Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:09, 9 December 2008

Help Page Patrollers are a group of Wikipedians who patrol the help desk and help users who have placed the {{helpme}} template on their talk pages. The patrol is an optional service. Patrollers can come and go, and there is no official sign up process.

Regular patrollers may add {{User HPP}} or {{user help desk}} to their user page:

This user is a help page patroller

This user volunteers at the
Wikipedia Help Desk.

What helpers can do

Make sure all messages are formatted correctly,
Answer questions,
Check the Help Me Category and answer questions from users,
Check archives

Patrollers

Add yourself with

#~~~ (Joined ~~~~~)

and if you are not using the userbox, add yourself to the Help Desk Patrol Category.

List

Levonscott User talk:Levonscott User:Levonscott (Joined 07:38, 21 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]
StewieGriffin! • Talk 07:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC) I'm Back Founder of the HPP[reply]
RyRy5 (talk) (Joined 00:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Hersfold ^(t/a/c) (Joined 21:41, 19 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Soxred93 | talk bot (Joined 19:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]
...... Dendodge.Talk^Help (Joined 09:34, 20 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Alexfusco⁵ (Joined 14:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Bauani (talk) (Joined 22:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Kerotan ^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) (joined 06:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]
::Manors:: talk to me (Joined 15:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions|Guest)} (Joined 02:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Teratornis (talk) (Joined 06:37, 5 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) (Joined 01:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Mr. Green^{Hit Me Up}Userboxes (Joined 16:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Josh Powell (talk) (Joined 14:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]
-- ShinmaWa^(talk) (Joined 19:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]
-- Natalya 22:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Active earlier this year, hope to regain that. Rudget (Help?) 13:23, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ChristopherJames2008 (talk) (Joined 13:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Iamzork (talk) (Joined 11:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Cedarvale1965-08 (talk) (Joined 02:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC))[reply]
:-) Stwalkerster [ talk ] (Joined 16:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC), but have been doing this for ages)[reply]
–thedemonhog talk • edits (Joined 18:13, 15 June 2008 (UTC); made twenty-three edits to the help desk page prior to joining the patrol)[reply]
IaM7DeadlySins (talk)
Scottydude _talk (Joined 02:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]
TermyJW - The One and Only (Joined 13:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC))
Eric (mailbox) (Joined 04:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Etineskid (talk) (Joined:18:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]
ukexpat (talk) (Joined 15:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Lego K^ontribs T^alk M (Joined 00:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Chamal ^talk _work (Joined 15:20, 16 October 2008 (UTC), but have been contributing to Help desk long before signing up here.[reply]
Genius 101 ^Guestbook (Joined 22:28, 18 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 06:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
-Porchcrop ^{(talk|contributions)} 04:29, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
$\xi ri\pi i\vartheta \alpha \xi$ (Joined 09:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Unionhawk ^Talk ^E-mail 18:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
LbB (Joined 14:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC))
Mysdaao ^talk (Joined 15:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Enti342 (talk) (Joined 21:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]
-- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ (Joined 07:04, 3 April 2010 (UTC))[reply]
œ ^™ 23:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bobby122 (talk) (Joined 15:17, 27 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]
Sainsf--Sainsf<^> (talk) 15:58, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Imagine Wizard (talk • contribs • count) Iway amway Imagineway Izardway. (Joined 13:43, 27 August 2010 (UTC))[reply]
John of Reading (talk) (Joined 22:01, 4 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]
—ASPENSTI—TALK—CONTRIBUTIONS (Joined 17:38, 2 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]
Goswamir14- www.rohangoswami.webs.com (Joined 00:33, 12 April 2011 (UTC))
Vibhijain (Joined 11:34, 15 April 2011 (UTC))
Electriccatfish2 (talk) (Joined 16:58, 22 June 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Creeper jack1 (talk) (Joined 21:09, 27 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]
—Prhartcom (talk) (Joined 02:27, 22 September 2013 (UTC))[reply]
Denver C. (talk) (Joined 16:36, 9 May 2015 (UTC))[reply]
Masssly (talk) (Joined 18:12, 12 June 2015 (UTC))[reply]
MarkYabloko (Joined 07:45, 11 November 2015 (UTC))[reply]
Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} (Joined 20:50, 24 February 2017 (UTC))[reply]
TheDoctorWho (talk) (Joined 02:46, 13 January 2018 (UTC))[reply]
Sam Sailor (Joined 21:49, 6 April 2019 (UTC))[reply]
Kichu🐘 ^Discuss (Joined 11:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC))[reply]
Jack Reynolds (talk to me!) (email me!!) (Joined 12:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC))[reply]
Kk09771 (talk) (Joined 17:21, 27 January 2022 (UTC))[reply]
ThatOneWolf ^{(talk|contribs)} (Joined 23:03, 9 November 2023 (UTC))[reply]

December 6

Book Cover image for infobox

I am putting together everything for an infobox on an article on a novel, The Road to Samarcand. I have looked at examples of other infoboxes of novels, and they often have likenesses of the covers. Would all of these pictures have been uploaded to Wikimediacommons, or is there another way to put images into infoboxes? I'm completely stuck about how to answer the licensing questions in order to upload the cover image, which I scanned, into Wikimediacommons. If anyone has experience with book covers in infoboxes, I would really appreciate some pointers. Thank you! Hammerdrill (talk) 04:39, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only free images can be uploaded to commons. Few if any book covers are free. So they have to be uploaded on English Wikipedia with a {{non-free book cover}} tag and a {{book cover fur}} non-free use rationale. —teb728 t c 04:47, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. I googled English Wikipedia (with several results), but I don't see a link for uploading. Maybe I missed it or didn't look in the right place. Can you please give me more details about finding where to upload the image of my book jacket? Thank you.Hammerdrill (talk) 22:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and Paste Symbols

How come I need to copy and paste the symbols instead of just clicking them like I used to? Eg.{{}} {{{}}} | [] [[]]--intraining ^{Jack In} 06:04, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say you should ask at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), since it looks like nobody here has any theories beyond what Chamal and Mgm already suggested. For the record, I'm also using Firefox and have had none of the problems you mention, so I haven't the foggiest. Report back if you find an answer elsewhere! --Fullobeans (talk) 07:09, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. thanks for your response, I will let you know if I find an answer.--intraining ^{Jack In} 08:27, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Too many citations?

I would like to know how many citations is "too many"; what I mean is when it creates a problem like this:

...been profiled in Chinese media.^{[2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21]}.

(Article Linda Wang (actor), first few lines. Thanks! ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 07:14, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For a particular debated statement, I'd say 4 refs would be acceptable. Unless all these links to the same domain actually show news from different sources, I think only one should stay. Otherwise, about 3-4 seems right (personal opinion). I'd move the excess links to the article's talk page. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People rewriting History

On most articles, I see people rewriting history. This is against WP:MOS. Why is this? 62.24.251.240 (talk) 10:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's difficult with an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. History has many viewpoints, conflicting arguments, historiography and re-historiography, so there's never one viewpoint. It's ideal to keep articles in a neutral point of view, i.e. by discussing each historian's views with a balanced view on what happened (or what didn't). If you see history being rewritten, it's better to be bold and fix it yourself, or post to the talk page. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 10:12, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by rewriting history? I'm confused because history has nothing to do with the MoS. Is this something about article history? But as Peter Symonds says, if it's about wrong information on history, then you can fix it with suitable references. But please note that the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. Even if something here doesn't agree with our belief or viewpoint, if it's backed by reliable sources, it stays. If you're adding another viewpoint, make sure it is referenced and try to present all viewpoints in a neutral manner. Cheers. Chamal ^talk 10:18, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggesting a new section: what NOT to put in edit summaries

I was direct here from Help talk:Edit summary.

Hi everybody,

Recently I've been experiencing that some editors put messages towards others in their edit summaries. I, in my most humble opinion, find that unnecessary, let alone if that is a personal attack or an offensive stance ([1], [2], [3]). I don't know how others feel about this, but maybe the guide lines should be updated. --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 13:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks are already forbidden, so I don't think it's particularly neccesary to ban them from edit summaries. However, there are other messages better left on user or article talk pages. If you can get a consensus that describes the kind of messages that shouldn't be in it, then I totally agree mentioning them in the policy is a good idea. - Mgm|^(talk) 15:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any ideas how I might check what the consensus is on the subject? --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 10:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess this proposal should be made at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), and see how it goes. Cheers. Chamal ^talk 10:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'll drop a line there. --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 12:15, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Hiding" a template

I'm about to deliver a newsletter, but I think most members would like it better if it was "hidden" because it is kind of large. You can find it here. If someone could just change its normal state to hidden that would be great, because I don't know how to. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 17:02, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See Help:Collapsing. Algebraist 17:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 17:04, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just deliver the link to people? If you're going to make them click on something to see the content, they could just as easily click on a link. --Teratornis (talk) 20:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Idk, it takes away from the fact that its more of a publication, and I guess it could be vandalized? I don't mind delivering it. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 20:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why

Why should I donate to wikipedia? --Useless Bored Person (talk) 21:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because I am a useful and interested person, but have no money - so we would balance each other out. Seriously, it costs a lot of money to provide a website as busy as Wikipedia, and donations help keep it all going. DuncanHill (talk) 21:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See also foundation:Donate/Questions/en#Why should I donate to the Wikimedia Foundation? Note that donations go to the Wikimedia Foundation which runs Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The bottom line is Wikipedia is primarily about having fun (those of us who get addicted to editing on Wikipedia do so because we find the structure of Wikipedia to be highly conducive to letting us attain the pleasurable sensation of Flow (psychology)). Thus you should donate to Wikipedia if you enjoy helping other people, and that happens to be the way you would like to help them. Obviously, some people enjoy helping people in other ways, and still others are sadists or sociopaths who enjoy hurting people instead of helping them. So whatever floats your boat. --Teratornis (talk) 21:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And, er, that whole small thing about writing and building articles, too, of course. ;) PeterSymonds (talk) 21:06, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming an account

If you rename, what happens? Do your contributions under the old name just disappear? Does your global account go down the tubes? Maybe there's a FAQ on this, sorry for not finding it. Thx! ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 22:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about global accounts, but locally, as far as all the records go, you appear to have always been using your new name. Algebraist 22:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note that old signatures are not records and they don't change when you change user name. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The links in your sig will still work, though, because when you get renamed, your userpage and all subpages get moved, leaving a redirect where the old pages were. flaming lawyer^cnever for get 03:37, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

help with footnotes/references

Can someone help me find very simple directions for using one reference for different facts, using that same reference, in different paragraphs. Thank you 71.87.55.138 (talk) 22:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Footnotes#Multiple citations of the same reference or footnote. Algebraist 22:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 7

Where to ask about de-listing a link from spam list

I think the links to typemock.com have been marked as spam by error. Now i can't add them where they make sense. Several questions: - where can I see the reason they were marked as spam? (can I see all the places they were in?) - who do I ask to re-review the status? is there an email I can send somewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.248.169.52 (talk) 08:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Typemock was WP:blacklisted at least in part because of WP:spamming by Special:Contributions/62.219.148.11. —teb728 t c 08:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC) It was not blacklisted in error: See User talk:62.219.148.11. You could apply for removal by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Spam blacklist. But it would be a waste of time unless you could persuade them that links to typemock would be beneficial to Wikipedia. They will be quite skeptical. —teb728 t c 09:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are trying to evade the blacklisting by using www.typemock.net, which redirects to www.typemock.com. That is not a good idea: It will just that domain blacklisted and you blocked from editing. —teb728 t c 09:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlisting user contributions

Is it possible to watchlist a user's contributions page? For example, if I wanted to see when edits had been made by User:HypotheticalExample, could I go into Edit Raw Watchlist and add "Special:Contributions/HypotheticalExample"? If it IS possible, what would be the correct syntax to add this to the raw watchlist? I tried a couple of different variants, and nothing worked, leading me to think that either a)I have the wrong syntax, or b)I am attempting to do something that cannot be done. Thanks! GJC 02:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you try it? I realize that the idea of "doing things yourself" might seem scary, but it's OK when it's over. flaming lawyer^cnever for get 03:33, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I've got an idea. Let's play a game. It's called "Let's use the Help Desk to actually provide a HELPFUL answer, or for that matter, actually READ the question (you know, the part where I said "I tried a couple of different variants and nothing worked...")." Oh--wait. We were already playing that game, and you lost. Good show. GJC 04:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flaming already tried different things. I don't think it can be done. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:02, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could enter the user's name into my contributions and save it into your favorites on your browser. Doing it that way means with one click you can check recent contributions.--intraining ^{Jack In} 04:15, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did think of that, and it may end up as my solution...I was just hoping there was a way where I could have it pop up in my watchlist without having to anticipate where the user might try to edit. :::shrug::: Oh well...Thank YOU, at least, and PrimeHunter too.GJC 04:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is technically impossible to watchlist a contributions page, or any Special: page at all. All of the Special: pages are created only when you call them. They are basically database calls which take raw information from the database and send it to your webbrowser based on certain criteria. When you watchlist a page, you are watching an actual page at wikipedia saved in the database. The contribs list doesn't actually exist as a "page", per se, until you call it, so there is nothing to "watch". --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:23, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you were really desperate, you could make a bot to put a "Special:Contributions/User" into a page, then put that on your watchlist. Except that the bot would have already done the job... But redundancy is the key to life, so it makes even more sense. flaming lawyer^cnever for get 05:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

font change

WTF. Did WP just change fonts/make the text smaller? I was just wandering around (with normal text size/font), then, all of a sudden, the font gets smaller and much harder to read. It even happened on the bar at the top that says Project Page, discussion, edit this page, etc. What happened? :( flaming lawyer^cnever for get 03:30, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you accidentally changed font size in your browser, for example (depending on the browser) by hitting '-' on the keypad or holding down Ctrl while scrolling down on the mouse. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Yay! That fixed it. flaming lawyer^cnever for get 04:33, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote won't hyperlink correctly. I think it is because the URL contains a { and a }

This is the footnote. <ref>[http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/ITT-Educational-Services-Inc-Announces/story.aspx?guid={1C3EACB7-42EA-49AD-8D45-AE5E45104A17} ''ITT Educational Services, Inc. Announces the Opening of its First College in West Virginia Expanding the Company's Reach into 37 States'' MarketWatch, November, 14 2008] </ref> Veecort (talk) 11:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um. the quotes are actually each a pair of single quotes, but whatever. Oh yeah, The footnote is the very first reference in the "ITT Technical Institute" article. (BTW, ITT Tech is a Scam.)Veecort (talk) 11:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was actually because there was a forced linebreak between the start of the link and the closing bracket and closing ref at the end. Putting it all on the same couple of lines fixed it on my screen. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. I actually saw that "forced linebreak" when I pasted it here and I disregarded and deleted it. Veecort (talk) 13:11, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Medaglie, decorazioni ed ordini cavallereschi italiani

In a number of relevant articles, an anonymous editor has tried to indicate a helpful link to the Italian version of Wikipedia, but it doesn't quite work in the "See also" section -- see diff. Three possible corrections occur to me, but I'm uncertain about which one represents the better choice in terms of this array of articles -- or perhaps another way of handling this is best?

For example, at Bronze Medal of Military Valor, the link would be improved by adding "it:" inside the brackets -- [[it:Medaglie, decorazioni ed ordini cavallereschi italiani]] and then

... leaving the link to a page of the Italian Wikipedia as it is under "See also"?
... creating a new "External links" section for this plausibly helpful option?
... repositioning link after Categories?

To me, this doesn't appear to have been vandalism -- just an error which needs tweaking? --Tenmei (talk) 17:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed it in this and the related articles using the proper interwiki link formatting [[:it:XXXXX|XXXXXX]] . – ukexpat (talk) 18:03, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a comment to User talk:84.220.18.15 with links to: Help:Interlanguage links and WP:EIW#Interlanguage (and, evidently, it:Aiuto:Interlink for the Italian Wikipedia version). That way perhaps the editor will know what to do in the future. Also, the editor should read Help:Unified login and check Special:MergeAccount, so he or she can automatically log in to the English Wikipedia after (presumably) logging in to the Italian Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Using Wikipedia Info on my own site

Hello

As a sufferer of Fibromyalgia I am finding navigation quite difficult.

I have one question: Am I able to use the information you have regarding Fibromyalgia on my own site or take extracts from it without linking to you? I cannot seem to find the answer anywhere?

I do not want to be sued for copyright

I hope you can help

Many thanks

Lisa —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisafibrochat (talk • contribs) 23:34, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:EIW#Reusing and especially Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. If you follow the instructions, you can copy all the Wikipedia content you like with virtually no risk of getting sued. (It might be possible to get in trouble by copying content from Wikipedia that someone else uploaded improperly. Other Wikipedia users watch out for copyright violations here, but you should check the references for all the content you copy, to make sure you are not accidentally copying something that should not have been on Wikipedia in the first place.) As to your difficulty with navigating Wikipedia, I can't tell whether you mean your difficulty has something to do with having Fibromyalgia. Quite a few people (healthy or not) have difficulty navigating Wikipedia at first, depending on what they are trying to find. Wikipedia is one of the largest Web sites in the world, so it takes a while to learn, and there are plenty of ways to get lost. If you refer to some specific difficulty that results from being differently abled, see WP:EIW#Ability and something there might help. --Teratornis (talk) 00:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bad interwiki links

On the Israel Police page, I want to delete two bad interwiki links but can't find their source. They appear to be duplicates of the Hebrew and Russian that appear correctly amd in proper alphabetical sequence below in the list of (six) other languages, but these upper ones lead to some template page in two those languages. What to do? -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 23:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Israeli Intelligence Community was lacking noinclude arround its interwiki links. I added them. —teb728 t c 23:52, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I'm too unfamiliar with Template syntax to have realized that was the problem. If you'd kindly advise further: what to do about that "nonexistent" Law Enforcement in Asia" template? -- Deborahjay (talk) 00:06, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Law Enforcement in Asia template is sort of a virtual navbox that uses the {{Asia topic}} template. To turn it into a real template, see some examples of real templates based on {{Asia topic}}, by checking the backlinks: Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Asia topic. For example: {{Crime in Asia}} seems to be one of the few that is more or less properly put together. There's no way to explain template coding in a short Help desk answer. You can learn by reading Help:Template and by studying the wikitext of templates you find interesting. --Teratornis (talk) 00:53, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 8

Hiding the donate bar

I looked around a little but I couldn't find anything on hiding the donate box above every article. Is there some sort of javascript I can apply to hide it? (I am referring to completely hiding it, not just collapsing it.) Thanks, Aiuw 02:05, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Preferences > Gadgets > Browsing Gadgets > Supress display of the fundraiser banner. Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 02:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Aiuw 02:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this trolling

In ten minutes I was accused of not assuming good faith and trolling here here and here. Are these users allegations justified? utter bullshit to me. It started when I removed an unsourced claim off of the Up Series article.--intraining ^{Jack In} 02:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding: the comments I left on the user talk page were deleted, in the edit summary's I was accused of being a troll.--intraining ^{Jack In} 02:11, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You automatically assume that your interpretation of WP:CITE#CHALLENGED is correct, that MarnetteD is trying to re-add false information, and that MarnetteD's suggestion to read WP:AGF is a personal attack. You wrote, "You can shove that good faith page up your arse" and "How dare you accuse me of not assuming good faith". That is a prime example of assuming bad faith. Xenon 54 02:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree but I will accept your interpretation of the situation.--intraining ^{Jack In} 02:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also see WP:CIVIL, and remember that in any disagreement on Wikipedia, the side which understands the rules best generally wins. If everybody understood and followed all the rules, we probably wouldn't have any disagreements. That's because the rules accumulated as a result of past disagreements and their resolutions. In other words, almost every policy and guideline on Wikipedia exists because it resolves some sort of disagreement that tends to arise repeatedly in the absence of said rules (or in the absence of knowledge of said rules). You can think of Wikipedia's rules as a way to predict what other editors will tend to do. To the extent that other editors understand and obey the rules, their behavior becomes easier to predict. This is fundamental to allowing Wikipedia to function. Since we aren't all sitting in one building where we can see each other and work things out face to face, we must create a similar degree of structure through other means. Actually I think Wikipedia has more structure than most real-world organizations. In much of the real world, many of the rules aren't written down, and so they become subject to personal interpretation. In many real-world situations, there are no explicit rules, so you are never quite sure where you stand, and people end up wasting vast amounts of time on repeating the same kinds of arguments over and over. On Wikipedia, ideally, a particular dispute only needs to occur once, and after that everybody can read the friendly manuals instead of repeating the same dispute. Of course no one individual knows everything in all the manuals, but it's readily possible to understand enough of the rules to stay out of most kinds of trouble. --Teratornis (talk) 03:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My interpretation's the same as Xenon's; see WP:MASTODONS. If you're accused of being a bad faith editor, the best way to prove that accusation false is to respond with all the good faith you can muster. Also bear in mind that instructing another editor to shove something up their arse is never, ever beneficial to what we do here, unless you're answering a question about suppositories at the reference desk. Disagreements are inevitable and often constructive. Conflicts are avoidable and rarely constructive. So by keeping a clear head and communicating politely, you're ultimately saving yourself a world of headaches. --Fullobeans (talk) 05:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing on Wikipedia can demand a lot of sangfroid, depending on where one edits. The more personally involved one feels with a particular topic, the harder it is to remain emotionally detached when someone else savages one's edits. One way to avoid getting bothered is to find something less bothersome to work on. A good example is the Help desk, where you forget about your own problems and instead answer other people's questions - I find it to be very calming. See Wikipedia:Help desk/How to answer#Why volunteer?. --Teratornis (talk) 09:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template Substitution

There seems to be a consensus on Template talk:RS500 that Template:RS500 should be substituted for its actual text wherever it is used in the article namespace. I read on Wikipedia:Template substitution that there are bots that help with this task, but from what I understand, this is generally limited to the User talk namespace. Where should I go/who should I contact to stop this transclusion? Thanks! —Pie4all88 ^{T C} 04:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can post to Wikipedia:Bot requests. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great; thanks for the help, PrimeHunter! —Pie4all88 ^{T C} 05:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

help needed

I need a help in redirecting a page from Sonu to Sonu (disambiguation). I cannot make a redirect by myself because the page Sonu is locked. Chandra.20 (talk) 07:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at WP:DABNAME which states "The title of a disambiguation page is the ambiguous term itself, provided there is no primary topic for that term. If there is a primary topic, then the tag "(disambiguation)" is added . . .". I think that Sonu (actress) should be the primary topic so Sonu (actress) should redirect to Sonu which should contain a hatnote (see also WP:DLINKS) linking to Sonu (disambiguation). Zain Ebrahim (talk) 10:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What would you like to see at Sonu then? I don't see any meaning that is more common than the others, so I'd actually support moving the dab page from Sonu (disambiguation) to Sonu in the spirit of using the least unneccesary description. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:50, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved Sonu (disambiguation) to Sonu per WP:DABNAME. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But shouldn't Sonu (actress) count as the "primary topic" for the term "Sonu"? All the others on that list are not precisely "Sonu" while the actress is. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 08:27, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some ads deleted some stay intact

there are quite a few advertisements on Wikipedia... for example indiabulls, CRISIL S&P et al.. Then why is ist that you delete my article without even waiting? this is no frustration but a genuine question.

Regards,

Sandeep —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandeeponthenet (talk • contribs) 11:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For a variety of reasons. Not all articles on companies are adverts. In a lot of cases difference lies in the language. Whether were choose to keep or rework an article about a company relies on whether we can find other people (not just anyone, but reliable sources) writing about them. We also have some additional criteria at WP:CORP. indiabulls for example, is a company that is registered at a National Stock Exchange of India. Companies that are already succesful don't need to advertise, but a lot of starting companies that aren't yet, try to use the high visibility of Wikipedia to their advantage in order to get noticed, that's why we have the rules. If something should be deleted according to the guidelines and isn't, chances are no one noticed or no one felt comfortable to make the decision to nominate it for deletion. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When talking about 'advertising', the tone that the article is written in also matters. If it is written in an obviously promotional manner (eg: our company is dedicated to providing...) then of course it will be advertising. Wikipedia articles should always be presented from a neutral point of view, and not in a biased manner. As for why some articles violating policy do not get deleted, we have a lot of articles here, and many are being created everyday. It's not possible to check each and every one of them to see if they comply with the policies. Many are found and deleted soon after they are created, and the ones which are not seen will be deleted when they get spotted. Cheers. Chamal ^talk 12:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See also What about article x?. In short, there is no central authority that applies policy and guideline consistently and at the same time. Rather, we are a collection of thousands and thousands of separate and individual volunteers, each editing by his or her own lights. Thus issues in an article (such as blatant advertising) may be addressed moments after the article's creation, while another article with very similar issues may not be focused on by anyone for months. So generalizing from any one article's existence or state to conclude something about other articles is a logic that often doesn't work well here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:35, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And see WP:BFAQ, WP:COI, and WP:PEACOCK. Almost all companies need to advertise, but companies that are already successful can pay for their advertising. They don't need to look to Wikipedia to get some free advertising, but if they do, other users will eventually police their edits here. Prominent companies are well-known to many people, so there is often lots of criticism published about them. That lets Wikipedia write articles such as Criticism of Microsoft to go along with the Microsoft article (which is a featured article i.e. one of the best articles on Wikipedia). If you want your company to be on Wikipedia, would you like to have a "Criticism of ..." article about it too? That is what can happen here. Companies which want to control the message about themselves will do so in their paid advertising. --Teratornis (talk) 19:47, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Current US state Chief Justices

I have written in to complain about purging problems very often in the last few weeks. I am now experiencing the most unusual problem at {{Current US state Chief Justices}}. When I go to the page I see each office and each officeholder has a link. When I look at the history, I see the last version of the page is of this format. However, when I attempt to edit the page I see the following

{{US states navbox with columns
|name = Current US state Chief Justices
|title = Current [[Chief Justice]]s of [[United States]] [[U.S. state|state]] and [[Territories of the United States|territorial]] [[State supreme court|Supreme Court]]s
|suffix = Supreme Court

|AL = [[Sue Bell Cobb|S. Bell Cobb]]
|AK = [[Dana Fabe|D. Fabe]]
|AZ = ''[[Ruth V. McGregor|R. McGregor]]''
. . . .
|NY = ''[[Judith Kaye|J. Kaye]]''
. . . .

When I return to the template and click on NY it takes me to New York Supreme Court. I actually want it to take me to New York Court of Appeals. I was going to edit this, but my edit view is quite a problem. In the past purge issues have not affected my edit view.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As the source shows, {{Current US state Chief Justices}} uses {{US states navbox with columns}}. The latter adds state links with the suffix parameter suffix = Supreme Court. It appears there is no option to change suffix for individual states so I don't have a solution for you. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I created this page and did not include that command. I will go back to through the edit history and see who made the change. That person will be the best person for me to talk to. Thanks for deciphering the code.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:37, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Account creator

I have been trying to process requests made through WP:ACC but when I try I get an error due to the fact that my ISP now accesses Wikipedia though an IP shared by millions. How do I request the "account creator" right. Anonymous101 (talk) 19:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Acc. :) That only allows you to bypass the throttle though, so I doubt it would help you bypass the ISP blocks. I'm not entirely sure on that though. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 19:51, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not blocked (as long as I log in) just the IP I use has created more then 6 accounts today. Anonymous101 (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help by the way. Anonymous101 (talk) 20:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I see. You're welcome. :) PeterSymonds (talk) 20:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have granted the account creator flag to you. —αἰτίας •discussion• 20:51, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Ads

Hi,

I found a link to a physician's private practice website on the Neuroendocrinology page (at the bottom under Neuroendocrine Physician). This seems like inappropriate advertisement. Is it OK to delete it? Thanks! Horus (talk) 19:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:EL and WP:SPAM and arrive at your own conclusions, however I personally think that deleting this link may be supported by the relevent guidelines. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I read it and removed the link. Horus (talk) 20:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Author, Skip Stover

I am an accomplished author and would like to know if Wikepedia could list information about me. I can be reached at <email removed>. To find out about my works, you can type Skip Stover on any search bar on the internet. I can also supply you with a very detailed background from my early child hood and family ties. Thank you. Charles "Skip" Stover, author —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skipster56 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Help:Starting a new page. You might also look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. – ukexpat (talk) 22:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:CREATIVE for specific notability guidelines for creative professionals. Even if you do meet the guidelines, don't start the article yourself. You can request that the article be created at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Culture and fine arts/Literature, and you can make the job easier for other editors by providing links to books reviews, newspaper articles, etc. --Fullobeans (talk) 01:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question for Wikipedia regarding monetary contributions

I loves Wikipedia, but I also loves my privacy.

I'd like to send some money to Wikipedia, or Wikimedia (I presume that's where you send it); but I want to do so anonymously.

I'm thinking of sending it in a (reasonably) opaque envelop—$20 to $100 in cash. Now I know the warnings and they aren't to be taken lightly, but I've done this in the past in other (non-Wikipedia related) transactions, and it has worked most of the time (I regarding the occasional loss as acceptable in the grand scheme of things).

What would happen, if you, or more aptly they, got a letter with the cash, my username, an email addresses (free Yahoo! or Hotmail or something like that). Would the money be used as intended, and would it be accredited to me—that is, my username? (Note, I asked this question at the Village Pump (miscellaneous)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous). Where, by the way, should I be asking it?)

Any and all comments would be appreciated. Yartett (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your questions are actually about the Wikimedia Foundation, which is the entity one donates to, and which handles the finances for all the List of Wikipedias and other Foundation wikis (Wikibooks, Wikiquote, etc.). See foundation:Donate/Questions/en, foundation:Frequently Asked Questions, foundation:Contact us, and if you don't find the answers you need there, you'll have to figure out who you can ask. Unless someone who happens to know the answers reads your questions in the places where you have posed them. I'm pretty sure you can donate anonymously without resorting to cash in envelopes, because the Foundation reports lots of anonymous donations. But I don't know exactly how you do that. --Teratornis (talk) 22:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of the donation methods available is payment through Paypal, which is about as anonymous as an online donation scheme can be. As far as I know, only Paypal has the information on who sent what. The recipient sees only payment from Paypal, a username and an email address. If this is not for you, your donation by mail would be sent to:

Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
P.O. Box 919227
Orlando, FL 32891-9227

However, a second, and probably better option than sending cash but just as anonymous, is to procure an anonymous money order ($1,000 maximum allowed for postal in the U.S.) made out specifically to the Wikimedia Foundation. This method avoids the possibility of the envelope opener pocketing the funds because it can only be cashed by the payee.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:59, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got this feeling, Wikipedians are watching me

When I joined Wikipedia a few months ago, I very quickly got a greeting on my username:talk page. When my attempts at articles were huffed and a few of my early postings were edited out—no hard feelings—I got comments, mostly by this greeter.

These people seemed amicable enough, but it lead me to wonder: are there people who hang around the "recent changes" part of Wikipedia waiting to greet, or even sponsor, newbies? If so, is there a "newbie-sponsoring-duty" protocol that Wikipedians volunteer for? Is there a hierarchy of types of articles checked—usernames, then articles, then talk pages, then user sub-talk pages, pictures, etc.

Any and all comments would be appreciated.Yartett (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See the links under WP:EIW#New_page, especially those with the word "patrol". Also see the links under WP:EIW#NewE. When you have a question about why a Wikipedia user did something, the most efficient person to ask is usually that person. You could ask your greeter on his or her user talk page how he or she became aware of your activities and decided to welcome you. You could also look at his or her User page and see if he or she describes any participation Wikipedia's various new page and new user patrols. On Wikipedia, some users leave helpful clues about why they do things, specifically to answer questions such as yours that their actions tend to raise. Wikipedia becomes deeply satisfying once you discover the abundant resources here for answering these types of "why?" questions. --Teratornis (talk) 22:03, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course we're watching you; and the sweater you're wearing right now is lovely. But seriously, the answers to your questions are yes, yes, and not really. The New Pages Patrol patrols new pages (imagine that), the Recent Changes Patrol patrols recent changes (you may see a pattern here) and the Welcoming Committee attempts to leave an appropriate welcome message for every new user who either registers an account or makes their first edit. Involvement in these projects is casual and voluntary; plenty of people are involved in all three. So if a prolific editor is in the habit of patrolling new users, pages, and changes, you may cross paths often. Also, you can change your account settings so that every page you edit will be placed on your watchlist, including user talk pages. This means that, every time you get a comment on your talk page, it's probably showing up on the watchlist of several other editors. This could conceivably lead them to check up on how you're doing by scanning through your recent edits. There is such a thing as Wikistalking, but it sounds like people are just trying to help you out by informing you of the appropriate policies as you go along. There's also an adoption process, for those who want to be formally "sponsored" by a more experienced user. As far as a hierarchy of importance goes: nope, individual editors decide for themselves what's important (although people can be recruited to a project if it needs more help). Some projects and patrols are more popular than others though. --Fullobeans (talk) 00:10, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

language interwiki question (linkings)

An English-speaker, Spanish-speaker, French-speaker, Esperantist, Russian-speaker, Arabic-speaker, Chinese-speaker do an article on the same topic. Presumably, the spelling for the subject would be the same for the first four languages if it's a biography (e.g. Barack Obama or Bob Barr), but how are links between the interwikis made if it weren’t, if the spelling differed, or if there's another script? Thanks.Yartett (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Interlanguage links. The link is to the exact spelling of the target article on the other language Wikipedia, whatever the spelling happens to be over there. --Teratornis (talk) 21:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

language interwiki question (size and number of articles)

Note that on the English Wikipedia, the articles on Barack Obama, John McCain, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, even Joe Biden are lengthy, often editted, and locked. Now check out the the Scots wiki. [[4]] Nothing on [[5]]John McCain. Barack Obama gets only 13 words. The Scottish Gaelic on is a little better. [[6]]. Other language interwikis are the same. Why is this? Is it because (a) they aren't as popular; (b) not as popular and there aren't enough sources in Scottish Gaelic, and even less so in Scots. Must sources be in that particular language, or can one cut and paste from the English and translate. Thank you.Yartett (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The English Wikipedia is by far the largest of the Wikipedias. Once you get past the top ten or so language Wikipedias, the remaining Wikipedias are small-ish and therefore their coverage of non-local topics can be spotty. The user community of each Wikipedia is responsible for their own content, so what you see reflects the priorities of the people who happen to be editing there. The best place to ask questions about what's on another language Wikipedia would be on that Wikipedia's version of this Help desk or Reference desk, if it has such pages. As to using sources not in the language of a given Wikipedia, on the English Wikipedia the guideline is WP:NONENG. Other language Wikipedias may have different guidelines; see their help pages. --Teratornis (talk) 21:56, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My ISP is blocked

Hi. I joined some time ago but I've never gotten around to editing anything yet. I went in to make my first change today (line 'It is not the Garnier it is the popular as to have proof from were I stand I can easly say that Erik built and worked in the Popular. because it made no sense) but I was told that my ISP is blocked because of abuse. Apparently, there's a load of stuff changed that has been traced back to my particular area (I assume, because I have not yet made an edit). I understand that you will get a lot of people messing about and putting up fake edits for fun, but is there any way I can be unblocked, seeing as I haven't actually done anything wrong? Cheers, Emer k —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emakav (talk • contribs) 22:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your ISP must not be blocked. If it were, you could not post here. —teb728 t c 23:09, 8 December 2008 (UTC) Is it possible you were not logged in when you attempted the edit? —teb728 t c 23:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you're currently blocked. If you click any "edit" or "edit this page" when blocked then it will say "you're blocked" and tell you how to become unblocked. Blocks are often only a few hours, so you probably didn't need to do anything to be unblocked. More at WP:BLOCK. --h2g2bob (talk) 23:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I rolled back the last edits to Erik (The Phantom of the Opera), including the text you cited. —teb728 t c 23:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, your ISP is either not blocked our the block was lifted really fast.--Archaeopteryx (talk) 02:08, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned AfD

Can someone take care of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saab Lofton. It's an untranscluded AfD, needs to be procedurally completed and submitted or else deleted. Grazi, Skomorokh 23:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thanks for the alert.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated, thanks. Skomorokh 01:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime:)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:27, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hi, I am unable to figure out how the closing admin come up with the figure of 100,000 potential entries from this discussion. S/he thinks the discussion is very clear but it looks more like a misunderstanding to me. Can anyone confirm that I am actually right or else point out the flaw in my understanding? Thanks. Juzhong (talk) 23:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

100,000 does appear to be an arbitrarily selected number; the actual total would be in the millions, assuming we could come up with a name for every participant from every country which fought in the war. Note that the title of the article is not "List of notable Korean War veterans," "List of Korean War veterans with Wikipedia articles," or even "List of Korean War veterans from the United States" (which would itself be well over 100,000 entries), but "List of Korean War veterans." How could one even do justice to a list like that? It would be impossible to source every entry, impossible to keep vandals from inserting their own names into the list, and nearly impossible to complete. The end result would be mind-bogglingly huge and useful for little apart from memorializing the veterans, which is something we have a specific policy about. The article you mention in the AfD discussion, People of the Spanish Civil War, is concise and restricted to notable figures who either played an important role in the war or were strongly identified with a particular cause. It's easily navigated, illuminating, and informative, even if you don't click on any of the wikilinks. There's no reason a list like that shouldn't exist for the Korean War, too, but I get the impression (obviously I can't read the list myself) that "List of Korean War veterans" was much more indiscriminate than that. Better to have Category:Military personnel of the Korean War and People of the Korean War. If you'd like to take on the latter project yourself, just clearly state the parameters for inclusion in the lead section (you know, "This is a list of people who are strongly associated with their role in the Korean War. For others involved in the war, see Category:People of the Korean War.") and I doubt you'll have anyone clamoring for deletion. --Fullobeans (talk) 00:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The list only contained blue links and described itself as being a list of notable people, I didn't know it had to have that title. Juzhong (talk) 01:07, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, our naming convention for lists of people says that the word "notable" is assumed, and should not be in the title of the list. Your options now, if you want to continue working on this list, are to ask that the article be userfied so you can work to improve it and clarify its scope, or to ask for a deletion review. Just remember to remain civil and to stay cool when the editing gets hot. DHowell (talk) 03:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 9

Vandalism on user page

Hello i keep getting vandalized on my user page, this time by a Ssjgoku420. I had semi-protected the page in the past. How do i get this perma-protected and/or delete the user page? Thanks

--larsinio (poke)^(prod) 18:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unifying account has given me two usernames

I unified my account from the Spanish Wikipedia, which went through successfully. My username here is different than the one I have on other Wikimedia projects and on other Wikipedias, but the emails and passwords are all the same. I can now log in here with Bellito, or B3llit0, but logging in with B3llit0 doesn't give me any of the various settings and scripts of the other account. What's wrong here, and how do I get it fixed? B3llit0 (talk) 01:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are various settings that can be modified on en Wikipedia, they can be found in Special:Preferences. Hope that helps.--intraining ^{Jack In} 04:17, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Despite having the same emails and passwords those are two different accounts. It is unfortunate that you didn't rename your English Wikipedia account to the same name as your Spanish Wikipedia account before unification. Because you didn't, your English Wikipedia account was not unified with you Spanish Wikipedia account. Instead you got a new account with the same name as the unified account. —teb728 t c 05:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any way I can get one or the other renamed (I'd like to rename this one) and have it work? I know that it's possible to move edits, as is done when renaming users, and it wouldn't be too hard to move my user pages to the new ones. (Yes, this post is from my other account.) ベリット ^話せます 06:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Encore Suites" page

Hello,

There is currently a page live for Encore Las Vegas that is titled "Encore Suites": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encore_Suites.

This is the incorrect name of the hotel and while we are able to edit other information, we are not able to edit the title. How would we go about correcting the title?

Thank you!

When a title is incorrect, assuming your account is at least 4 days old, you can click the "move" tab at the top of the page to move it to a new name and leave the old page as a redirect to the new one. B3llit0 (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tag requested

Hello. There two articles, A. B. Swindell & Abaidas, that I think deserves more biographical information on it. Is there anybody considerate enough that will side with me and place a tag on them?--Archaeopteryx (talk) 01:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well they both have stub templates and {{expand}} so not sure what else can be done until someone plunges in and add more details. – ukexpat (talk) 01:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) I added {{expand}} to the two articles, for what little good it will do. The way Wikipedia functions is that articles are added to when a volunteer interested in the subject, and with the ability and motivation to expand, happens by. The expand tags do add the articles to Category:Articles to be expanded, but I don't know that anyone really acts based on that category. The project, Wikipedia:Pages needing attention apparently at one time took an active role in acting on that category but it is defunct.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, how does Wikipedia decide that a project is defunct? Is all it takes just one editor adding the {{history}} tag, as happened at Pages needing attention here? — Sebastian 02:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah.... that pretty much how it works, although if a tag does get slapped on and is not removed in over six months its a pretty good bet that the page/process is no longer used. {{historical}}'s are sometimes doled out at MfD's though and those tags could be considered to have more weight. Icewedge (talk) 02:07, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fishery templates

Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing

The fishery articles use a number of fishery templates to form a somewhat hierarchical network across the articles. Since these have been installed, the traffic for fishery articles has much increased, particularly for the lower level articles. However, every now and then, someone comes along, and wants, usually without discussion, to introduce their own idea of layout, or simply removes templates or pushes them out of the way. Sometimes editors come along who seem malicious. Is there some forum where I can get these issues properly considered by capable editors without axes to grind? --Geronimo20 (talk) 02:15, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you are a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing - why not bring it up there? WikiProjects are ideal when you need to discuss such things with the big picture in view. — Sebastian 02:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see, you've already done that, and it seems you feel that the discussion is getting nowhere. My impression is that this is because there seem to be only two editors involved. Are there no more editors in this project that could help you find a compromise? If not, you could maybe ask for a third opinion or any of the other paths listed at WP:Dispute Resolution. — Sebastian 02:52, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is the problem. The discussion you mentioned was with an editor who is not a member of the project. The trouble is that there is currently only one other (occasional) active member. Right now, there is an insufficient support base for fisheries, which means the project templates can be vulnerable to an editor bent on his/her way, but with no commitment to what is best for the project. Which is precisely what is happening with another editor right now. --Geronimo20 (talk) 03:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, I'm forwarding a question I posted here, cheers. Ryan4314 (talk) 05:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles should answer your question. Most administrators not in that category will also consider your request unless the material is a direct copyright violation or attack page. - 87.211.75.45 (talk) 06:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of documentary films

I am going to try and get this List of documentary films to featured list status. When I start with the table I am not going to complete it in a day or probably a week or 2, Do you think it is a good idea to copy the page like I have here so it would not look really messy for a while or just edit it on it current page.--intraining ^{Jack In} 08:30, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are worried about the way it looks, you could do it one letter at time. Juzhong (talk) 10:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no problem with working on a temporary copy in your userspace. Just make sure that if you copy it back, you consider intervening edits and if someone edited it on your userpage that you include their name in the edit history. Mgm|^(talk) 10:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep sure thing, By adding their user names to the edit history do you mean add them to the edit summary?. thanks--intraining ^{Jack In} 10:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Either merge the histories, or link them in the edit summary along with time and date and summary of what they did. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:25, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

O.K Thanks for your help.--intraining ^{Jack In} 11:30, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Date de-linking

After the dates on an article have been de-linked, is it still possible to switch all of the date formats (1 July 2008 ← → July 1, 2008) on an article at once, or does this have to be done manually? (Reason I ask is that Amelia Earhart should have American-style dates.) AlexiusHoratius 12:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If dates are delinked, then they should be manually edited for consistency using the proper local style. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 12:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So it is not possible to use that automated de-linking script to reverse the format once the dates have been de-linked? AlexiusHoratius 12:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Lightmouse has a script that can assist in this task. Rjwilmsi 17:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shaun Costello

I am Shaun Costello, and a few days ago I was told that my listing page, which has been on Wikipedia for years in various forms, had disappeared. It turns out that someone with the user name "Fram", who lives in Belgium, took it upon himself to delete my page, apparently for no reason whatsoever. At least no reason that I could determine from the information available. How can something like this happen? Are the lunatics running the asylum? Is there no system in place to prevent frivolous actions taken by users who, on a whim, can add or delete what they wish? Is there anyone responsible at Wikipedia who can correct this action? It seems preposterous that people, hiding behind silly pseudonyms, can take actions without fear of reprisal. Perhaps people like your Mr "Fram" should be forced to use their real names during their Wikipedia related activities, so that they can be held accountable. Thank you, Shaun Costello/My real name —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaun Costello (talk • contribs) 12:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page has been speedy deleted as an Attack page or negative unsourced biography of a living person (see here). Please note that this is for the protection of the subject of that article, and not just because the admin fancies it. Please read WP:BLP for our policy on biographies. You can ask about this at User talk:Fram if you want, and you can request a copy of the deleted article too. The article can be recreated with proper references. Cheers. Chamal ^talk 12:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Head Title

If I started one article named "Abc def", where I made an error and want to change the "d" to a big letter, how do I edit the head title? --Nicoliani (talk) 12:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can rename an article by moving it. If your account is old enough and you made at least 10 edits you should have a move tab available, if not, you can ask a more experienced wikipedian to do it. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:38, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Templated category

How can you find out which template has a specific category in it again? -- Menti sock 13:35, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean which categories are associated with a template, such that adding a template to a page places it in a certain category? TN‑X-Man 17:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I mean categories that are implemented in templates. Category:Wikipedian drummers for example: if it doesn't tell you the template that categorizes the user is there any way of tracing the template? -- Menti sock 17:44, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume that when a user adds {{user drums}} to their user page, they are automatically added to the category. Same thing happens with most user boxes. – ukexpat (talk) 17:52, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, in the code for {{user drums}} you will see this:

<includeonly>{{{category|[[Category:Wikipedian drummers|{{PAGENAME}}]]}}}</includeonly><noinclude>[[Category:Musical instrument user templates]]</noinclude>

which is the category code. – ukexpat (talk) 17:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict x a bunch)Exactly. You can see which categories are added by templates by viewing the code for the template. See [[7]]. TN‑X-Man 17:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User Pages and Deletion of Comments

Just out of interest does a user own their user-talk page in the sense that they can choose to delete any and all comments left on it by other users- be it vandalism, warnings or just general feedback? How much control does a user have over their talk page- is it even theirs or is it part of the project and required to be kept for records sake? Gavin (talk) 14:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:UP#OWN and the subsections under it. You can remove warnings and messages on your talk page, but you do not own it. In fact, the removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. For the records, it will always be on the page history so no harm done. Cheers. Chamal ^talk 14:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

It is pretty well accepted that by deleting comments, you are acknowledging that you have read them. Doing so while engaged in an ongoing discussion can be seen as uncivil. Records are maintained through the page history; my recommendation is to move closed dialogs to an archive page, I archive by year. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I ask because I know a user who is removing every comment on his page regardless of whether it is abuse, friendly or anything in between. He's doing it as a response to some bad experiences he's had, he seems abit down- I told him to snap out of it but he took it as an attack...anyway is it contravening policy to just delete everything on a talk page... Gavin (talk) 14:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) On the other hand, persistently commenting on the talk page of a user who clearly doesn't want to receive your messages can also be seen as incivil or harrassment. And on the third hand, editors are expected to be willing and able to engage in a reasonable amount of civil discussion about their edits should a dispute arise. It's all about context.

Of course, this sort of question – while usually presented here or at AN(/I) in a general sort of way – usually contemplates a specific situation with a specific editor. You'd probably get a better answer with an open description of the situation. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I need to see a comparison of Mobile Phones Operating Systems

I need to see a comparison of Mobile Phones Operating Systems and I couldn't find a page about that on wikipedia. Is there something that I can do to get that information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedhesham3 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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 is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. – ukexpat (talk) 15:37, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is Category:Mobile phone operating systems, though it doesn't offer a direct comparison.--A bit iffy (talk) 16:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback Userbox

How do I get the userbox that says "This user has English rollback rights" or something like that? Hairy Perry 15:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go

This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia. (verify)

.--intraining ^{Jack In} 15:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Hairy Perry 15:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mention it!!--intraining ^{Jack In} 15:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can also check out more userboxes at WP:USERBOX#Gallery. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 15:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait, there is one other question I have. How do I get the box that goes in the corner of your userpage that when you click on it, it says this User has rollback rights in English Wikipedia, like ThinkBlue has on hers. Hairy Perry 15:59, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{rollbacker}}. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 16:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

image display

Resolved

– User can see images. TN‑X-Man 16:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Logo on page suddenly does not appear.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wtfr (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure what you're asking. Which logo does not appear on which page? TN‑X-Man 16:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On Weatherford International logo suddenly no longer appears http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weatherford_International —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wtfr (talk • contribs) 16:25, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c)My guess is that it's Weatherford International, but the logo displays for me. – ukexpat (talk) 16:28, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see the logo as well. It may be an issue with your browser and/or browser settings. TN‑X-Man 16:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with comments above, if you mean the image in the infobox on the top right of the page. Perhaps you may try clearing your cache? --PeaceNT (talk) 16:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I cleared the cache/cokkies and it still does not display. Previously it was visible now its not. Do you know what the browser setting should be? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wtfr (talk • contribs) 16:35, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you try a purge as well? – ukexpat (talk) 16:38, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Thanks must of been the browser settings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wtfr (talk • contribs) 16:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HOUSE OF PAIN disambiguation

The Wikepedia info on HOUSE OF PAIN is focused on a former rock band that has been out of business for years.

All current rights to the term HOUSE OF PAIN are owned by Ironwear International, Inc., dba HOUSE OF PAIN. Since May of 1996; HOUSE OF PAIN has been a sportswear company targeting weightlifters and MMA fighters. The company HOUSE OF PAIN is based in Texas, with worldwide distribution, as seen at www.houseofpain.com .

The term 'HOUSE OF PAIN' is trademarked extensively (in USA and European Countries) by Ironwear International, Inc. The only currently valid Trademarkes for the term HOUSE OF PAIN (some of which were issued in 2000, 2001, and 2008) are wholly owned by this sportswear company (Ironwear International, Inc.).

This HOUSE OF PAIN information is far more current than that on a disbanded musical group, and as such - it should be listed under 'House Of Pain' (at least in the disambiguation section). We are not trying to market or sell via Wikepedia, but it is an infringment of our TM to not even list the company who owns the legal rights (TM & C) to the phrase HOUSE OF PAIN. How can we correct this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RickBrewer (talk • contribs) 16:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In order for your company to be listed on the disambiguation page, there must be an article on the company first. Users are usually encouraged not to start articles where they may have a conflict of interest, but you can certainly suggest the article be created, either by working with an established editor or working on the article in a sandbox and asking others to review it. Before getting started, you may want to review this guide on companies and this guide on sourcing. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 16:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And also Your first article and Spam. – ukexpat (talk) 17:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block

Why is the page Virgin Killer blocked for UK users? --Teacake Martyr (talk) 17:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Internet Watch Foundation and Wikipedia. -- Menti sock 17:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 267: / Line 267: @@
 = December 9 =
+==Vandalism on user page==
+Hello i keep getting vandalized on my user page, this time by a [[User:Ssjgoku420|Ssjgoku420]]. I had semi-protected the page in the past. How do i get this perma-protected and/or delete the user page?
+Thanks
+--'''<font color="LimeGreen">[[User:larsinio|larsinio]]</font>''' [[User talk:larsinio|(<font color="orange">poke</font>)]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/larsinio|(<font color="DodgerBlue">prod</font>)]]</sup> 18:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 == Unifying account has given me two usernames ==

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