Jump to content

Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎user signatures: new section
Line 342: Line 342:


:Given that the article was deleted and salted because it was repeatedly created, in a manner that did not assert the notability (and in one case acted as an advertisement) of the documentary, it would probably be best to seek a decision from [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]], as suggested by Anakin101 above. I would also suggest working on a version of the article on a user subpage (something like [[User:Commoncase/sandbox]]) and present it during the deletion review discussion, as it would demonstrate the viability of allowing the article to be recreated. I must stress that the policies of [[WP:NOTE]] (specifically focusing on [[Wikipedia:Notability (films)]]), [[WP:V]], and [[WP:NPOV]] must be strictly adhered to if you want the article to be successful. Good luck. [[User:Parsecboy|Parsecboy]] ([[User talk:Parsecboy|talk]]) 17:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
:Given that the article was deleted and salted because it was repeatedly created, in a manner that did not assert the notability (and in one case acted as an advertisement) of the documentary, it would probably be best to seek a decision from [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]], as suggested by Anakin101 above. I would also suggest working on a version of the article on a user subpage (something like [[User:Commoncase/sandbox]]) and present it during the deletion review discussion, as it would demonstrate the viability of allowing the article to be recreated. I must stress that the policies of [[WP:NOTE]] (specifically focusing on [[Wikipedia:Notability (films)]]), [[WP:V]], and [[WP:NPOV]] must be strictly adhered to if you want the article to be successful. Good luck. [[User:Parsecboy|Parsecboy]] ([[User talk:Parsecboy|talk]]) 17:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

== user signatures ==

Is there a limit on user signatures? On my talk page, there's a signature that's incredibly long, and makes it hard to read the thread. [[Special:Contributions/132.205.44.5|132.205.44.5]] ([[User talk:132.205.44.5|talk]]) 22:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

--[[Special:Contributions/132.205.44.5|132.205.44.5]] ([[User talk:132.205.44.5|talk]]) 22:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:44, 29 February 2008

 Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous 
The assistance section of the village pump is used to make requests for assistance with Wikipedia.

If you wish to report vandalism, please go to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism instead.

If you have a specific question to ask, you may go to Wikipedia:Ask a question or MediaWiki Help instead.

« Archives, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12


Wikipedia keeps logging me out after restarting browser

Recently, every time I close my main browser, Firefox and reopen it, my Wikipedia account keeps getting logged off. When I test logging in, the "Remember Me" box is checked at the login page, and cookie options are set to accept and be kept until they expire, but it still acts like this. My other browsers, IE and Opera, doesn't have these problems (and I'm sure that there are no Wikipedia cookies being used for either browser when I test Firefox). Anyone have any idea what's wrong? --FlyingPenguins (talk) 22:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The same recently started happening to me. A hard refresh (ctrl-shift-R) fixes it, but it's annoying and happens every time. --NE2 23:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having the same problem in both Safari and Firefox. —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 04:29, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Me too on Safari and Firefox. --hydnjo talk 21:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Check "Remember me" on the log in page.(Not sure it work in Firefox) Or see Help:Logging in#Log_in_problems —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ftbhrygvn (talkcontribs) 14:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I always check "remember me", and my cookies are enabled. But when I start a new browser session lately, I find myself logged out again. —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 15:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, at least I know that I'm not the only one having this problem after seeing your replies. Also, someone asked something similar in the technical assistance section of the Village Pump as well. --FlyingPenguins (talk) 19:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, that's been happening to me a few times lately. It's really odd, has never happened before, and I haven't changed anything. Hmm... нмŵוτнτ 20:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are not actually being logged off, just refresh the page or browse to a different WP page and the logged in bar will mysteriously appear. Seems it doesn't see your cookie the first time. Dsergeant (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, we've all found work-arounds but that doesn't address the "what happened" question. Whatever it was should be repaired and not be dependent on our "creativity" at this moment. :-( hydnjo talk 21:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Being logged out, Wikipedia:Help desk#Logging in, Wikipedia:Help desk#Interesting log in problem, Wikipedia:Help desk#Logging out everytime I close my Browser, Wikipedia:Help desk#Frequent Logouts, and others I'm sure. --hydnjo talk 21:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just log back in. It's not too much of a hassle. But, if we could find out the root cause somehow, it'd be wonderful! нмŵוτнτ 21:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, this happens with IE also, not just other browsers. Definitely new behaviour as of about yesterday or the day before. Loren.wilton (talk) 03:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This started happening to me too just after having updated Firefox to v2.0.0.12 a few days ago Jackaranga (talk) 18:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Jackaranga, I don't think that this problem that we're all having has anything to do with your update (Geesh - I hope not!). --hydnjo talk 19:41, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having the same problem in IE. At first I thought it was a "security enhancement" on my PC, but after reading this section I'm not so sure.—RJH (talk) 19:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Bob, be damned sure - it ain't you (again, Geesh - I hope not!). --hydnjo talk 20:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, this was interesting. When I opened my browser and clicked on the sign in link, it had my username in the first box as per usual but it also said I had messages waiting. When I clicked on the messages link it signed me in without my having to enter a password. Hmm...—RJH (talk) 16:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) I'm getting the same problem. Someone's changed the default expiry time on the four cookies the site sets to 60 minutes. Anyone know why the devs made the change? Caknuck (talk) 05:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uh wow I'm glad to see so many people having the same problem as me (because I'm not alone). Yeah it happens in IE too. Per Dsergeant, it seems that only WP main page shows me being logged off. Browsing into another article will automatically have me signed in. Maybe we can look into the main page itself? — Yurei-eggtart 07:57, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yea I'm having the exact same problem with firefox where it seems the computer isn't reading my cookies right away. Its not a big deal, but its just a little annoying that it says I'm not logged in on the main page and I then get magically logged in when I go to the log in page. It seems like its a technical problem with Wikipedia since the same problem is occurring when I use Internet explorers and I can log in fine with Uncyclopedia. Does anyone know what is causing this?Noneforall (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It seems someone fixed the problem on Wikipedia since for the last two days I've been automatically logged on when I view the main page. --Noneforall (talk) 19:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for an illustration.

I know we have a page to request photographs, but is there anyplace where I can connect with our resident artists to request an illustration be made for an article? Specifically, I'd like a thematic drawing for The Maid Freed from the Gallows capturing the elements of a maiden positioned to be hanged, stalling the executioner until someone can arrive with a bribe with which to free her. I searched the Commons and other likely PD sources but have found nothing suitable. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Requested pictures which even has a dedicated section for diagrams. See also {{Diagram needed}}, {{Reqdiagram}}, Category:Wikipedia requested diagram images and Wikipedia:WikiProject Illustration.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well I wouldn't call it a "diagram" exactly, but I suppose that will have to do. Cheers! bd2412 T 12:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Bates Edit war

User talk:70.237.206.144, a new user, insists on inserting "Bates said" when sourcing Tom Bates military service, even though his military service was sourced in his official Berkeley Mayor Biography and an SF Chronicle article which is noted in the footnotes. The user has good intentions and is not a vandal. I asked for a third opinion already. Maybe some more comments on the talk page will help resolve this matter. What is the standard procedure?User:calbear22 (talk) 19:57, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a statement to Talk:Tom Bates, supporting your position. The Chronicle story is a pretty clear source. Darkspots (talk) 15:08, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need a little help with expanding a stub...

Good morning:

I am working with Sprint on their Xohm campaign, and we would like to expand the current stub about Xohm. I have a proposed expanded entry, but I wanted to make sure that it jived with the rules/guidelines/etiquette for a corporate wiki entry.

Anyway, any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. We want to make sure we do this the right way, and I figured we would check to see if this is structured and/or worded correctly.

Thanks so much

Below is the proposed entry:


XOHM

XOHM (pronounced “zoam”) is a business unit of the Sprint Nextel Corporation, headquartered in Herndon, VA. XOHM is also the brand name of the mobile broadband Internet service the company will be launching in 2008. Xohm is high speed wireless broadband Internet that is designed to work as fast on- the-go as it does at home. XOHM utilizes WiMAX, a wireless Internet technology designed to provide reliable, high-speed connectivity over large areas, releasing people from wires and hotspots.

History

In August 2006, Sprint announced it would invest nearly $5 billion to use its 2.5GHz spectrum holdings to build a nationwide WiMAX network. Their holdings cover 85 percent of the households in the top 100 U.S. markets, the most of any wireless carrier in any single spectrum band.

In August 2007, Sprint announced that its WiMAX service would be marketed under the XOHM brand name.

Executives

Barry West, Chief Technology Officer, Sprint, and President, XOHM

Atish Gude, Senior Vice President, Business Operations Oversees sales, product, marketing and customer experience

Rebecca Hanson, Vice President, Strategy and Planning Oversees strategy, corporate development, legal and finance

Doug Smith, Chief Technical Operations Officer Oversees technology and network development, deployment and operations

XOHM Partners

Xohm is heading a strategic alliance of technology companies, working together to realize the promise of mobile broadband Up to 50 million WiMAX-enabled devices are expected to be commercially available by 2010.

Building the Network & Infrastructure

Motorola, Nokia Siemens Networks, Samsung, Alcatel-Lucent and Ericsson

Manufacturing Subscriber Devices

Xohm is working with Intel and PC OEMs, Samsung, Nokia, ZyXEL, ZTE, and Trellia to introduce XOHM-ready devices including notebooks, workstations, ultra-mobile PCs, mobile Internet devices, cameras, portable music players and portable gaming devices.

Delivering Service Applications & Content

XOHM is teaming with Sprint, IBM and Google to offer local and location-centric services, music, movies, TV, gaming, video chat, blogging, mobile conferencing, remote surveillance, home, corporate and "in the field."

XOHM Rollout

XOHM mobile broadband will be launching in Spring 2008 in Chicago, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C.


Awards

The XOHM WiMAX mobile Internet initiative earned the Best of WiMAX World 2007 Award for Industry Innovation.


(Logo picture here)

Userboxes

I'm not sure if the helpdesk covers this, but how do I stack userboxes to the right? Most people do that. I need help!!--Editor510 (talk) 18:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:UBX#Grouping userboxes. I use {{boxboxtop}} and {{boxboxbottom}} on my page. Go to a user page and edit it to see how they did theirs. It is impolite to save changes to their page, but absolutely fine to look at the source code. JackSchmidt (talk) 19:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to read the source of my user page. Visit me at Ftbhrygvn (Talk|Contribs|Log|Userboxes) 02:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Westside (Los Angeles County)

We need Sources for Westside (Los Angeles County). Can you help? Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 19:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One very useful tool for finding sources, among others, is Google books. I searched for "West Los Angeles" and immediately found this on the first search results page. Using the various names of the area in separate searches should reveal much more. There are many resources provided at the book excerpt page for finding out the information then necessary to properly fill out a {{Cite book}} template for use with a footnoted citation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

where do I go to report sites that plagerize wikipedia?

This URL is a mirror of Thiruvanaikaval but provides no reference to Wikipedia. Where do I report this? Kingturtle (talk) 19:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORK might be what you're after. Algebraist 20:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Kingturtle (talk) 22:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The best thing to do, if you really want action is the {{sofixit}} way: complain to the site yourself, and if that doesn't work, go to the ISP. I have done this twice, and both times the site itself removed the content, or added a link (see requirements) There are instructions for this at the aforementioned WP:FORK. That site seems to have a contact form. Prodego talk 22:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helping with the backlog?

If a regular editor wanted to help with the backlog, should he or she just go to WP:BACKLOG, pick a random topic and start working on it? Are there some sections that need more help than others? I've been mostly doing 3O and RCP work as of late, but it looks like other sections could use a hand... — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 07:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, there are plenty of things that need as much help as possible. If you prefer "manual labor" work that doesn't require searching for sources, you might want to try Category:Orphaned articles or Category:Articles that need to be wikified. If you'd rather do research for articles, there are of course Category:Articles lacking sources and Category:Articles with unsourced statements. If article writing is more your forte, you can try your hand at Category:All articles to be expanded All of the categories are in dire need of assistance, being backlogged for over a year or with more than 10,000 articles within them. Or you can pick one of the sub-categories; it's really up to whatever you feel like doing. Parsecboy (talk) 02:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need input about new article

I am qualified to write an article about a company called Vectrix Business Solutions, which was a player in the Dot-com bubble from 1994 to 2002. The company received $45 M in venture caplital from HM Capital in 2000, and owned a product, EdgeWorkX, that was selected as the best Internet development software by Byte magazine in 1996. The company received major advertising and business development assistance from Microsoft (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/1999/may99/vectrixmspr.mspx).

I will write this article if you think it is relevant. I don't want to waste the effort if it is not. Please let me know what you think I should do. Jarhed (talk) 23:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our article at 555 95472 is a copy of the Peanuts Wikia article at http://peanuts.wikia.com/wiki/555. One is copying the other, I'm not sure which came first, but whichever, neither one credits the other. If the Wikia is copying our article, they're violating our copyright. If our article is copying them, it's a copyright violation. What should be done? Corvus cornixtalk 05:39, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was dropped into Wikia in this edit [1] and already existed on Wikipedia prior to that [2] in the same (?) form. So I'd say its Wikia copying Wikipedia. But I don't know the GFDL implications. MBisanz talk 06:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that Wikia is GFDL compliant, but I may be wrong on that, but regardless, it still needs to identify that it came from Wikipedia. Corvus cornixtalk 20:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wikia does have its content licensed under the GFDL. I've tried adding the template Wikia suggests to its article, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to be working correctly. Tra (Talk) 23:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can see, the template is showing up fine on the Peanuts Wikia page. There shouldn't be any further issue here, unless someone at the Wikia removes the template. Parsecboy (talk) 01:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see "[Template fetch failed for http://www.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Wikipedia?action=render; sorry]", no template, and nothing there to indicate that this article was copied from Wikipedia. Corvus cornixtalk 19:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's rather odd. When I made my previous comment earlier, the template was showing up just fine, but now I have the same error message stated by Corvus cornix. Strange. Parsecboy (talk) 20:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed, interwiki transcluding can be buggy. Mr.Z-man 20:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yay, looks find now, thanks to all. Corvus cornixtalk 22:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to view the pages that I have created

Is there a way to view the pages that I have created only, not edited or added to my watchlist. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 10:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have created 27 articles wihich are listed here. Visit me at Ftbhrygvn (Talk|Contribs|Log|Userboxes) 04:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Onlyw orks for pages less than a month old. ViridaeTalk 04:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
user:Interiot used to run a tool on m:toolserver that would produce a report of pages created (on request). He is mostly inactive now and may or may not still be responding to requests. I'm in the process of getting a toolserver account and hope to be able to run this tool (among others), perhaps within a few weeks. -- Rick Block (talk) 05:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How many references are too many? - RoyBoy 800 20:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would say one or two is more than sufficient. Note that both links 77 and 84 are dead, and can be safely removed in any case. Unless something is highly controversial, it shouldn't need more than one reference, and this does not seem to be a controversial statement. Parsecboy (talk) 01:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New developments?

Back from a one year hiatus. As such, I would like to know if there have been any major new policy changes/developments/features that I've missed out on and need to be informed of. Thanks in advance.--TBC!?! 05:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DJs, Radio Stations, Notability, Oh My!

Sorry, couldn't resist the little bit of humor in the thread title :)

In all seriousness, however, I wanted to bring up the issue of notability in regard to on-air DJs on American radio stations.

I've had this dispute with several different editors on several different articles and, quite frankly, I'm getting sick of it. What constitues a notable individual, for the purposes of inclusion their respective radio station articles?

In my opinion, part-time DJs and support staff (traffic reporters, news reporters on non-News/Talk stations, "sidekicks" on certain shows, and speciality show staff such as mixshow mixers/DJs) do not meet WP:Notable and should not be included. However, I've run into several instances where editors have overruled me on this issue (please see WDVD as an example).

Typically, in radio station articles that I have created or that I watch, I include DJs using the following basic template:

"As of February 24, 2008, the full-time on-air personalities were:

  • Mornings: Zippy, Skippy, and Dutch
  • Middays: Suzy Gossiphound
  • Afternoons: Tad Pole
  • Nights: Terry Tunespinner"

I do not include an overnight DJ, unless it is a syndicated product such as Danny Wright (country stations), Blair Garner (country stations), Romeo's Playhouse (top 40 stations), etc. I almost never include weekend DJs, unless - again - it is a syndicated product such as American Top 40 with Ryan Seacrest.

All of that being said, can we please adopt an official Wikipedia policy in regard to the listing of radio DJs?

For the purpose of simplicity, I would suggest using the reasoning that if the individual is listed on the station's official website, they may be listed here on Wikipedia, so long as it is a name listing only and does not contain biographical information.

--InDeBiz1 (talk) 07:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:N only applies to article subjects not the content within articles. As long as the info is verifiable using reliable sources, relevant to the article, and not presented like an advertisement, it should be fine. Mr.Z-man 08:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So you would agree, then, that my recent edit to KSLZ is allowable, under the reasoning that you have noted?--InDeBiz1 (talk) 09:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't seem like a problem to me. Fléêťflämẽ U-T-C 12:30, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Embedded graphics print as solid black

In printing the Six Sigma article The Six Sigma symbol on page 1 prints as a solid black square. One year ago (12/12/2006) it printed correctly. I tried both paper and two different PDF writers. All gave the same result.

Has anyone else seen this sort of problem? Is there a workaround?

Bread2u (talk) 18:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems fine in my browser. Perhaps you're having a problem with SVG rendering?—RJH (talk) 18:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Did you get a new printer or install new printer or camera software? Fléêťflämẽ U-T-C 19:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting Vandalism

I was looking at the page on Kuwait and I've noticed that it has been vandalised. I have trawled through the help pages trying to find out how to report the vandalism but I get lost on all the coding and stuff (not an expert user, here!)

Can anyone tell me how to go about reporting vandalism?

Are there specific forums where vandalism should be reported?

How easy would it be to add a "Report Vandalism" link to the navigation bar on the left?

I understand that this is a community site and, as such, is maintained by the community but I do feel that there could be a way of being able to inform those more able to remove vandalism of where to look, should users become aware of any. Please excuse my ignorance if such a system is already in place. If it does, perhaps it could be made more visible (eg the link as I've mentioned, or even a link on each page which can alert admins to review a site for vandalism?)

Just some thoughts . . .

Thank you! PongoPilot (talk) 20:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there's a specific user committing the vandalism, you can warn them to stop, and if they continue being disruptive, you can report them at WP:AIV. If it's general vandalism in an article, something that might have been buried by subsequent edits that missed it, you can always just point it out on the article's talk page, if you're uncomfortable with fixing it yourself. That way, someone who might be more familiar with the topic can remedy the situation. I hope that helps. Parsecboy (talk) 20:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Because anyone can edit, Wikipedia is open to undesirable edits but most of these are corrected by other editors within a very short time. We have a "recent changes" page that allows users to check edits as they happen, and "watch lists" that allow logged-in editors to closely monitor pages they are interested in. In extreme cases we can "lock" pages from receiving edits for a while, but generally the page can be reopened for editing after a short time as most edits we receive improve our articles. You are welcome to revert vandalism yourself (see Help:Reverting); in fact, we highly encourage it. Mr.Z-man 20:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. It seems someone has already edited the vandalism out - thanks again!PongoPilot (talk) 21:16, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You should also warn the vandal, using the templates found at WP:VANDAL. They help other editors to see whether the vandal has shown a pattern of stupidity, and if so the warnings can/should become more harsh, possibly leading to blocking the user from editing. PKT (talk) 21:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for a term...

For cases of ongoing fiction, or even ongoing real events, there are acases where an editor feels a need to tag on 'The character's status is currently unknown', usually referring to the serialized story's most recent available installment (show or comic book issue, for example) being a cliffhanger. What's the right policy to refer an editor to for this overly dramatic, unencyclopedic sort of thing? ThuranX (talk) 22:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Odd character in cite journal template

Does anybody have an idea what that special character is that has started appearing at the end of the cite journal template? For example:

Last, First. "Example". None.

To me it just looks like an empty rectangle, so I probably don't have that character in my font. At any rate it looks untidy. Thanks.—RJH (talk) 23:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is unicode 0x200a, a Hair space, also described at fileformat.info. JackSchmidt (talk) 00:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The reason it is there is quite technical, but described at the talk page. JackSchmidt (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Yet another wikipedia innovation that won't render correctly on most browsers. ;-) Thank you for the explanation.—RJH (talk) 18:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we should use it if it doesn't work on old browsers. Providing information is far more important that having professional typesetting. • Anakin (talk) 14:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Afd

What happened here? The listing is not showing up like it should. Fléêťflämẽ U-T-C 01:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everything seems to be in order now--the AfD shows up in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 February 27. Let us know if it's working for you. Darkspots (talk) 22:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this real?

Is it true that it's unacceptable when I write "President George W. Bush's blog says the Iraq war would end soon" and then provide links to show that - (1) the blog really features the quote; (2) that the blog is really Mr. Bush's; and (3) provide a book cite, written by Mr. Bush to go with it? It is a direct quote, and it should be attributable to first party sources. Can someone help with this strange interpretation of WP:SPS? Aditya(talkcontribs) 13:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No answer! At the very least, can some one tell me what's the guideline on citing direct quotes? Aditya(talkcontribs) 09:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds okay to me, from an WP:SPS point of view. Not sure how relevant it is to an article though. Wikipedia:Quotations may be of interest too. • Anakin (talk) 14:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So, the phrasing of law is more important than the spirit and sensibility? Why would a direct quote not be attributable the a first party source? In reality first party sources should be more reliable than the third party sources when it comes to attributing direct quotes. Aditya(talkcontribs) 11:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What to do about user circumventing WP:DR

I've had an run-in with a user that has taken it upon themselves to decide who has removed other editors entries in a Dispute Resolution page. What should be done about something like that? The original user has had problems in the past but is taking steps to become a better editor. Now, they try and use the dispute resolution process like they are supposed to and someone just removes their request! What should be done in a case like this? Padillah (talk) 16:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The user doing the removals should be adequately warned, and if they continue to act disruptively, you can report them to WP:AIV, at which point they will likely be blocked. Could you provide some diffs to show exactly what's going on here? Parsecboy (talk) 16:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Third opinion is only one (and the smallest) of several dispute resolution projects. I replied to Padillah on User talk:Athaenara#WP:3O and posted the pertinent diffs and edit summaries on Wikipedia talk:Third opinion#Athaenara's removal of WP:3O Request. — Athaenara 17:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand how this justifies you to circumvent another editors efforts. If you feel 3O isn't the place for his efforts talk with him and place a comments under the 3O entry. If you feel 3O is too little and think the dispute needs to move to another form of DR then post a comment to this effect and apply efforts at the next DR stage. But I don't see any of that effort, all I see is persecution of an editor that looks like he's trying to comply (editor history not withstanding). Padillah (talk) 18:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My post here was for information only, intended to aid any impartial uninvolved editors who wish to address your concerns, which I see as valid, BTW. There's a small discussion of a related matter on User talk:Callmebc#Puzzled. — Athaenara 19:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question about TV series season/episode articles

Folks, I have a question about these articles for example: Episode six (Ashes To Ashes) and Season 1 (Friends). Shouldn't the TV show name come first, viz Ashes to Ashes (Episode six), and Friends (Season One). Thanks all for the help. – ukexpat (talk) 20:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For seasons, it generally is "Show Name (season number)" (as to distinguish it from the show's name), however, for episode names, if it needs disambiguation from other names, it should be "Episode name (Show Name)", otherwise the episode name alone is used. --MASEM 20:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


CSS table border problem showing up in Firefox

Borked table borders

The main table in List of autonomous areas by country is exhibiting an intermittent problem in Firefox 2.0.0.12 on WinXP. The fault is that the table borders disappear in the top half of the table, per the illustration on the right. The fault is intermittent in two senses: on some loads, all borders show; and the point at which the border picks up alters ... a half hour ago, it was picking up again around South Korea. now it's picking up at Papua New Guinea. The main page author reckons it's an issue with firefox CSS handling. Would anyone care to venture a second opinion, to be on the safe side? --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help with GAN instruction block

There a discussion happening amongst regulars an wp:Good article nominations about how to encourage more reviewers. Presently, we're concerned that the instruction block at the top of main nominations page appears too daunting and is turning away potential new reviewers—but as we are all familiar with the system, we have no way of knowing if that's really the case.

With that in mind, I was wondering if someone unfamiliar with the GAN process could spare a few minutes to take a look at our instruction block, pretend they were someone interested in maybe doing their first review, and then giving us some feedback on 1) how daunting/unclear the instructions are, and 2) any advice on how we might improve them.

Thanks in advance! --jwandersTalk 00:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's not about being too daunting but about the lack of any explicit solicitation for reviewers. The only thing close is:

If you are interested in reviewing good article nominations regularly, please add yourself to the list of participants, listing your special interests if you wish to do so.

which describes rather than supplicates, and I think it may give an unintended impression to the possibly interested that if they are not willing to obligate themselves to doing so regularly, they shouldn't bother. It could also give the impression that only those on that list of regular reviewers are authorized to review. While this is belied by the later statement: "When you nominate an article, please consider also choosing another article from the list to review," that instruction appears later, is unconnected, and appears as an afterthought. To bring this to a head, I think you should define expressly and up front the lack of special dispensation needed to review articles, state the need for more reviewers, and ask people to do so rather than just describe how to.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Protected Title Question

Mornin' folks. Just wondered if anyone knows why Bloodstained Memoirs is a protected title and how to request it be unprotected? Thanks.  – ukexpat (talk) 14:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the log, it appears to have been protected because it kept getting created and wasn't notable enough for an article. Wikipedia:Protection policy#Protected titles says to ask an administrator or seek deletion review. I really don't understand why it was protected nine months after the last creation though. • Anakin (talk) 15:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, I'm somewhat new to Wiki. Would somebody please be able to list the relevant admin I must contact to have the title changed to just "Bloodstained Memoirs". Thank You Commoncase (talk) 17:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the article was deleted and salted because it was repeatedly created, in a manner that did not assert the notability (and in one case acted as an advertisement) of the documentary, it would probably be best to seek a decision from deletion review, as suggested by Anakin101 above. I would also suggest working on a version of the article on a user subpage (something like User:Commoncase/sandbox) and present it during the deletion review discussion, as it would demonstrate the viability of allowing the article to be recreated. I must stress that the policies of WP:NOTE (specifically focusing on Wikipedia:Notability (films)), WP:V, and WP:NPOV must be strictly adhered to if you want the article to be successful. Good luck. Parsecboy (talk) 17:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

user signatures

Is there a limit on user signatures? On my talk page, there's a signature that's incredibly long, and makes it hard to read the thread. 132.205.44.5 (talk) 22:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--132.205.44.5 (talk) 22:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]