they have a Help desk over there.--Commander Keane 05:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Website

I was wondering if it is ok to write a wikipedia about a website that I own. I don't want to promote it I just want to put it out there. Can I do this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Savagemania (talk • contribs) 05:19, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia strongly discourages, though does not bar, writing about something in which you have a financial stake (or any other stake)--see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. It is generally better to wait for someone else to write the article than to do it yourself. Also note WP:WEB, Wikipedia's notability guidelines for webpages. If your site does not meet these requirements (which focus on the existence of independent, reliable sources covering the site) then any article about it is likely to be deleted. Calliopejen1 05:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

give me a it

Give a anwere On a definition of a symphony Nowwwwwwwwwwwwwwww? --124.187.144.21 06:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

How old are you? Can you make better sense? Definition of "symphony":

• wiktionary:symphony

Article on "symphony":

• symphony.

--70.179.170.119 07:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

clear=none

I was just wondering what this parameter does. A reponse on my talk page or to let me know you've responded would be greatly appreicated! Thank you!100110100 07:04, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I think you must mean the style declaration clear:none; See http://www.devx.com/projectcool/Article/20061. Adrian M. H. 12:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

If you are talking about HTML in wikitext and you refer to the <br> tag, evidently the clear=none property does nothing. --Teratornis 14:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

The site's newsletter: the Wikipedia Signpost, has been missing an article.

Where is the Technology Report? Why haven't I seen it for weeks now? Will it come back? Once it does, will the missing past editions of the Technology Report become retroactively placed on the old Signpost issues as well? I loved reading the new technological updates about Wikipedia so if it's somewhere else, please give me a link. Thanks. --70.179.170.119 07:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the problem's that nobody's written one (which can sometimes be a problem on a wiki!) When the next one is written, I suppose it'll be up to whoever writes it as to whether it's retroactive (all the information would be likely to be included together in one new issue). In the meantime, this link gives a list of all bugs that were fixed in the last week (which should provide even more information about technological updates, but which does show all the bugs, not just the relevant one). Fixed bugs are in black, and new features are in grey; note that a lot of the effort is in translation of new languages. (You can change the 7d in the URL to increase how long ago a bug can have been fixed and show up on the list.) Hope that helps! --ais523 08:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

user page

I jus wanna edit my user page. I would like to ask is there any pre designed templates to use for our user pages. Cause my user page looks horrible. Or is there any tutorial about editing our user page. Please help me thanks--Frans Adiesha 09:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

• See User:The Transhumanist/User page design. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

• Have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject User Page Help/Trading Spaces. Adrian M. H. 12:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

How to delete your contribution?

I doubled-send my contribution with different headline. How to delete your first contribution? Thank you. Please reply to my account <chel_mike>—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chel mike (talk • contribs) 09:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

• You could've tagged the page with {{db-owner}}. Someone redirected it for you, but I deleted it, because it seems unlikely someone will type that in. Bracketed modifiers are only needed when there may be confusion between more things with the same name. Also, make sure you watch the capitalization in your article titles. "2006 Koreon Drama Series" should've been "2006 Korean drama series". - Mgm|^(talk) 10:53, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Color in writing

I notice that a lot of users sign their posts in a nice format. I would like to do the same, but I don't know how to. Could someone please tell me? Robbsi 10:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing your signature. PrimeHunter 10:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Differentiation

≈218.248.65.66 13:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps one of the links from Differentiation might be useful. -- Rick Block (talk) 13:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Chihuahua

Hi I have a Chihuahua (dog) that had pups 4wks ago she was fine during the birth and is great with the pups over the past couple pf days she seems to get a high temp and has a bit of a turn i am wondering if she might have a milk diease i sponge her with water when her temp is up then she seems to be fine can i take the pups away from her and bottle feed ? she was crossed with a pom queen_of_angels

It sounds like you don't need the Help desk; you need a veterinarian. --Teratornis 14:40, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

See the Reference Desk. Scottydude _talk 16:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Mediation cabal

Hi does anyone know how long it takes someone from the mediation cabal to arrive? I put in a request for one yesterday and no-one has appeared (yes, I know they are busy people). A couple of people have come to the article I have been editing and are removing bits and putting in lots of citation tags and a POV tag, which are absolutely not justified as the article is neutrally written and full of appropriate references. They won't discuss anything calmly with me or point out anything they consider POV and unfortunately there is no-one else around, so I am waiting anxiously for a mediator.Staug73 14:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that takes a cabal, necessarily. A request for comment should be enough at this stage. Can you provide a link to the article? I'd be willing to at least take a look at it and give you my opinion. Adrian M. H. 14:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

See Special:Contributions/Staug73. As the mediator's response on Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-05-01 Electroconvulsive therapy points out, it's helpful if you tell us the article you are talking about: Electroconvulsive Therapy. --Teratornis 14:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. My mistakes. I have only just realized you have to click on request. My mediator was there all along and I just hadn't worked out to find them (and was complaining about them being slow. Oh dear). And I thought the article came up automatically. I'm learning. Yes, comments would be appreciated. Where will comments appear?Staug73 14:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

That depends on what sort of comments you are seeking. When I respond to posts at WP:3O, I comment publicly on the article's talk page for both parties to see, and may make comments on users' talk pages if appropriate. If I take a look this particular article, I will respond on your talk page. Adrian M. H. 15:04, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I just want to be able to find them! Staug73 15:09, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Selfridge Field

The last paragraph on the page for "Selfridge Field" erroneously states, "STARBASE, an acronym for Science and Technology Academies Reinforcing Basic Aviation and Space Exploration, engages in activity-based science and math lessons." STARBASE is not an acronym. It should simply read, "STARBASE engages in activity-based science and math lessons." As a co-creator of STARBASE, the acronym was only initially provided to congress when they were drawing up federal legislation. Since all upper-case words in govenmental or military "speak" typically deonte an acronym, they asked that we assign one to it. We did so only to appease legislators. In fact, it was done in a rather hysterical brainstorming session. Shortly after passing legislation, the acronym was removed, and the program is simply known as STARBASE (contrary to what others may suggest). Again, as a co-creator, I can guarantee it's not an acronym. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.82.9.66 (talk) 17:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

But can it be verified? If you can provide a source, or the existing statement is unsourced, then I suggest being bold and editing it yourself. Adrian M. H. 17:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Reverts

how do i revert vandalism? is there a button or something?The juggsd86 19:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

There is a lot of different ways to do so. One would be to go to the history - find the revision - click diff (diff) - find undo - click it - save. There are many scripts to do that. If you want one I suggest using Lupin's popups. «razorclaw» 19:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

See also Help:Reverting. PrimeHunter 20:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Irc

The link in question is: irc://irc.freenode.net/wikipedia-bootcamp

The Error I'm getting is: Firefox doesn't know how to open this address, because the protocol (irc) isn't associated with any program.

I would like to: I be able to access all irc channels but can't. How can I do so? «razorclaw» 19:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

You should download a free IRC client such as [www.mirc.com mIRC] and make sure it is specified in Firefox's settings for handling irc:// protocols. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 19:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Internal use of wikipedia and linking to network shares

Were trying to create a link to a file stored on a network share. The wikipedia page is for internal use so we should be able to include this link. You would think the following would work: [\\fileshare\testfolder\1.doc]

But this does not work. Any suggestions? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.140.254.10 (talk) 20:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

Try Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. The HD is all about editing Wikipedia. Adrian M. H. 20:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Note that the clause:

• The wikipedia page is for internal use

makes no sense, because pages on Wikipedia are visible to everyone, even your user pages. Either you misunderstand how Wikipedia works, or you are not talking about Wikipedia at all, but instead your own wiki (such as a corporate wiki).

If you are really talking about a page on a corporate wiki and not Wikipedia itself, then maybe you should set up another corporate wiki that runs on TWiki, which I think has more features for linking to files on arbitrary filesystems than MediaWiki does. While MediaWiki is great for corporate wikis in many ways, it lacks a number of features a typical corporation probably wants (such as easy ways to link to existing content in corporate databases and file servers). MediaWiki is designed for the needs of Wikipedia and other Wikimedia Foundation projects, and Wikipedia doesn't need to link to existing piles of content in numerous file formats, because Wikipedia has tens of thousands of active users who are happy to type content in. --Teratornis 02:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Submitted article yesterday, do not see.

Hello, I submitted my first article on a boxer by the name of Pete Ranzany. I created a user name & password, wrote the article, then hit save. It doesn't appear anything was saved. I read somewhere that it might take up to 30 hours, However, this was longer than 30 hours ago. Is there a way to retrieve what I wrote on my account? Will this article I wrote ultimately appear? what do you think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Reye611 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

You contribs show that you have not yet created any article. Adrian M. H. 21:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

It never takes more than a couple of seconds for a newly created article to appear. Usually it looks instantaneous. If it didn't show up then you most likely didn't do it right. By the way, I see that you have successfully created the article since asking the question. Cool. :-) Tugbug 23:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

My password is supposedly incorrect!

On April 27, 2007, I tried to log in to my Wikipedia account as sw2442, but for some reason, when I tried to enter my password, it said "incorrect password." I had been able the day before (April 26,) to enter my user and password info with no problem. Have I been deleted or removed because of a mistake I made, or did some other user change my password without my knowledge? Thanks for your help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.168.104.2 (talk) 20:54, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

• By any chance, was your password the same as your username? Because the developers (or someone else, I forget who) blocked all access to accounts whose usernames are the same as their passwords for security reasons. If you have email enabled you can request a new password--VectorPotential^Talk 20:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes I did have my user and password the same. I knew I should have created a unique password. How do I request a new password, especially since I'm not sure Wiki has my email address. Every time I ask to change my password it says it has no e-mail address for the user name. Thanks.

You'll need to disregard that account and create a new one then. And register an e-mail address in case you ever get locked out again. Adrian M. H. 21:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to all for your help. I will create a new account. I just hop the info I added this last year doesn't disappear. Thanks again.

Good article indication

It might sound a bit stupid, but how come Good Articles aren't indicated with a symbol at the top right corner, like Featured Articles, or semi-protected pages? It seems like an easy way of spotting them while browsing, at least to me. —May the Edit be with you, always. (T-borg) ^{(drop me a line)} 21:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't sound stupid at all. There used to be such a symbol which was placed on Good Articles. See here for the deletion debate regarding that. Garion96 (talk) 21:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I wish they still used it. Adrian M. H. 21:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I see. Thanks, I really hadn't thought about those points. —May the Edit be with you, always. (T-borg) ^{(drop me a line)} 21:40, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Lots of WikiProjects tag the talk pages of articles with article status indicators. People who like the idea of article ratings would probably want to see the expansion of WikiProjects to the point that every article falls under the scope of at least one WikiProject. --Teratornis 00:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Guide to editing

Is there a laments terms guide to editing Wikipedia pages? The syntax is different from anything and the help system sucks. the idea behind Wikipedia is incredible but it's been made so hard to accomplish the task of writing down what you know so other people will know it too. Everything is so scattered and unorganized, how do I navigate through editing a page ? When I click on the 'edit' link to update the references section of a page, how come there are no other references there that you can clearly see ? What happens if I write something in there, does it erase everything already in there ? How come you couldn't just use one of the umpteen billion languages already available to allow this site to grow. Is it only designed for people with knowledge who also have coding experience ? Thats not very fair, that leaves many people with a plethora of knowledge, and very basic editing skills, out of the loop. What do I do here I get more frustrated every second that I'm in the editing mode because nothing makes any sense.

Please use the + tab to make a new section - I have added a heading for you. Also, please sign posts with four tildes. Navigate to Help:Contents and you should find links that take you through the basics, such as Help:Editing and Wikipedia:How to edit a page. Adrian M. H. 21:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

As regards the "empty" references section, see Wikipedia:Footnotes. Nihiltres^(t.c.s) 22:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that the markup is very easy to understand. I have no HTML experience, or any other for that matter and I learned very quickly. The most important markup keys you really need to know to edit Wikipedia is internal linking, external linking, and formatting texts. You can see these here. I'll give a quick explanation: to link text in an article to another article or page on wikipedia simply place two brackets (like this [[Wikipedia]]) around the title of the article you would like to link to. It will produce this: Wikipedia. To link a word that is not the title of the page to a page type this: [[Pleasant Grove, Alabama|text you want to bluelink]] this will produce this: text you want to bluelink which sends you too Pleasant Grove, Alabama. To italicize text place two apostrophes around the text (''Italicized text'') which will produce Italicized text. To bold text use three apostrophes, and to 'bold and italicize' use four apostrophes. If you need anymore help or have anyquestions please ask here or place {{helpme}} on your talk page. The brackets, {{...}} transduce another page or template from the Wikipedia server onto another page. So the template {{helpme}} will be viewed from your talk page. Happy editing Scottydude _talk 23:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

One more comment: One thing that's great about wikipedia is if you don't want to learn the syntax, it's not that big a deal. Just do your best and as long as another editor can see what you were trying to do, someone will eventually clean up after you. Because of the wiki format, a rough draft is good enough. Calliopejen1 23:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I read somewhere in the endless WYSIWYG-vs.-markup language debate that a site like Wikipedia doesn't necessarily want to make editing too easy and intuitive for new users. Requiring all new users to learn a new markup language functions something like an IQ test, immediately screening out large numbers of people who find the markup language difficult to learn. While I don't have hard data to support it, I strongly suspect that if we divided the world's people into two groups (those who find wikitext easy to learn, and those who find it difficult), the group that finds it easy to learn would probably contain a much higher proportion of people who can also learn Wikipedia's goals and contribute constructively. Of course this is not fair to the (I suspect) exceptional people who are able to contribute constructively but nevertheless have some sort of mental block against learning wikitext markup, but what can you do? No one system can be perfect for everybody. Wikipedia has 6,879,733 articles in English, so plenty of people are able to figure out how to edit here. If enough people hate wikitext and want to build their own encyclopedia some other way, they can do that.

There isn't a huge incentive for established Wikipedians to change the markup language that they themselves were able to learn easily enough, and generally find convenient to use, any more than, say, English-speakers want to clean up irregular verbs and non-phonemic spellings to make English easier for non-native speakers to learn. If only one percent of the world's population is able to figure out how to edit here, that is more than enough contributors to build the world's largest and highest-quality encyclopedia, particularly if that one percent comes disproportionately from the intellectual upper layer of society (and it certainly seems to). In some sense, Wikipedia is like a playground for smart people, where smart people can hang out with other smart people and try to impress each other with how smart they are. On real-world playgrounds where people play games such as basketball, you have to have some ability to play the relevant games if you want to fit in comfortably there.

In a corporate wiki it may be a different story, however, because a corporate wiki needs a large percentage of employees at a company to contribute. If nobody at a company knows wikitext markup, and few employees are technically inclined, it may be hard to get a corporate wiki started. Employees won't have much incentive to learn to use it until a critical mass of employees are using it. --Teratornis 00:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Copyright permission into OTRS

I have obtained permission releasing an image, and would like to upload it. But how can I store the email into OTRS to prove it? Wooyi^{Talk, Editor review} 23:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Assuming the permission is compatible with our licencing requirements (i.e. permission to release under GFDL or CC-BY/CC-BY-SA, without non-commercial restrictions), you need to forward the email to permissions@wikimedia.org. --YFB ¿ 00:24, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

permanent semi-protection

About 90% of the edits to the article American football are cases of vandalism by anonymous IPs.

Occasionaly, the article will be semi-protected for a few days, at which point the vandalism stops. Then someone removes the semi-protection, and it picks up again.

How can I get the page to be permanently semi-protected, like George W. Bush? -- Mwalcoff 23:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

According to the current protection policy page, only special pages are indefinitely protected. For articles in the name space, this only includes frequently recreated deleted pages and the main page. Other protected pages are protected with the idea that after a certain "cooling off period" the frequency of vandalism will drop off. For W's page, that will probably be some time after he leaves office. Perhaps you should mention this cycle of events on the next protection request, or on the talk to come with an idea to prevent vandalism. I'd imagine that vandalism would jump up during football season and other big events important to the game. —Mitaphane _?|! 00:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

On the contrary, vandalism at the page has not dropped off with the end of football season. Thanks for the suggestion, though. -- Mwalcoff 00:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it's a topic that needs to be revisited. I am personally totally in favour of anon IP editing, however, I feel that with some articles, retaining completely open editing is an unnecessary burden on the goodwill of good-faith editors (by putting it on them to keep reverting vandalism). I think that for no other reason than trying to retain good-faith editors who can get frustrated and burnt out constantly reverting vandalism in the same articles, some of those articles should be - at the very least - semiprotected for substantial periods. Anchoress 02:01, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

How about: every successive instance of unregistered user vandalism causes a page to be semiprotected for a time period that increases by a constant factor, minus an adjustment for vandalism-free days following the end of semi-protection? For example, the semiprotection period could double with each instance of unregistered user vandalism, subtracting one day off the next semiprotection period for every two days in which no vandalism occurs after the last spell of semi-protection ends. Articles that attract relentless vandalism would soon build up very long periods of semi-protection. When a heavily-vandalized article's current period of semi-protection ends, the article would essentially be on probation with respect to further vandalism. The article would have to go a very long time (twice the length of its previous spell of semi-protection) to restore its "virgin" state, so to speak.

Personally, I am skeptical about the unsubstantiated arguments in favor of allowing unregistered users to edit. I question whether allowing anyone to edit almost anything makes Wikipedia more "welcoming;" rather, I suggest that makes Wikipedia more misleading, to the tune of 2,000 article deletions per day. Do all the new users who get suckered into spending hours editing new articles only to have their work deleted for violating the incredibly complex guidelines and policies feel "welcomed"? The act of "welcoming" someone requires the active intervention of some sort of intelligence, and at the moment that kind of intelligence cannot be built into software. Nobody feels "welcomed" by a machine (yet), and to pretend otherwise borders on delusion. Welcoming requires actual humans to greet the newcomers, identify their goals, and interpret the complex rules of Wikipedia for each of them. Currently there is nothing that insures new arrivals get that kind of help, unless they are resourceful enough to figure out how to ask for it before they plunge in and do all sorts of futile editing. And note that registering makes it easier for new users to get help, because then they have user talk pages and some sort of identity for experienced users to address.

I also don't buy the claim that just because unregistered users make a number of constructive edits, requiring them to register would deprive Wikipedia of all those edits. For all we know, some number of "anonymous" editors actually do have accounts, and simply forget to log in before editing, because the system does not require it. Another group might be perfectly willing to register accounts, but haven't bothered yet because it isn't required. How many constructive edits would we really lose if unregistered users were blocked from editing? The only way to find out is to actually require editors to have accounts for a while. If after, say, three months of requiring editors to have accounts, if the loss of constructive edits outweighs the benefits of reduced vandalism, then we could switch back to the present policy. I don't understand how a project supposedly based on objectivism and sourcing all our claims would refuse to subject a questionable policy to any sort of empirical test, to see if all the faith in it has any basis in reality. --Teratornis 03:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I should point out that the whole business of deleting articles amounts to poor ergonomics, because most users who have never used a wiki before probably expect a "Save" button to actually save something. Most computer users have been conditioned through years of experience to interpret the word "save" to have a particular meaning, and the "Save" button on Wikipedia means something very different than that. With virtually all application software a visitor is likely to have used before, a "Save" command implies a certain level of persistence: something that a user "saves" generally persists until the user decides to delete it, or there is a hardware malfunction. "Save" on Wikipedia only means "save to the article's history," and even that won't be visible to most visitors if the article gets deleted. Nothing in the user interface of Wikipedia really conveys to the naive new user the quite possibly low probability that a given edit will really be "saved" in the way the new user tends to expect. Of course, if new users were actually welcomed, by having experienced users interact intelligently with them before turning them loose to edit whatever they please, new users would have a better idea of how the word "Save" on Wikipedia differs from the normal meaning. --Teratornis 03:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

May 3

Wiki

Can I join wikipedia and become a member with no payments?

Indeed, you can. See the "sign in/create account" link, top right. Then you may wish to see Welcome to Wikipedia!. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 00:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:ACCOUNT says: "...creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, and it's generally considered a good idea to do so for a variety of reasons." Note that it's best to start off making small edits to existing articles rather than create new articles while you are still very new, lest you violate some policy you haven't heard of yet, and end up asking Why was my article deleted?. --Teratornis 01:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Say what?! You mean I didn't have to sign over my soul and first-born? Clarityfiend 06:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

My user talk page

Hi: Is it ok to remove some entries from my user talk page ? and how do I archive the user talk pages ? BrianGV ^talk 01:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is okay to remove some comments from your talk page. There's no rule against it, unless it's a vandalism warning that you got recently, and WP:ARCHIVE should help you out--$UIT 01:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

A Ctrl-f browser search for "talk" on User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia quickly turns up Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page and more; see the links under: User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia#Tal. --Teratornis 01:49, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response ! BrianGV ^talk 02:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

How

How do I edit the See also: box in Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science? A reponse on my talk or to let me know thus would be greatly appreicated, thank you!100110100 02:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

What change do you want to make?--VectorPotential^Talk 02:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Clicking the edit tab at the top of Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science shows that the content comes from transcluding Wikipedia:Reference desk/headercfg. Clicking the edit tab on that page shows the content comes from Wikipedia:Reference desk/header. Clicking the edit tab on that page shows the content comes from Wikipedia:Reference desk/header/otherrd. So that last one is what you would need to edit, but I would strongly suggest discussing your changes with some of the other editors of that page first. It looks like Wikipedia:Reference desk/header/otherrd gets transcluded by all the Reference desks, so be careful what you do. --Teratornis 02:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Any changes made to that template should definitely be discussed on WT:RD beforehand, it also wouldn't hurt to run them by froth (talk · contribs)'s talk page--VectorPotential^Talk 03:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Language usage inbetween the article

I have a content which contains English and Tamil. I have inserted English Contents but I am not able to type Tamil Content. Please guide me how to insert Tamil Fonts inbetween English Fonts.203.99.42.141 04:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate articles

When there are two articles about the same subject (Edwin Thumboo and Singapore Literature - Edwin Thumboo), does there need to be a discussion or can someone just go ahead and incorporate all the info in one page? (I've tagged them just in case.) Clarityfiend 06:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

• The second article clearly violates naming conventions. As long as you redirect it (so the edit history is retained) and incorporate any missing info in the correct article, there's no need to discuss it, although you might want to inform the creator of naming conventions. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Template

I've created this: Template:Australian Nobel laureates. I can't seem to get the formatting right. Could someone show me how to fix it? Thanks. Recurring dreams 06:45, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

• You bolded the heading unnecessarily (as the template would bold it already) and you didn't include the template name for the view and discuss links to work. I've fixed it now by looking for the syntax instructions at Template:Tnavbar-navframe. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Lone talk page

Can someone check out Talk:Chad Dittman. Maybe it got missed during a deletion or move. Thanks Joe I 06:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. You can request deletion of talk pages without articles using {{db-talk}}, or the Help desk works just as well :-) --Commander Keane 07:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Picture not showing up correctly when not maximized

The picture of rank for a USAF Chief Master Seargent (search: cmsgt) shows up as a solid line when not click on for maximized view. I do not know how to fix this. I have been trying to fix the "Worn on left arm" descriptions that are incorrect for USAF enlisted rank... it's "Worn on left and right sleeve, centered between shoulder seam and elbow while bent at 90 degrees." when I noticed the problem. oh, edit, my source for the info is AFI (Air Force Instruction) 36-2903, but I don't know how to correctly cite----jamesklyne—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jamesklyne (talk • contribs) 07:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC).

• Are you talking about Image:CMSgt.gif? There's a few others with similar names. I checked Chief Master Sergeant, but couldn't find anything wrong. Also, you said you tried to fix it, but I couldn't find it in your edit history. All it lists is your question here. Could you please be more specific and provide a few links? As for the citation. Put the info that backs up what you said at the end of the sentence (after the period) and put it between <ref> and </ref> tags. Make sure there is a <references/> tag in the references section of the page. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

No sir, I am talking about a wikipeida search for "cmsgt" after which clicking on the present rank insignia draws a blue line... url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:USAirF.insignia.e9.afmil.png -jamesklyne