Wikipedia:Help desk

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

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

Ask a question

March 11

Ames Monument

Resolved

See Talk:Ames Monument. Not all the references are showing up in the article, and I can't see what is wrong. CosmicPenguin (talk• WP:WYO^Help!) 02:45, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I replied on the article's talk page. There are two refs named "uprr", that may be it. – ukexpat (talk) 03:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Fixed in [1]. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, PrimeHunter, for the help. Fishdecoy (talk) 16:30, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Restoring my watchlist

Is there any way to restore/retrieve an old version of my watchlist? My watchlist usually has about 5000 pages on it. I notice it currently only has about 2000. My guess is that when using the raw watchlist editor within the last few days I've accidentally deleted about half of my watchlist. Is there any way to get it back? DH85868993 (talk) 02:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't know of a way, if you did not export a copy to a text file that you could save. The links under WP:EIW#Watch document a lot about watchlists. --Teratornis (talk) 04:23, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Chateau Dudley Wayland MA

Why isn't the Chateau Dudley in Wayland MA open. I haven't found any new or relevant information pertaining to this. I even called and the number was disconnected. Do they still have a liquor license? I know they were supposed to renovate but stay open. I can't find out what happened at a Wayland town meeting either, though there was mention of one on Dec. 28 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.30.171 (talk) 03:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, this is the Wikipedia Help Desk, for queries pertaining to the use of Wikipedia? Perhaps you were looking for the reference desk or some other more general help desk site? Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 04:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:NPA

Anybody thinks my edit contravenes the aforementioned? -- Mentifisto 04:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

If I understand your question correctly - I don't really see anything that I'd consider a "Personal Attack". I mean he's allowed to remove anything from his talk page he wants, but I wouldn't worry about it. just IMHO — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 05:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

He said in the edit summary that it was one. Thanks, though. -- Mentifisto 06:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

commons

I've uploaded several images to Wikipedia, how can I get them to appear in wikimedia commons? the roof of this court is too high to be yours (talk) 06:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

You can go to Wikipedia:Upload and follow the links in the first couple lines there. Where it says "Uploading a free image..." Dismas|^(talk) 06:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I did that. But I tried putting images I uploaded on wikipedia into a commons gallery and they're not appearing... the roof of this court is too high to be yours (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I can see these: Commons:File:Detail St John's.JPG, Commons:File:Trad door balzan.JPG, Commons:File:Taeuber.jpg. Jay (talk) 07:02, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

The ones not appearing are: Commons:File:JewishmalteseFamily.jpg, Commons:File:Trad door balzan.JPG the roof of this court is too high to be yours (talk) 07:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

As I said before, I can see Commons:File:Trad door balzan.JPG. What do you get when you try to view this? Maybe you can try a different browser? I don't see a Commons:File:JewishmalteseFamily.jpg. Jay (talk) 07:58, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

You can see on Wikipedia images uploaded on Commons, but you can't see on Commons images uploaded on Wikipedia. In order to see them on Commons, you have to upload them on Commons, as explained by Dismas. That is, login on Commons and reupload them there. —teb728 t c 07:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Bothersome. Pietru (talk) 08:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

The smart method is to move the images to commons. See WP:EIW#MoveToCommons. You can use the CommonsHelper tool, which makes the process relatively painless once you figure it out. But note that Commons only accepts free content, whereas Wikipedia also accepts some non-free content. You can read about my exciting adventures with using these tools:

• User:Teratornis/Notes#Move some images to Commons

Yes, it is bothersome that everyone in the world cannot agree to speak one language and live by one set of copyright laws. The consequence of this fragmentation is that we have several hundred Wikipedias in different languages, with Wikimedia Commons trying heroically to serve images and other media files to them all. It is a bit of a bother to learn how to upload images to Commons, but if you will slog through it, you will help all those other language speakers who can also use your images. The English Wikipedia is the largest single Wikipedia, more than twice the size of the German Wikipedia at number two, but if you add up all the Wikipedias, about 3/4 of the articles are in languages other than English. Thus for every person you help by uploading images to the English Wikipedia, you might be hampering about three other people by not uploading your images to Commons instead. Commons has other key advantages, such as vastly better image categorization and way-cool galleries. Use Special:MergeAccount to create a single sign-on account if you haven't already. That way you won't have to log in separately at Commons or any other Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 22:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

template for undeleted article

When an article is listed for deletion and result of discussion is to KEEP, a note of this discussion is made in the article's talk page using the {{Oldafdfull}} template. What is the template to be used to link to the deletion review discussion after a page is undeleted? Jay (talk) 07:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

{{Olddelrev}}. Nanonic (talk) 07:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow, thanks, I never thought there would be one! I thought I had searched everything possible - WP:Undeletion#Closing reviews, WP:Deletion process#Wikipedia:Deletion review discussions, WP:Introduction to deletion process#Deletion review debates, and could not find any mention of such a template or a process of referencing the discussion in the article talk page. Jay (talk) 08:38, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Also {{ArticleHistory}} which incorporates the information of {{Oldafdfull}}, {{Olddelrev}}, {{Oldafdmulti}} and others. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 10:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Proper way to copy or cite discussion on talk pages?

Resolved

 – ukexpat (talk) 15:10, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I found a discussion at Talk:Pharmacology that suggests that the topic (withdrawing from medications) be discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pharmacology/Style guide, but it doesn't appear to have been discussed there. Is it considered better form for me to copy the discussion to the Wikiproject style guide talk page, or to simply make a comment on the style guide talk page referencing the discussion at Talk:Pharmacology? Thanks. Shanata (talk) 08:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the Village pump would have a better answer, since this is a policy rather than usage question, but my two cents: I'd take the conversation wholesale over to the style guide page in this case, if only to make sure it gets the attention of more interested editors. There's probably not a formal preference either way on where the discussion should happen, but since someone's positively suggested it go over to the style guide page I'd say that's the pragmatic choice. Gonzonoir (talk) 10:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

In fact, it might be worth just taking that one up at the main WP Pharmacology talk page, since it's a pretty radical proposal (potentially at odds with the requirement that WP not give medical advice), and you're likely to get the most eyes on it that way. It may even have been discussed there already, in which case someone should point you to the earlier thread. Gonzonoir (talk) 11:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I copied my question to Village pump. I will also do a quick search of the WP Pharmacology talk page archives and put the question there if I don't see a similar discussion (you're right that the style guide talk page doesn't seem that active). I agree that, at best, it would be walking a fine line to give labeling information. However, description of physiological effects of coming off medications might be appropriate. Thanks again. Shanata (talk) 11:45, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

transfer of credit hours

Please inform that how many credit hours are trasnsferred from Diploma to undergraduate course —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.138.47.12 (talk) 10:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. Gonzonoir (talk) 10:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Kenya Provinces Riftvalley.png

Resolved

 – ukexpat (talk) 15:09, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Why does this page (that already exists) have a "Create this page" tab at the top. Is this a bug or a feature. It seems illogical to me. --droll [chat] 11:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Because the page doesn't actually exist on the english wikipedia. What you're seeing is the information from commons. Previous to this (I'm guessing recent) software update, the file tab would appear red to signify this - showing that the page didn't exist. Nanonic (talk) 11:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, If that is the way they want it then that's fine by me. --droll [chat] 12:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Linking to Commons

Resolved

 – ukexpat (talk) 15:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I seem to have the opposite problem to that in the issue "Commons" earlier today. I have uploaded some images to Commons (on the 8th March) but can't link to them from Wikipedia. The file Garneddwen_Halt_31_May_1975_1.jpg is one of them. It can be seen in Commons with no problem. Can anyone point out where i am going wrong? Bruern Crossing (talk) 13:10, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

No such image exists, either here or on commons. You're probably thinking of File:Garneddwen Halt 31 May 1975 1.JPG, which is working fine. Algebraist 13:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

(e/c) Works fine using [[File:Garneddwen Halt 31 May 1975 1.JPG|100px]]:

Note that since the file name has the extension in capitals, it should be given the same way in the link too. Cheers. Chamal ^talk 13:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Algebraist and Chama. Looks like the capitalised extension is what I was getting wrong.Bruern Crossing (talk) 13:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Getting autoconfirmed status

Hi. I'd like to clean something up on the iPod page, specifically that the release date of the ipod (23 October 2001) has been broken over the line, i.e. 23 is on one line, October 2001 is on the next line down. This is poor writing and falls into the kind of clean up I tend to do instinctively(and mostly anonymously) any time I see a problem like that. (I ask myself what Strunk or EB White would say and then fix it so they'd like it.) However, because the ipod page is locked (some sort of locked, I can't tell which level), I can't edit it. How do I get the right status to be able to edit that? Thanks, cheers. Friedlad (talk) 14:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC) PS-are the four tildes all I have to do to sign this post? [self edit: YEP!]

It appears the article iPod is currently semi-protected, which means that you must be autoconfirmed to edit it. That simply means your account needs to be active for four days and made at least ten edits. You have four more edits to go before your account is autoconfirmed. TNXMan 15:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Note that where lines break in articles depends on what browser and settings one uses (the date all appears on one line when I view iPod, for instance), so don't just put in a hard line break; if you want "23 October 2001" to always appear on one line, add HTML non-breaking spaces, thus: "23 October 2001" (open the edit window to see what I did). This code is also available in the "Wiki markup" section of the special-characters box below the edit window. Deor (talk) 17:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Letters with accents

How would I type letters with French accents? Thanking you in advance, Hammerdrill (talk) 15:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Right below the edit summary box (when you are editing a page), you should see a drop-down menu. The default option says "Insert", but if you choose "Latin", it should bring up an entire menu of letters with accents, umlauts, etc. TNXMan 16:02, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Depending on your computer, you may also be able to use alt codes or something similar. Algebraist 16:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

See also Diacritic#Generation with computers. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Editing titles for articles

How can I edit the title of an article that I submitted? There is a capitalization error that I want to correct. My title reads 'Duval teachers united' instead of 'Duval Teachers United.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnmeeks1974 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

In order to correct the title of a page, the page must be moved to the correct title (assuming the new title isn't taken). In order to do this, your account must be autoconfirmed, which means your account has been active for four days and made at least ten edits. I've gone ahead and move the page for you. You can see it at Duval Teachers United. TNXMan 16:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Warnings

I am just wondering it is only administrators that can give warnigns to users? or can anyone do it, by warning i mean leave a message on the users talk page not acutally any sort of givign thema warnign ont ehre account or such if it exists. If i am able ot to do that is there a script for doign it automatically? just have a user who is adding informaiton to article that isnt vandlism as such but adding stuff that is inappaiorate and is nothing to do with the shpow ie adding basically sex topics and implying it happens in the episode to children cartoon episodes. I am starting with askign the user to explain there edits and where a source for it is but the response is not directly offesnive or rude but it seems to be getting that way hence why i like ot know if it possible to warn--Andrewcrawford (talk) 16:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Of course non-admins can leave messages for other users. Just go to that user's user talk page, and explain in a civil manner your concerns. If the user is blatantly disregarding Wikipedia rules or basic norms of human decency, feel free to remind them of the rules and direct them to the appropriate policies and guidelines. Admins are editors with special tools, but they do not have any special rights or powers. Admins may delete articles or block users, but they are not "judges" or "police" and do not hold any additional weight when solving disputes. Just go ahead and ask the misbehaving user to stop; when it becomes clear that they will not, and if you need an admin to stop them, after you have given them ample warning, you can post a message at WP:AIV or WP:ANI. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Anyone can revert vandalism and leave warnings. From Special:Preferences → Gadgets, you can enable Twinkle and Friendly. Follow the links from that page for more help. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 16:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Though you should be cautious using these, especially with established users, there's also a set of warning templates you might find useful in cases of clearly-defined policy breaches. Gonzonoir (talk) 20:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. There are templates, but too many users, both as givers and receivers, look at these templates as "magic bullets" which somehow carry more weight than a personally written message. They do not. If you just tell someone to stop being disruptive, and cite policy, and warn them of the eventuality of being blocked, there is no need to use those templates. You may use them for convenience purposes, but they are not required. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:34, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Not only is it OK for you to message another user re disruptive edits, but it's a helpful step. Many "vandalism" edits are really just first-time experiments, and a polite, positive message to the editor may stop further experimentation and even convince them to contribute instead. I like Template:Welcometest for this purpose. However, if a disruptive editor is bent on vandalising articles and ignores warnings there is a four-step warning process, after which an admin may block the vandal if s/he feels it appropriate. Your message, along with any others issued to the same user, may eventually be used by an admin as part of the process of deciding whether to issue a block, so it's a useful part of the collaborative process. See Wikipedia:Vandalism for advice on what vandalism is and is not, and how to deal with it. And thanks for helping. Karenjc 23:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

in-line template for "wrong" link?

Resolved

 – TNXMan 20:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure I used to know an in-line template for when a citation given didn't actually prove the fact at hand, and now I can't find it. I don't *think* it's {{specify}}. Been looking around for 15 mins now and no luck, anyone who can point me in the right direction? Ta. AllynJ (talk | contribs) 19:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I think you want {{Failed verification}}. Algebraist 19:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

That's it. Thanks a lot :) AllynJ (talk | contribs) 19:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Capitalizing the title

I wrote an article, but I can't figure out how to capitalize Donald Leroy Evans at the top of the page. Hopefully somebody else knows how. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_leroy_evans —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thehull (talk • contribs) 19:58, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

• Hi TheHull: that text reflects the article's title, which was established when you created the page. I've now moved it to a correctly-capitalized version. Gonzonoir (talk) 20:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Why my posting is Tagged

Please forgive me I am new at this. I have read "Wikipedia: Your first Article" and posted "Secure Video Hosting"

Am I being tagged because: 1) my formatting (my references were not in the right place) 2) the fact that I refer to a company 3) the topic is already covered

How can I correct this?

NButen (talk) 21:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it appears your article was deleted as advertising. Wikipedia does not host advertising for companies, products, or services. All articles must be written from a neutral point of view and cannot be promotional. TNXMan 21:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

And see WP:BFAQ and Wikipedia: The Missing Manual. --Teratornis (talk) 21:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

footnotes

how do you cite wikipedia as a footnote for a research paper in MLA format? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.135.216 (talk) 21:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I think this page may have the answers you need. TNXMan 21:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Upcoming albums for musicians

If a musician has an new album coming out soon, should I list the album under his discography and/or mention it in the body of the article?--Pokeronskis (talk) 22:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

See if Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums gives any specific guidance. If not, then I would think adding it under the discography section would be fine, since that is where the album will eventually appear when it comes out. Mentioning the album somewhere else would just create extra work later, and I can't see the point. If the album is coming out in, say, three months, that gives a three month window during which someone else might complain about having a to-be-released album in the discography section. So even if someone might not like the idea, what are the odds that they will notice in the next three months? That's only my opinion. I haven't edited album articles enough to know the current best practice. You could also ask on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums if you can't find a documented answer and you want to be sure. --Teratornis (talk) 22:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

As usual, reliable sources apply. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 22:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for adding that. In case the original poster hasn't heard the term or needs a refresher: WP:RS. That is, regardless of where the to-be-released album goes in the article, the o.p. should provide a footnote citation to at least one reliable source that gives the details and the release date. --Teratornis (talk) 03:30, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

false information

Hi I am Callum O'Grady from Nuneaton and under my name there is false information about me being the 'oldest graduate' Under 'Nuneaton' 'notable inhabitants'. I think somebody did this on my laptop a while ago as there has been laughing about it from friends - how do i delete this? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.133.84 (talk) 22:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:BLP says any unsourced information about a living person which is in any way contentious should be removed (by anyone) immediately, with no need for prior discussion. --Teratornis (talk) 22:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I removed the unsourced claim. You may now return to your former obscurity. --Teratornis (talk) 22:30, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

archives fort lauderdale florida

i want to know what offices were next to holy cross hospital from the time it was bulit thru when the fort lauderdale hospice was built nex to it 23:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC)74.225.43.61 (talk)

You could ask at the Reference desk, or maybe someone at the Fort Lauderdale Historical Society could tell you. We have a History of Fort Lauderdale, Florida which you can read, but I would be surprised if it is that detailed. --Teratornis (talk) 04:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

March 12

AFD history

I'm trying to fine-tune some language for the BLP policy and I'm wondering if there's an easy way to generate a list of AFD's that have referenced or involved WP:BLP1E rather than trying to sort through all of the "what links here" on the unredirected WP:BLP1E page. SDY (talk) 00:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

This search might be useful. I tried using Google first using this search but I must be doing something wrong (or does Google not index pages in the wikipedia namespace?).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:34, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I vaguely remember a decision a while back to noindex all AFD subpages. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

bugzilla:4776 removed them from indexing by editing our robots.txt at http://en.wikipedia.org/robots.txt. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

That first search is helpful, thanks. SDY (talk) 04:22, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Anytime.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:30, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Problem with another editor

I hope I'm asking this in the right place (It's a little overwheleming navigating Wikipedia:Community portal). This is my first time on Wikipedia and I seem to have got off on the wrong foot. I noticed today that an editor was removing a number of "dead links" from pages dealing with mobsters. I thought I'd finally have a go at editing and I double checked the websites on Wayback Machine to see if there were any archived versions. I was successful in replacing 14 articles but these were reverted as vandalism by the same editor. I was careful to explain that in my first edit summery and undid several of these edits explaining these edits weren't vandalism but that I'd replaced the websites with archived versions.

At this point, the editor seemed upset that I'd been reverting his edits. I tried to talk to him on his talk page and we briefly discussed the issue on my own talk page. It was my understanding based on his edit summaries that the link he removed were "dead links" and I had simply replaced them. It was his opinion that the majority were "personal websites" which violated WP:EL. While I have read WP:EL and understand its guidelines, I pointed out there were a number of removed websites which do not fit this criteria. One of these was the official website of Waukesha, Wisconsin and I asked if he could list a specific "personal website" which violated WP:EL. I also brought up the news and magazine articles which were removed, but he didn't really answer my questions. The conversation seems to gotten a little hostile and I was wondering if someone could help out.

For the record, I originally made 15 edits. Of these, 4 websites were being used as cited references while 12 others were used as external links. My edits to Arnold Rothstein and Charles Birger removed vandalism/blanking. 72.74.209.246 (talk) 00:43, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I have asked the editor in question to slow down a bit and consider taking the dispute to dispute resolution rather than edit warring. He was certainly mischaracterizing your edits as vandalism, and we should always assume good faith. I will make no comment on the merits of the websites you are trying to link, so don't think that I am endorsing one side or the other in this. You are both involved in an edit war and each of you may be blocked if it continues. My advice is to disengage from editing the articles. Just because one can make instant changes does not always mean it is in the best interest of all involved to do so. Often, you end up rapidly reverting each other, which is disruptive. So let me give you the same advice I gave him. There are lots of venues at Wikipedia availible to resolve disputes like this. Two that may work here are Wikipedia:Third Opinion and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Start a thread at one of those noticeboards, and see if uninvolved editors can help adjudicate the problem. Good luck! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

That certainly wasn't my intention and I left a note at his talk page as soon as he began reverting my edits. I honestly thought the editor had overlooked by edit summery or that I'd simply restored the old links. I did stop editing the articles in question so I could try to sort things out with him but now he seems to believe I'm stalking him. All I was doing was trying to help and frankly this has been a troubling experience. 72.74.209.246 (talk) 01:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

In that case, if you are still concerned, I recommend bringing in outside people to help resolve this dispute. If you try the noticeboards I left above, and leave a message there, they are patrolled by people who tend to be good at resolving disputes and mediating problems. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:34, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not saying you did anything wrong, but note that external links are in most cases inferior to footnote citations. See Wikipedia:Spam event horizon and WP:LINKFARM. It's best to think of external links as being merely a temporary list of sites that editors should eventually work into footnotes. Therefore, I'd focus first on getting the other editor to agree about the status of the four footnotes in dispute. You're probably on firmer ground with those, as long as they qualify as reliable sources and support some claim(s) in the article(s). In general it's best not to be too aggressive when you see a large number of edits by another editor that you want to revert. The methodical and considerate approach is to first make a list of all the things you'd like to change, pick the one or two that you believe you can make the best argument for, and discuss them with the other editor before acting. That way you get an idea of how strongly the other editor feels before you act. Realize that reverting another editor is an aggressive act, even if the other editor was also being aggressive. Aggression is intrinsically a part of collaborative editing - we cannot really avoid stepping on other people's toes as we go around changing things - but that doesn't mean other people are going to be any less reptillian about it. Also note that by editing as an unregistered user, you automatically bias many other users against you, because a glance at any article history tends to show many vandal edits by unregistered users. From your comments above, you don't sound like you belong to the vandal class in any way, but anyone who has been reverting I.P. vandals for years on Wikipedia will tend to make that negative association. So my advice is to distance yourself from the vandals by creating an account. And yes, Wikipedia's instructions are overwhelming at first. Wikipedia is unlike anything most people have ever experienced before, and what Wikipedia does would have been considered impossible by virtually everyone just ten years ago - a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and it becomes the world's fifth-most-visited Web site? Since Wikipedia is doing the seemingly impossible, it must be operating on principles that the average person simply cannot guess, but must learn by reading lots of manuals. Wikipedia's policies and guidelines are, I believe, a kind of breakthrough in the technology of organization, and you will not regret any amount of time you invest in studying how they work. You may wish to read Wikipedia: The Missing Manual which explains the basics that every new Wikipedia user should learn, in a logical order. --Teratornis (talk) 03:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

How do I print an article

Resolved

How do I print an article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.158.19.27 (talk) 01:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Click on "Printable version" under the "toolbox" heading on the left side of the page. You can now print an article just as you would any other page. Xenon54 (talk) 01:21, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

How can I find articles in Sicilian? On the left there are so many languages but not Sicilian.

Resolved

How can I find articles in Sicilian? On the left there are so many languages but not Sicilian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.229.41.179 (talk) 02:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

The Sicilian-language Wikipedia is here. Algebraist 02:30, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

The interwiki links in the left sidebar of a page are to articles corresponding to that page. So Sicilianu is not listed on this page because Sicilian Wikipedia (presumably) does not have a Help desk forum. But it is listed in say English language and links to scn:Lingua ngrisa. —teb728 t c 07:08, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Search for untagged words

Ok, I am in the process of categorising Trinity College, Cambridge alumni. I have already found the "what links here tool" which allows me to filter all articles which contain the tag Trinity College, Cambridge which has been quite useful for finding uncategorised alumni. Now I am wondering if there is a way I can search for all articles containing the words "Trinity College, Cambridge" untagged?? seems a long shot, but it would be kinda useful for what i'm working on. Thanks. 79.75.158.188 (talk) 03:01, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Use Google. Type in: Trinity College site:wikipedia.org -- kainaw™ 03:33, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Or use the Wikipedia search function over on the left there... – ukexpat (talk) 03:39, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

For the Google search place en. before wikipedia.org to limit it to the English Wikipedia and this string, -inurl:wiki-User -intitle:Talk -inurl:wiki-Wikipedia -inurl:wiki-WP -redirected-from, should basically limit the search to just articles and avoid redirects.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

To expand on that I'd also put Trinity College in quotes, but even doing all that only cuts the results in half; it's still finding almost 10,000 articles with numerous false positives. Hmmm. Maybe adding some term that many biographies would have that other articles would not. "Early life" is a common biography section heading, as is "biography" itself.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Put "Cambridge" somewhere in your search term too, to sift out all the many other colleges by that name. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

stub types

I'm familiar with Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types - is there a separate list of stubs to tag articles that are lists.. boy I hope I got that worded rightly. — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 07:41, 12 March 2009 (UTC) (forgive the poor humor at the end)

They exist, but they're not really in a list, and there aren't that many of them. Category:List notification templates. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Notice About Orphaned Images

The images are being linked to in an article as a reference. To get past this at first, I made a gallery inside the article to display them but someone removes this gallery saying it's a Non-Free Gallery. The screen captures for this show support an item I documented inside the article since I kept having someone challenge that the information wasn't valid. I scree grabbed it to prove this item existed in this series.

I quoted it as a reference and it has a link inside the article, but apparently the system wants the actual image thumbnail to appear in the article and not just a link? Why aren't links inside the article to the item being seen as a "File link"?

Cringer (talk) 07:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Is the article Fangface? --Teratornis (talk) 08:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You can link to an image without displaying it like this: File:FangfaceOrangeHat.jpg. Personally, I don't like non-free images. They make life harder for people who want to translate or reuse content from the English Wikipedia, since many countries have no fair-use provision like the U.S. You could try writing to the copyright holder of the images and ask for permission to redistribute your screen captures freely, and follow the procedure at commons:COM:OTRS. If you can upload actually free images to Wikimedia Commons, you will silence your editwar opponent. Or at least force him or her come up with another argument. --Teratornis (talk) 08:22, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Note that it is possible for the English Wikipedia community to decide at any time to get rid of fair use images, or to change the rules to get rid of many of them. If you can get free content it's better all around. If the copyright holder does not want to release any free screen captures, then I think you should stop using a free encyclopedia to give that information hoarder free publicity. Wikipedia is part of the free content movement. It makes sense for us to preferentially promote other people and organizations who share our values, over people and organizations who want to prevent information from being free. --Teratornis (talk) 08:27, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

If you merely link to a non-free image, and no article shows it, the image will be deleted as orphaned. On the other hand, non-free images may be shown only under Wikipedia's highly restrictive non-free content policy. —teb728 t c 08:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it was Fangface. Sorry, I didn't think to mention the article. I used it as a cite link to show that an item existed in the show that I placed into the article since someone had erased other content I listed saying I didn't site a source. If you can tell me another way to prove that the name of an Arcade or a character existed in a single episode of the series, thus making the information about that which is factual, then I an open to suggestions.

This is an example of a file that was flagged as an orphan on the page: File:FangfaceArniesArcadeSign.jpg It's used as a <ref> link at the top of the article page. Below is the exact item from the top of the article page.

In the episode Don't Abra When You Cadabra, it is revealed that Fangs has an uncle named Arnie and that he runs a video arcade called Arnie's Arcade.

Both references items in those links appear in the Notes area but are shown as orphaned on the "File links" area for that file, which doesn't make sense to me. Yes, I'm aware that copyright law sometimes are weak or non-existent in other countries. As for getting permission, I wouldn't know whom to ask permission from as far as this goes. What would I need to ask them and how exactly would one represent screen captures to them to get permission to redistribute them? Fair-use is how I've used images of this sort on my fan page since it existed all these years.

I am also beginning to feel like I am wasting my time with the entire Wikipedia as a whole. So many people are on this "You must link to a source link". The problem with that is, what if there isn't an online link for a source to this item. What if the source is something in your possession? For instance, I have a board game, yet I was told that it had to be sourced before I could included information I typed directly off the front cover of the box. I finally got the person not to erase the content, but they still have a problem with the fact that my source was a scan of the front cover of the box. I can't figure out what the problem is exactly. How does someone source the information off the front of a board game box? I can't link to it, since there is no official page for it. The board game is 30 years old and is very scarce, so finding it anywhere except EBay, is pretty impossible. Also, linking to EBay is not a very good linking source due to have often they remove links. Comments welcomed. Thanks Cringer (talk) 08:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Forgive me for pointing out what may be obvious.. but why source with an image when you can source to the episode itself? {{Cite episode}} was designed for this. As for sourcing information off of a box (ignoring original research etc) what's wrong with perhaps using {{Cite manual}} or even {{Cite video game}} (that probably has enough fields to be able to be used for board games too e.g. Mattel (2009). Scrabble (Board Game) (Deluxe ed.). We're bonkers about letters)? Nanonic (talk) 10:08, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I would be surprised if anyone who edits on Wikipedia doesn't wonder at least once whether they are wasting their time. There are roadblocks and restrictions and gotchas everywhere you look, and on top of the persnickety rules there are many users who don't even know the rules. Depending on the subject that interests you, Wikipedia may or may not be the best wiki to use. See Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. Pop-culture topics in particular can lead to tough sledding on Wikipedia, due to the rigorous requirements for reliable sources (not always easy to find when it comes to fancruft), and the fact that the entertainment industry has the most repressive intellectual property attorneys outside of Microsoft (and Microsoft is getting into the entertainment industry too). That is why fans of various pop-culture artifacts have started their own wikis, e.g. Wookipedia, WoWWiki, etc. Editing on Wikipedia has its advantages, such as the highly-developed infrastructure of manuals, tools, templates, and this Help desk. But Wikipedia does not want various sorts of content. Thus to maintain one's wiki-joy it is essential to learn about all your wiki options. Maybe for certain kinds of editing, you will find it easier on some other wiki. But be aware that other wikis may have different problems. That's probably why so many people write on blogs where they can write anything they want without having someone else second-guessing everything they do. But most blogs are garbage that hardly anybody reads, so there's no free lunch here. --Teratornis (talk) 18:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Thanks. How can i access female sex tourism and find there members? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nastykenyan (talk • contribs) 07:55, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6.8 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. —teb728 t c 08:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

We have a female sex tourism article, but it doesn't have members per se. --Teratornis (talk) 08:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

How do I delete a Wikimedia commons picture that I uploaded?

I want it gone because it gets to be on top of the google list when I want the data from another wiki to show up. 125.212.86.99 (talk) 09:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

What picture are you asking about? —teb728 t c 09:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

See Commons:COM:EIC#Del for links to pages about deletion on Wikimedia Commons. Start with Commons:COM:D. If you uploaded an image yourself, and no projects are using it yet, you can request a Commons:COM:D#Speedy deletion by putting Commons:Template:Speedydelete on your image. You might be able to change the order in which the image appears in Google search results by changing the name of the image (which basically means deleting the image and re-uploading it to Commons under a different name). However, in general it is a fool's errand to try to game the Google results. Google can and does change its PageRank algorithm on occasion, so all your efforts to game Google can come to nothing. --Teratornis (talk) 18:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Television introduction

When did television arrive in Perth, Western Australia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.34.16.162 (talk) 10:00, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

This page is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the 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. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 10:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

What is the definition of NPT,BSPF,orPT124.195.194.1 (talk) 10:28, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF NPT,BSPF OR PT124.195.194.1 (talk) 10:28, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You're probably better off asking at the reference desk, but it looks like they're different gauges of thread on the port of a valve in e.g. plumbing. See also British standard pipe thread Gonzonoir (talk) 10:39, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Signature

Can someone please help me develop a fancy signature please? I don't even know where to start! CUTKD (talk) 11:34, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You should start by deciding what you want your signature to look like. A desire that it be 'fancy' isn't much to go on. Algebraist 11:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Well I can be more specific ;) I'd like the "CUTKD" part to be white, with a black horizontal stripe through the middle. I would then like links to talk and contributions as superscript capital T and C respectively, the former in blue and latter in red. Thanks for your help... CUTKD (talk) 11:53, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You want your name to be displayed in white? You know most people view Wikipedia on a white or near-white background, right? Algebraist 12:05, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

LOL!!! Sorry I haven't explained myself very well at all. There's a font (don't know what it's called though) where the letters are slightly enlarged, almost like a caricature, where the writing is white but with a black outline. That's what I'm hoping for, but with a black stripe through the middle. CUTKD (talk) 12:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Some of the info you're looking for can be found at Wikipedia:Signatures - then it's a matter of html markup. If you see a sig that is close to what you want, do an edit on that section or page - and see what the editor has used. You'll most likely need to check the box to "Use raw signature" in your preferences. — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 12:33, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

For example (forgive me if I'm out of line here TnXman) <font color="darkorange">[[User:name|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:nameTalk|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/nameContribs|Man]]</font> — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 12:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Then ... for the font - [[User:CUTKD|<span style="font-family:Lucida Handwriting Italic;color:#9B30FF">'''CUT'''</span>]][[User talk:CUTKD|<span style="font-family:Lucida Handwriting Italic;color:#63B8FF">kd</span>]] ... so you would end up looking like - wait for it ..........................................CUTkd

• hope that helps (doubtful about a white line through the middle though. — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 12:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks for the help. Once I've gotten the code I'm gonna use, where do I dump it so it becomes my signature? CUTKD 14:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by CUTKD (talk • contribs)

Go to "My preferences" at the top of the page. Make sure "raw signature" is checked and paste the info into the signature box. TNXMan 14:23, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

in your prefrences - on the User Profile tab where it says signature. Glad I could help. — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 14:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Toolserver help

Many pages of sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places in the USA use {{GeoGroupTemplate}}: most sites have coordinates given by the Register's official database, so it's helpful to be able to plot all of them on a single map. Not all lists of sites are in this format; the project is in process of converting from a simple list of names to a table that includes the coords: compare the South Dakota (without table) and Cleveland, Ohio (with table) lists to see what I mean about coords and template. Because adding a table expands the page size greatly, the process of adding tables means that we have to split out individual pages: for example, the Utah list I recently converted to a list-of-lists. However, I've found that newly-created lists don't seem to work with the GeoGroupTemplate: although Carbon County, Utah displays properly, I know that there are several other pages (can't give any examples at the moment) that say basically that such a page is not at the Toolserver. Is there something that I have to do to get the Toolserver to recognise or otherwise work with the page? Nyttend (talk) 13:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Whenever you tackle something new and complicated you should take good notes. Record links to the manual pages you are trying to follow, note the commands you try, and copy the exact text of any error messages you receive and (if possible) how someone else can reproduce the error. Otherwise, when you have a problem, you will only be able to "basically" report the error. Imprecise reporting reduces the pool of people who can answer the question to those who by some coincidence are already familiar enough with the problem to decode the imprecision. By such a coincidence, just yesterday I saw something on the Toolserver that mentioned XML dumps (yes, that is a sloppy reference on my part). But I retained just enough of a clue to hunt for more clues. Wikipedia:Toolserver leads to m:Toolserver. The lead section of that page summarizes the database replication on the Toolserver cluster and tells how to determine the date of the last replication. I would guess there is nothing you can do to influence the replication schedule. In the meantime, you can try to recall a page for which you previously saw the message about not being on the Toolserver, and see whether the page existed at the date of the last Toolserver database replication. If the page looks like it should have made it into the last replication, then you have a problem to investigate further. Otherwise, you just have to wait for the next replication. Other places to look for information or ask a question might include: Wikipedia talk:Toolserver, the toolserver wiki, and the links under m:Toolserver#Contact. In my experience with using tools, I have found a low correlation between the two seemingly distinct abilities to (a) build tools, and (b) document them coherently. You can help with this problem by improving whatever documents you find yourself being victimized by as you struggle to learn a poorly-documented tool. If you don't have access to the original document(s), you can write your own how-to guides in your userspace, and then move them to the Wikipedia: namespace. --Teratornis (talk) 17:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

So it was simply the basic workings of the Toolserver? I assumed that there was something that I had to do to get it to work, so I wasn't attempting to report an error. Nyttend (talk) 22:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Just now getting this message at National Register of Historic Places listings in Boulder County, Colorado, which I copy:

File not found at http://toolserver.org/~para....[line break]Suggestions:[line break]Make sure the URL is spelled correctly.[line break]Make sure the file exists.

I'm quite sure that this is the same message as I received otherwise. Nyttend (talk) 04:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Footnotes

Can someone help me with these footnotes in Pope John Paul II and Judaism ? I did not create the footnotes, I was trying to re-arrange them, but they are rather complicated. Thank you ! ADM (talk) 14:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Was this article split out of another? It looks as though there are <ref name> tags defined in another document. If you let me know which, I can do some cleanup. Gonzonoir (talk) 15:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I split it from Relations between Catholicism and Judaism and Pope John Paul II. You're welcome ! ADM (talk) 15:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

What you will need to do then is go back and find the original full <ref name = XXXX> tags and copy over the whole reference into the new article, replaceing the first use of that reference in the new article. There's no magic trick to it, it's just a matter of taking the time to find, copy, and paste the right refs to the right locations. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 15:41, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

There you go, that's done, sans magic tricks. As a next step, the article's lead needs a bit of attention. Gonzonoir (talk) 15:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

How can I delete an article I created in error?

Is this possible? WAT (talk • contributions) 15:24, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

It is. If you're the only contributor, you can mark the article with {{db-G7}} (author requests deletion). TNXMan 15:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Assuming you're talking about 70.159.19.242, mark it with a CSD, G7 tag (author requests deletion) and you'll be fine. It's already marked with a G2 (test page) tag, which will probably adequately do the trick. Evan ¤ Seeds 15:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

And now its gone. In the future, if you don't remember all of the esoteric db-codes, you can always use the basic {{db|''reason here''}} template, and explain why you want the page deleted. If its something simple like "i just made this as a test, and now want it gone", just write that for the reason here and it will be deleted shortly. You can also find a full list of the db-codes at WP:CSD. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 15:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Pulling a Ripper

"Pulling a Ripper" (pronounced Pool-ing a Ri-pah)

When two (2) individuals agree to take on a new challenge, or engage in an activity together and one of the two individuals decides not to go thru with it in the middle of transition, leaving the other one alone.

The expression "pulling a Ripper" can be used at different tenses: "...he really pulled a Ripper on him" "I think I am going to pull a Ripper on tonight's dinner"

The expression is usualy used in the context of moving from one place to another, or a massive change of plans that may disrupt career plans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.191.175.230 (talk) 15:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you're looking for Urban Dictionary? Evan ¤ Seeds 15:41, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It appears you are trying to submit an article. However, Wikipedia does not accept articles about neologisms. If you have reliable sources that support your article, you can try submitting it at articles for creation. Alternatively, you can create an account and create the article yourself. TNXMan 15:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Working on New page

Hi

I am working on new page. Is it possible for me to save my work, come back tomorrow after couple of days and continue before publishing it? I do not want to get it deleted. Please let me know how can we save our work without publishing

Regards Adarsh —Preceding unsigned comment added by My3ada (talk • contribs) 16:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Your best bet is to work on the article in a sandbox in your userspace. If you click on this link (User:My3ada/Sandbox) and add the content there, you can save it and come back later to work on it. Be aware, though, that this sandbox exists in your userspace and not in the main article space. When your article is ready to be put in the mainspace, you'll need to move it. TNXMan 16:16, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Misspelled title

I have just created the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Research_and_Technology_Organization_(RTO), but I have misspelled the Organization (should be organisation), which is not coherent with the rest of the text (and the offcial definition of it) so I would like to change it to the proper spelling. I have been banging my head against the commands but I cannot really make it. Can anybody help me?

Also I have noticed that the term "organization" is also misspelled in at least a couple of other pages.

Beside going into each one of them and correcting it, is there a way to make them link to the page just created. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agobruceonwiki (talk • contribs) 17:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done Moved the page to NATO Research and Technology Organisation (RTO). Next time, you can just go to WP:Requested moves. For more information about British & US spellings of words, organization in particular, see WP:Manual of Style (spelling)#International organizations. hmwithτ 17:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the parenthetical RTO is required, it should be moved again to NATO Research and Technology Organisation. – ukexpat (talk) 18:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done. – ukexpat (talk) 18:23, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I also added a link to NATO Research and Technology Organisation on the RTO disambiguation page. – ukexpat (talk) 18:43, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

LOL. Fail on my part. Thanks for correcting my move, Ukexpat. I wasn't even looking at anything else but the z/s. hmwithτ 20:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

SVG image corrupted

Resolved for the specific item. The General problem might still persist.-- ExpImp^talkcon 19:21, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I made the following image ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abrams_mirror_and_the_lamp.svg ) with Inkscape and everything was fine when i uploaded it. But now all the text has moved to the right, even though it is (according to the Image-Page) still my original version. Could someone tell me how this has happened and what i can do to prevent this from happening again? Thank you.-- ExpImp^talkcon 18:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea, but the first thing to try is to download the image from Wikipedia and diff it against the original. The first branch in the troubleshooting tree is to determine whether the copy on Wikipedia is exactly equal to the copy on your local disk, which in turn determines whether you are having a problem uploading the file, or a problem getting the file to render correctly through the multiple steps to get from Wikipedia's server to your browser. Did you try viewing your local copy of the SVG file in a Web browser? --Teratornis (talk) 18:27, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

By coincidence, I'm thinking about learning to use Inkscape, so in my usual methodical way I began by collecting some links to read: Commons:COM:EIC#Inkscape. Something in there might lead you to a clue, or to someone else who has a clue, if you don't get a good answer here. And if you're looking for a challenge, see my list of SVG files I would like to create. I asked a friend who said he knew Inkscape, and he said those images would require "mad skilz". --Teratornis (talk) 18:33, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

The SVG was fine, but the PNG renderer had some problem. I solved the problem now, by reuploading it with a different font. My problem still is, that when I originally uploaded it (30 October 2007), the PNG renderer did work fine and showed the picture as it should. Someone seems to have changed s/th in the png renderer in the meantime.-- ExpImp^talkcon 19:21, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Hmm you're leaving it as text in the inkscape file? If I run into rendering issues I usually change all the texts to paths by highlighting them and clicking "Path" then "Object to Path". Kind of a work around I know, and I'm not sure if it would solve your problem. TastyCakes (talk) 20:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, you can make arrows with colours other than black by using a similar procedure. To my knowledge it's the only way to make arrows with a different colour. TastyCakes (talk) 20:36, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

replacing factory sound system

I have no idea whay size my factory speakers are and I need to order new ones but there are 6 speakers in all and I just want to make sure I get the right size speakers, I have no owners manual so i have no clue how to find out how to find out the size. Can someone please get back to me asap.my email is <blanked> Thank You, Micah J Privett —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.173.124.194 (talk) 18:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I think you need to spend some cash money to hire a qualified audio technician to look at your setup. Otherwise, you're looking for a mind reader, and not one of them has collected the Randi Prize which supports the hypothesis that mind readers are all frauds. --Teratornis (talk) 18:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Correction, the information you seek might not exist in any mind at the moment (perhaps the former installer has died), so you might really need a remote viewer if you don't want to pay for a technician to look at your setup. But remote viewers have not collected the Randi Prize yet either. So I still recommend hiring a technician. --Teratornis (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I need to edit my own wiki account

Hi, why am i having such a hard time editing my own account? I have added to it, and now there are redundancies and i cannot edit the original content that i would like to..can someone please help me? thank you so much <blanked> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rpwinc (talk • contribs) 18:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

A few points: first, it is not "your account", Rosalind Wiseman is an article about Rosalind Wiseman. Second, we only have your word that you are indeed Ms Wiseman - if you are, then you have a huge conflict of interest issue and you are strongly discouraged from editing the article. Third, the article is completely devoid of any references to reliable sources to support claims of Ms Wiseman's notability, one of Wikipedia's key inclusion criteria. One possible solution is for you to leave a message on your talk page declaring your COI, indicating the changes that you think should be made to the article and provide references to support notability. – ukexpat (talk) 18:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

See WP:WWMPD for some things you should do to prepare for the possibility that the article might get deleted. It looks like you inserted some text after the Rosalind Wiseman#External links section, most likely because you didn't see how to edit the lead section of the article (by clicking the "edit" tab at the top). You have a lot to learn about Wikipedia if you want your editing to be pleasant and productive here, so I recommend that you read Wikipedia: The Missing Manual to get a basic understanding of how things work. Also see WP:BLP for information about what you can do if you see incorrect information about yourself in the article. --Teratornis (talk) 19:01, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I've had to revert that article back to a version that is over a year old - every single new version was a copyvio. --Cameron Scott (talk) 19:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Please remember to link the jargon which the new user is unlikely to understand: Wikipedia:Copyright violations. --Teratornis (talk) 19:14, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Note, there is a similar discussion on WP:EAR, Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests#Hi i need to edit my OWN biography and i cannot – ukexpat (talk) 19:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

NB, Rpwinc has been blocked as a spam user name (the name of Wiseman's company). – ukexpat (talk) 20:23, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Enzo Farrari Coupe

What years were the Enzo Farrari Coupe produced? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.210.112.114 (talk) 20:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You might find what you are looking for in the article about Enzo Ferrari (automobile). If you cannot find the answer there, you can try asking your question at Wikipedia's Reference Desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except about how to use Wikipedia, which is what this help desk is for). I hope this helps. NanohaA'sYuri^{Talk, My master} 21:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Maintaining GFDL history on article split - what to do in this case?

I noticed the page Madoff investment scandal was split from Bernie Madoff, but the split wasn't mentioned in the edit summary as specified in Wikipedia:Splitting, which is a violation of the GFDL. I tried to tag the article to have the problem fixed, but the only tag I could find was one for articles that were moved, not split. Is there another tag I should have used, or is there another way I should have gone about trying to get the problem fixed (such as a place to report such problems)? Calathan (talk) 21:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You could make a note on the talk page, or you could do a null-edit (something simple like taking out an extraneous space) and there make a note like "This article was split from Bernie Madoff on XXXX at XXXX UTC" or something. As long as it is clear where the article came from, it shouldn't matter that the note was made a few edits too late... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:28, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

How To Handle Possible External Link To Viral Site

I was checking out a link in an article and received a warning from the Avast virus protection system on my PC. How should I handle this? As Avast suggests - this may be a false positive. Is there a Wikipedia process editors can follow to report and have a site validated when a virus protection system gives a warning? What is the process, if a viral site is confirmed, for handling the external link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pknkly (talk • contribs) 21:24, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

What was it? --Cameron Scott (talk) 21:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

This site (click at your own risk). An inspection of the source code turns up basic HTML, but there's some suspicious-looking script at the bottom. Norton hasn't alerted me to any infections, and I am running a quick scan now and a quick scan turned up nothing. Obviously, if the site is poisoned, it should be removed immediately. Xenon54 (talk) 22:05, 12 March 2009 (UTC) edited 22:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

It looks like a one pixel by one pixel hidden iframe with some weird code in it. Since, however, the iframe's source is set to be http://url/ it generates an error - I'm running Safari on a Mac, and the activity window reports one error when it gets to that bit of the page. I don't think it's a virus, to be honest, probably more likely to be some sort of tracking thing (like those one-pixel images that used to be popular a few years ago) for monitoring website usage, but one that hasn't been correctly configured so doesn't actually do anything...pushthebutton | go on... | push it! 23:34, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

editing from a mobile

are we not supposed to edit wikipedia from a mobile device? i keep getting a message directing me to the mobile version of the website at the top of the page, but the mobile version lacks an edit button. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mobile Writes (talk • contribs) 22:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't mean you're not supposed to. Anybody can edit Wikipedia. I've edited on my iTouch on several occasions. If you're able to go to Wikipedia's actual website (en.wikipedia.org), then you should be able to edit it. From what you're saying, you're going to some sort of mobile version (perhaps something like m.en.wikipedia.org) Killiondude (talk) 22:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Try putting the browser in "mobile mode" and the top of every page will give you a notice saying you should go to the mobile version of Wikipedia. I simply left it in "desktop mode" and was fine, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't violating any rules. Thanks. Mobile Writes (talk) 18:15, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

March 13

Advice on how to make a template with yes/no parameter

I am desperate to figure out how to properly create a template that does this:

• If parameter ugh is not included, then nothing happens.
• If ugh=yes, then certain text is included.

Thank you. — Athelwulf ^[T]/_[C] 00:08, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

mw:Help:Extension:ParserFunctions. Specifically, {{#ifeq:{{{ugh|}}}|yes|whatever text}}. Or, if you want to allow any non-empty value of ugh to trigger the text: {{#if:{{{ugh|}}}|whatever text}}. — TKD::{talk} 16:08, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect link, as opposed to a dead link: How to edit?

I found an incorrect external link in the article for Cotton College (Guwahati, India). I've read about how to respond to dead links, and I found a previous help desk entry that relates to the topic of incorrect links. But I'm still not sure I edited the external links section of the article correctly, to respond to the incorrect link. Can you provide feedback, so I'll know how to help next time I encounter such a situation? ( Also, is there any convenient way I can monitor this help request, besides just reviewing the page from time to time, to see whether/when the request has been replied to? ) Thanks! Ohiostandard (talk) 00:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I would still call that a dead link, so I reformatted it as such. If a live link is found, it can be fixed. – ukexpat (talk) 00:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

[ Historical Note by user Ohiostandard: At this point, after Ukexpat's edit, user PrimeHunter also edited the problematic external link on the Cotton College page. He left helpful comments about his edit on the talk page for the article, and on its history page, where the wikitext he used is explicitly shown, but he left no comment here on this help thread to announce his edit. ( A minor oversight, perhaps, if even that. ) The effect of his edit was to cause the "dead link" tag associated with the link to point to the summary for the Cotton College page in the Internet Archive, rather than to Wikipedia's dead links clearinghouse page, as it had after Ukexpat's edit. If you'd like to review the process, to learn about editing broken links, you should note that for some reason the history page date&time stamps on our respective edits do not correlate well with those of the entries here on this help desk thread. My own edit occurred at 13:45 12 March 2009, according to the history page; Ukexpat's and PrimeHunter's are the next two in sequence. - Ohiostandard (talk) 20:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC) ]

I didn't know the standard method of dealing with such cases used the internet archive/wayback machine. Very effective, very elegant; thank you. - Ohiostandard (talk) 02:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

It appears to me that the predominant concern that is addressed at Wikipedia:Dead external links—the intent of that page—is actually addressed to dead external links in references, rather than in external links sections. That distinction and underlying rationale is not drawn on the page, which provides little on its drafting intent and is very terse. The only mention of the one verses the other is implicit: "Dead links of online newspaper articles can be converted to references to off-line sources", thus speaking to references. No external links section mention is made. I don't think we need to take any extraordinary steps to save dead external links that are not being used as references. This is expressed in the far more scrutinized and consensus built page Wikipedia:External links, which provides at Wikipedia:External links#Longevity of links, that external links in external link sections should either be replaced or removed rather than marked as dead and left. The section actually addresses that this is different from links in references and refers to yet a third page, Wikipedia:Citing sources#Repairing dead links. By virtue of what that page is, we know there they're talking about references.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

In this case [2] it was the official website of the subject. Wikipedia:External links says "Wikipedia articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the subject's official site, if any." The article had no references or other external links. Much of the content could probably be verified at the official website in the Internet Archive, and the site may reappear if the college is still active and just forgot to renew the domain registration. In these circumstances I think it was reasonable to keep the site listed with a link to the Internet Archive.PrimeHunter (talk) 03:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

The thrust of my post is not to criticize what was done with the link but clarify that that the dead link page is not really the applicable standard (and needs clarification).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad I asked for help; this is a fecund, enlightening discussion. Fuhgettaboutit's points seem to me to be very relevant to the general case, i.e. to the case wherein dead links appear in an article's "External Links" section. I'd be quite inclined to agree in most cases with the principle that broken "links in external link sections should either be replaced or removed rather than marked as dead and left." It's my opinion that the specific instance under discussion does merit an exception to that rule, however, for the reasons PrimeHunter elucidates. Ultimately and ideally, I would of course be delighted to see the issue clarified by a more exact and comprehensive treatment than the pages Fuhgettaboutit cites now provide. ( It took me far too long - a couple of hours reviewing the relevant instructional pages, besides experimenting with the corresponding wikimarkup in my sandbox - to come to even a rudimentary understanding of the issues and process involved in dealing with broken links. ) Two suggestions occur to me in all this: (1) I think it would be helpful to have all the information about dealing with broken links consolidated into a single article, with other articles that need to address the matter then doing so only by reference to that consolidated source rather than proliferating their own instructions and, (2) I think it'd be beneficial if that consolidated article dealt with broken links by section, i.e. if it had discrete instructions for each section of an article page in which broken links may occur, or at least for each group of standard sections wherin broken links should be addressed in an identical way. I appreciate the help and comments from each of you, and that no one bit the newcomer. On the contrary, I'm feeling kind of ... um, gently nuzzled. Btw, PrimeHunter, the independent news articles I found via Google India make it clear that Cotton College is in active operation, but I still couldn't discover any current official web site for them. - Ohiostandard (talk) 12:28, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

The Help desk is one of least-bitey areas of Wikipedia, in part because the volunteers who answer questions are quick to bite each other when one of us loses our composure with a newbie. But these are more like love bites. All seriousness aside, there's just a lot more mutual scrutiny here than might be the case in some article-editing contexts on Wikipedia, where it may be harder for some editors to perceive the behavioral norm. Also, on the Help desk, people answer questions about situations where they usually don't have a personal stake in the outcome, since it's not our work getting changed. It's easier to remain objective when we don't care. About your other points:

• Yes, Wikipedia's friendly manuals are complicated, and often their organization (I use the term advisedly) tends to reflect historical contingency rather than intelligent design. All the manuals are the work of editors much like you and me, who were addressing problems they faced in the past, which may not be exactly the permutation confronting the next user. You should not regret any hours you spent studying the manuals. If you intend to make Wikipedia a habit, almost everything you learn on the way to learning something else will tend to come in handy in the future. Especially if you make the wise choice to start answering questions on the Help desk - one sure way to really get a handle on what goes on here. Perhaps the surest way to fail on Wikipedia is to try to spend the least possible time reading manuals.
• We already have consolidated our manuals, in a sense, with the Editor's index to Wikipedia. The primary author of the index explicitly cites the redundancy and multiplicity of documents as a reason for creating the index. Pick any topic of significance that relates to the internal operation of Wikipedia, and we have lots of different pages about it.
• If you think you have problems now, try reorganizing our manuals and see what happens. In many cases, the various pages that treat flavors of a topic have their partisans who might not take kindly to someone else's grand vision. It's easier to start new pages than to reorganize existing pages - and that probably has something to do with our document multiplicity. If a particular document page has been around for a while, and proven useful, it will be the target of a large number of links from user pages, talk pages, and project pages. In that sense it becomes like a financial institution that is "too big to fail". Removing the page becomes like ripping out a kidney.
• We don't refer to Wikipedia's internal documents as "articles", but rather as "pages". (I was about one year into editing on Wikipedia before I learned that distinction.)

You may want to read Wikipedia: The Missing Manual. --Teratornis (talk) 16:20, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey, we care, just not in the way that makes steam come out of our ears :) Gonzonoir (talk) 16:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again, to all, for the very helpful information here. - Ohiostandard (talk) 19:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

creating an informational box on article

I see that many articles about organizations have an informational box at the top right, usually with a logo and a list of information such as type of business, year founded, headquarters location, key personnel, industry, products, etc... I am new to Wikipedia and although I have created an article, I would like to add an informational box (with logo at the top). How to do this? I suspect there is a template lurking somewhere around here... (24.253.219.1 (talk) 03:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC))

If my article is new and has been called "spammy" and "reads like an advertisement" by other Wikipedia folk (I have made numerous revisions, deletions, improvements) is it a good idea to still add a photo or two, or wait until the copy and reference concerns are worked out? I think a photo or two would be an improvement but others may think photos make the article appear more promotional. Really, isn't any photo inherently promotional? Nonetheless, I see many on other Wikipedia articles (examples: Otto Bock, Whole Foods) (24.253.219.1 (talk) 03:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC))

Regarding the information box, I think you're looking for {{Infobox company}}. See also Category:Business infobox templates. I don't think the addition of an infobox with a logo will work any change to actions taken with regard to advertising or perceived advertising. You seem to be already aware of the need for sources. Note that they should not just be reliable sources but independent of the company—third parties writing about it. Try very hard to write from a neutral point of view (which is very difficult when you are an insider); avoid peacock language, and be aware of our notability standards for companies. See Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for an overview on the subject. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:21, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Table code

Is there a way to make this table function correctly while still having the merged rows in the first column (year) for a couple of the lines? Grsz¹¹ 03:13, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

If by "function" you mean "sort" I suggest reading Help talk:Sorting, for example Help talk:Sorting#Sorting when column items encompass multiple rows? has an example that seems to be somewhat similar. --Teratornis (talk) 15:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

warn editor about AfD

Is there a tag to warn an editor about an AfD? (I can't find it.) Bubba73 (talk), 04:43, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to list pages for deletion -

For creators who are totally new users: {{subst:AFDWarningNew|Article title}} ~~~~
For creators: {{subst:AFDWarning|Article title}} ~~~~
For contributors or established users: {{subst:Adw|Article title}} ~~~~
For an article you did not nominate: {{subst:AFDNote|Article title}} ~~~~

HTH. Nanonic (talk) 04:54, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It is after my bedtime :-). Bubba73 (talk), 04:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

After you get some sleep, I suggest determining why you couldn't find what you needed. Wikipedia is huge and complex, so knowing how to find stuff is pretty important. For starters, the term "tag" does not make the best search keyword, because the term is general and includes unrelated things such as HTML tags. The precise name for the class of things you were looking for is Wikipedia:Template messages. If you use these often (and who doesn't?), you might want to put the {{Wikipedia template messages}} template on your User page for handy reference. --Teratornis (talk) 15:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Changing spaces to underscores

Is there any nice template or function that changes spaces to underscores in a string, leaving the rest of the string unchanged? Stifle (talk) 10:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

• Any particular reason you'd like to do that? - Mgm|^(talk) 11:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Your browser window provides the url, which contains the page name with underscores, and for any particular section, just go to it through the subject page's table of contents and you will get the full string. For example, I just copied the url for this post from my address bar, and simply chose not to copy the opening "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/"; I thus automatically was provided with the underscored string: "Wikipedia:Help_desk#Changing_spaces_to_underscores". There's no need to actually visit the link to do this. You can simply right click on the table of contents link-->properties-->copy the url excerpt. Hope that helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

There are many ways to change spaces to underscores, depending on what context you have in mind. Are you writing a template? The need to change spaces in template arguments to underscores so they work as part of a URL comes up with External link templates. Happily, we have a magic word to handle this specific case, called {{urlencode:}}. For example, in {{Google custom}} this snippet converts the first argument to work as a URL parameter: &q={{urlencode:{{{2|}}}}}. If that's not the context you have in mind, then tell us the context as we are not mind readers. --Teratornis (talk) 15:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Information on Flash Professional why is it used and who are the people that use the software?

I need to do a presentation on the Software Flash Professional cud u please give me some information like why is it used and by whom.? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.227.71.113 (talk) 14:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Have you tried the Computing section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. You may also want to see our article on Adobe Flash. TNXMan 14:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Font

What's the default font used by Wikipedia? --120.138.100.183 (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

There is none; your browser will display whatever the default sans-serif font is for your settings. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. --120.138.100.183 (talk) 15:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Update Company listing

Hello, My name is Spencer Linn. I am the Marketing Manager for Upp Technology, Inc. In looking at your company listings I noticed that my companies information is not up to date. Can you please make the following changes?

Integrated Warehousing Solutions, LLC has been renamed/rebranded as Upp Technology, Inc.

Our new website is www.upp.com. There you can find the latest up-to-date information on our company.

<company contact details removed>

Best Regards,

Spencer Linn <blanked> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.22.165.101 (talk) 16:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

If you are referring to Integrated Warehousing Solutions, I have just tagged it for speedy deletion. It is about as spammy as you can get and will have to be fundamentally rewritten to stand a chance of remaining on Wikipedia. Please note that Wikipedia is not a place for company listings, it is an encyclopedia for article about notable subjects. – ukexpat (talk) 16:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

How do I add a jpg file I just uploaded to my Wikipedia article?

I've just uploaded a jpg image of Dovey Johnson Roundtree and would like to add it to her page. How do I go about doing that? Megavoice (talk) 17:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

You go to her page here, then click edit in the section you want to put it in, then put in the image command. The image command can be brought up by clicking the little picture icon next to the trumpet above the edit box. Or you can cut and paste this: [[File:Example.jpg]], where "Example.jpg" is the name of the file you uploaded (may not be jpg). You are probably going to want to format the image, so put it something like this: [[File:Example.jpg|thumb|300px|your caption here]]. 300px is the size you tell the picture to be, you may want it to be bigger or smaller. TastyCakes (talk) 17:17, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

The page does appear to be a bit crowded on the right hand side, so you might want to add |left in the image command to keep it on the left. Which picture is it you want to add? TastyCakes (talk) 17:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

nevermind, someone has already put the image in for you. TastyCakes (talk) 17:20, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Donation Banner

Hi,

Where can I find the Wikicode for the Donation Banner that was earlier putup in the site. Is there any Javascript page associated with the Banner ? 121.247.81.36 (talk) 18:10, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Chicken Supreme

Hi, i just looked up Chicken Supreme only to find that it's a redirect to chicken kiev?? Please note that Chicken Supreme is nothing like chicken kiev, and is a dish worthy of an article in it's own right in my opinion. See here to see what chicken supreme is. --79.75.184.195 (talk) 18:41, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

So why not create an account, be bold and write the article? – ukexpat (talk) 18:49, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

But note that Wikipedia is not a recipe book. – ukexpat (talk) 20:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

If you look on a large recipe site like Allrecipe.com or Cooks.com, you will find many recipes, each with a very different idea what chicken supreme is. (One recipe even forgot to mention using any chicken) It is a rather generic kind of name. Rmhermen (talk) 21:42, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

question regarding when certain topics are highlighted with different colors

what does it mean when certain topics regarding the subject matter you are inquiring about is highlighted with different colors. For example when one topic is highlighted in purple and the other is highlighted in pink. What does the pink highlight mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.49.35.203 (talk) 19:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what you mean. I do know that, many times, the default settings on web browsers cause visited links to display as purple and unvisited links as blue. Also, on Wikipedia, some links are blue (if they link to an existing article) and some are red (if they link to a non-existent article). TNXMan 19:08, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Putting images on my wiki page

I figured out how to upload an image but now I don't know how to make it appear on my page that I am editing in Sandbox. How do I make it appear? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nsteve (talk • contribs) 20:24, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

In order to add the image to the page, you'll need to type [[File:NAME OF IMAGE.jpg]]. Make sure you include the entire filename, including the extension. You can also place the image at different spots on the page and/or make it a thumbnail by using image syntax. See WP:Image syntax for more details. TNXMan 20:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Are you editing your sandbox under a different account? User:Nsteve only has one edit and that is your message above. – ukexpat (talk) 20:58, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Large volume media additions to WikiSource and/or Commons

First off, I'm making the assumption that this is the correct location for discussions on Wikisouce and Commons, which might not be correct.

Question: is there Wiki software available to allow Wikipedia users to view image files (of books/magazines/journals) on the left side of the user's display, with the matching digital article on the right side of the screen? That seems to me to be the ideal: viewing the original document/book/journal/newsclipping complete with illustrations and photos on the left side, while having the digital article (with all its advantages) displayed on the right side of the user's screen.

I've noticed in Wikisource only a few issues of National Geographic Magazine had been uploaded, and of those many were only indexed while only a few had been proofed and were readable as digital articles. To me that seems to ignore the huge stores of desirable articles available from quality magazines/journals that are no longer under copyright protections, prob. a hundred issues of National Geographic alone prior to 1923 as well as tens of thousands of journals. It also seems that an easy way to provide significant benefit to Wikipedia editors and the general public would be to make those public domain magazines and journals available as quickly as possible (via uploaded scanned .Jpeg image files), followed with very simple article indexing with subject tags. Digital conversions, proofing and meta-data could follow afterwards on a time-available basis. If Wiki viewing software (as noted earlier) were used and the scanned article's digital text were not yet available, a message stating so would be added to the blank view on the right side of the screen, opposite to the page image on the left side. Other messages on the right side could indicate the absence or completeness of proofing and meta tags.

For your consideration if this has not yet been discussed -thanks.... HarryZilber (talk) 20:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually your assumption is not correct. Commons help desk is here and Wikisource help is here. – ukexpat (talk) 21:05, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikisource:Wikisource:Requests for assistance may be a more comparable page at Wikisource. —teb728 t c 22:14, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Removing Information

who is in charge of deciding what can be removed from an article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.104.13.47 (talk) 21:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

No one person is in charge of deciding what can or cannot be in an article. Wikipedia works by consensus, which means everyone that is interested decides which content should or should not be in an article. TNXMan 21:50, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

The basis for that removal often arises from certain policies that have strong consensus, such as that information in articles, and especially controversial material and quotes, must be verified by citation to reliable sources (and see the subsection of that page, WP:BURDEN, which is especially relevant for your question); must not be original research; and must be written from a neutral point of view. Also note that any unsourced contentious material (positive or negative) about a living person is properly removed immediately.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

In a sense, ultimately Jimbo decides. You should read Wikipedia: The Missing Manual. --Teratornis (talk) 01:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Argumentum ad Jimbonium?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:56, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Or Jimbo ex machina... – ukexpat (talk) 03:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Questions about corrections of material, editing, Conflict of Interest

I work for a company that has an entry on Wikipedia. My company did not create it. There are a lot of factual errors and inaccuracies about the company as well as a lot of loaded language and unsourced or unverified statements.

I respect Wikipedia's rules and I support its standards. I also value fairness and accuracy.

So I am looking for guidance about what to do regarding content that is just plain incorrect and, additionally, inflammatory accusations/allegations that are unverified or not footnoted. I'll list my questions so if anybody can provide advice, they can do so in reference to the numbers.

1) If I add information about the company I work for, from 3rd party sources, like credible newspaper articles (i.e. AP or Reuters), am I violating the Conflict of Interest guidelines for Wikipedia because I am an employee of the company?

2) If I flag unverified information added by others, am I in violation the Conflict of Interest guidelines for Wikipedia, as an employee of the company?

3) If my addition of verified information or flagging of unverified information is a Conflict of Interest, what do I do? Just post my concerns or content on the talk page and wait for someone to intervene?

4) What happens if no one intervenes?

5) If no one intervenes, does the Conflict of Interest still stand so long as the information involved is incorrect or unsubstantiated?

6) In general, conflict of interest notwithstanding, how much time should pass before material is deleted on the basis that it has been flagged and no third party has intervened?

7) Are company reports, like an Annual Report, audited by external auditors and filed with the SEC (therefore carrying significant penalties for filing false information) acceptable Wikipedia as sources?

8) Am I right or wrong in this interpretation: the Conflict of Interest guidelines preclude a company authorizing changes to its entry or an employee of that company from making changes to the entry about the company, but anybody else is free to edit the entry. If the company find fault supported by Wikipedia policy with regard to content, its only recourse, short of violating the Conflict of Interest guidelines, is to post objections, corrections, alternative sources, etc. in the Discussion/Talk section of the entry and then wait/hope an interested party at some point will act on the information.

I know in the past there have been controversies about companies paying people to write 'nice' things about them or adding material that is more about marketing than about verifiable encyclopedia content. Personally, I have no desire to do that. I do have a real desire, within the guidelines of Wikipedia, to correct the incorrect and eliminate the unsubstantiated and the biased. I just don't quite know how to do it right. I would never want to get into one of those situations where accusations of 'corporate fixing' are leveled at my company. I am confused by the Conflict of Interest statement, as I interpret it, ruling out 'editing your own entry.' Who is more likely to care about inaccurate content? Why, if it can be verified through 3rd party sources, is it considered inappropriate for action to be taken?

I accept Wikipedia doesn't want to be hosed by corporate types with bad judgment and support it. Wikipedia is meant to be an online resource of verifiable material, not a press release. On the flip side, I do not think it is in the spirit of Wikipedia's objectives, nor is it fair to the employees, their families, stockholders, and anyone to form in whole or in part an opinion, to allow inaccurate information to remain in a Wikipedia entry.

Any guidance or advice you can give me would be much appreciated. I could have just set about editing my company's entry but I really do respect that Wikipedia is trying to build a credible and so invested a fair amount of time reading the rules over the last few nights on my own time at home. But, I am left with some questions remaining and an entry that is very flawed.

Thanks very much. Sorry for going so long! —Preceding unsigned comment added by CluelessCautiousCapitalist (talk • contribs) 23:22, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

The best thing to do is add a message to the talk page declaring your conflict of interest, listing the changes that you think should be made to the article and providing as many reliable sources for them as you can. – ukexpat (talk) 01:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

If we really got serious about enforcing conflict of interest, we wouldn't have many articles about politics, religion, pop culture, etc., because most people who have a burning interest in a topic tend to have some sort of stake in it, and most people who lack an interest in things probably aren't writing articles about them. For example, do we have a strict rule that says anybody who believes in a religion (or actively opposes it) should refrain from writing about it? Of course not. Most people who know about a particular religion are its adherents or its debunkers, since a given religion is largely useless to everyone else (thought much about Zeus lately?). In my opinion, if someone comes to the Help desk and admits to a conflict of interest, he or she doesn't have a conflict of interest, at least not in the sense of someone who hasn't heard that we have a WP:COI guideline, or purposely violates it. Besides, merely working for a company doesn't determine what a person might write about it, because there are such things as whistleblowers and disgruntled employees. If someone works in public relations or is a company owner or senior manager, then we could expect astroturfing and peacock language, but if it's a technically-inclined junior employee who plays buzzword bingo in meetings and reads Dilbert, maybe he or she hasn't sold out entirely yet. If you can still find some irony in your workplace, then I'd say you have a shot at being objective. On the other hand if you're over 50 and are more interested in business than in pursuing the appropriate sex, then maybe not. Note that this is just my opinion; we have 47,769,224 registered users, and many of them will reflexively oppose any editing of a company article by anyone associated with the company. That doesn't mean they would automatically "win" in a dispute with you, but you would be spotting them to a considerable head start going in. Which means you would need to have even more Wikipedia experience and knowledge of our stupefyingly complex rules than they do.

In general you should read all the stern warnings in WP:BFAQ, and if you're really serious, read Wikipedia: The Missing Manual. Study our featured articles about other businesses - those reflect our highest editorial standard. Ideally, you should demonstrate some interest in Wikipedia, rather than just in one particular topic, by first improving some articles where you don't have a potential conflict of interest. Even better, you could answer several hundred questions on the Help desk (I'm not kidding, that's how I learned about Wikipeda). Doing such altruistic things will help you gain experience and understanding in areas with a low potential for disputes before you attempt a tricky type of editing that would challenge even the best of us. (It would be a bad idea for you to plunge straight into editing the article about your company while you're still learning the basics here.) Then, as ukexpat advises, you could either make suggestions on the talk page for the company article, or (if your suggestions are extensive) you could edit a copy of the article in your userspace (for example, in User:CluelessCautiousCapitalist/Sandbox). Generally the biggest deficiency on Wikipedia is the lack of reliable sources, so you can make a real contribution by supplying some. A reliable source does not become less reliable merely by being suggested by someone who might have a conflict of interest. You should, of course, explain your conflict of interest on your user page if you intend to influence the article about your company. Thanks for reading our instructions and trying to play by the rules. Wikipedia would be a whole lot better if every user did that. Here's hoping you quickly outgrow the first word in your username. And thanks for writing a long question, it balances my long reply nicely.

If this sounds too difficult, it may be possible to buy some help with improving the article about your company to good or featured status. See Wikipedia:Bounty board and Wikipedia:Reward board. There's no conflict of interest with you or your company paying to have someone else improve the article about your company, because our article review process is rigorous and largely immune to outside influence. If even a hint emerged that someone was trying to subvert an article review, the scrutiny would multiply. --Teratornis (talk) 02:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Article for RFID

Hi i tried posting this article on Wikipedia and it got deleted for "blatant addvertising." I don't know what to do to make it acceptable to be posted. I feel that it is not advertising but I don't know what i can add or subtract to make it acceptable. Please help. Carolyn Mejia e-mail: <blanked>Cocom1226 (talk)

Here it is:

RFID Journal Live! Is an annual conference focused on radio frequency identification (link to RFID Wiki article page) and its many applications in the business world. The event provides information on the latest solutions and advances in radio frequency identification, allowing attendees to share ideas with other attendees from over 30 countries and plan strategies for the future. End users discuss what they’ve learned, vendors exhibit their latest products, and start-up organizations unveil their newest innovations. One event is held in the United States, one event in Canada and yet another in Europe. Upcoming Event The Seventh Annual Conference and Exhibition will be held from April 27th to April 29th, 2009, at the Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin Resort (link to Swan Resort Wiki page) in Orlando, Florida. The conference will focus on panel discussions, including topics such as RFID Basics, The Benefits of RFID, Microsoft Biz Talk RFID in the Real World, Positioning Your Company for Success in Tough Economic Times, How to Track Files with RFID, How RFID Delivers Shipping Accuracy and Cost Savings, and much more. Listing of Past Events RFID Journal LIVE! Europe 2008 – Held November 4-6, 2008 in the Clarion Congress Hotel, Prague, Germany. RFID Journal LIVE! 2008 – Held April 16-18, 2008 in the Venetian, Las Vegas, Nevada RFID Journal LIVE! Canada 2007 – Held November 26-28, 2007 in the Toronto Congress Centre, Toronto, Canada RFID Journal LIVE! Europe 2007 – Held November 6-8, 2007 in the Mövenpick Hotel Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands RFID Journal LIVE! 2007 – Held April 30 - May 2, 2007 in Disney’s Coronado Springs Resort, Orlando, Florida RFID Journal LIVE! 2006 – Held May 1-3, 2006 at MGM Grand, Las Vegas, Nevada RFID Journal LIVE! Europe 2006 – Held October 25-27, 2006 at Hotels van Oranje, Amsterdam, The Netherlands RFID Journal LIVE! 2005 – Held April 10-12, 2005 in the Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers, Chicago, Illinois RFID Journal LIVE! Europe 2005 – Held October 11-12, 2005 at Hotel Okura, Amsterdam, The Netherlands RFID Journal LIVE! Canada 2006 – Held November 8-9, 2006 in the Toronto Congress Centre, Toronto, Canada History The RFID Journal Live! Conference and Exhibition is hosted by RFID Journal (link to RFID Wiki page). A privately held corporation, RFID Journal, LLC was launched on March 1, 2002 by founder and editor, Mark Roberti, and is headquartered in Melville, N.Y. With a national and international membership base, RFID Journal provides services to a wide variety of industries. RFID Journal, Inc. is a member of American Business Media (link to AMB Wiki page), the association for business media companies and is listed in Dun & Bradstreet’s (link to D&B page) database of privately held corporations. External Link <blanked> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cocom1226 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

According to the deletion log RFID Journal Live was deleted because it did not assert the notability of the subject. See WP:N for Wikipedia’s notability guideline. Has the subject received substantial coverage in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject? If so, what did those sources say, citing the sources. If not, Wikipedia has articles only about notable subjects. —teb728 t c 23:54, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Judging from the fact that this years conference will not be held until next month, I would guess that it has not (yet) received the substantial coverage that would qualify it for an article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia—not a publicity medium. —teb728 t c 00:27, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

See RFID Journal for an example of a page that is written somewhat more like an encyclopedic article rather than a press release. Even this article has a major problem in that it does not demonstrate notability and thus is in danger of being deleted. But at least it asserts notability. —teb728 t c 08:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

March 14

Self-Created SVG

Hi, I am in the process of making an SVG version of my university's coat of arms, which to my knowledge is not a copyrighted image. Am I correct in thinking that this self created version would fall under a free use licence if I upload to wikipedia? Thanks 79.75.184.195 (talk) 00:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

If there was any creativity involved in creating the coat of arms, it would be automatically copyrighted by being created. Your copy would be derivative of the original. —teb728 t c 00:30, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

So does that mean it could be used for any purpose on here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.184.195 (talk) 00:32, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Quite the opposite. Since it would be copyrighted by the university and not licensed, it could be used only in accord with Wikipedia's restrictive non-free content policy. —teb728 t c 00:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

So can someone please explain to me how this image is apparently free use??? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.184.195 (talk) 00:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

That’s a good question. It may be incorrectly tagged. If the design is old enough, the copyright may be expired. I can’t imagine any circumstance under which File:Sidney Sussex College shield.svg would be {{GFDL}}. —teb728 t c 07:30, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, copyright exists from the moment it is first published in a publicly readible form. Copyright does not have to be declared, rather the opposite is true; unless something is declared by its creator to be free to use, or liscenced for free use, it is assumed that the creator or original copyright holder continues to maintain that copyright until they either formally release the image into the public domain, or it becomes old enough, by statute, to qualify for public domain. If you cannot prove the image was created long enough ago to be in public domain, then all uses of the image, and all copies of it, including those made by you by hand, are still covered under the original copyright.

Coprorate logos DO have a special fair-use exception under our image use policy, but claiming "fair use" of a copyrighted image requires a specific set of actions on your part, including the use of a proper fair use rationale, and if you mess up any part of it, the image gets deleted and you get mad at the world. So, please tread carefully here. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:09, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

In my limited experience a difference exists between copyright over a blazon and copyright over a rendering of that blazon. In terms of the blazon, copyright would have started ticking many years ago. If you ignore every other rendering of that coat of arms, and effectively start from scratch, you are creating a derivative not of the image but of the text (which is in many cases much older). It's probably a grey area though (watch out for modern changes to the blazon, which renew copyright over that portion of the arms!), but certainly is de facto allowed. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 08:24, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Sidney Sussex College was founded in 1536. The design of its blazon is very likely to be in the public domain. To demonstrate this, the uploader should have found an instance of the blazon that was published prior to about 1860. (A later date would need additional specific info.) The SVG would then be a derivate of the PD work. If the SVG creator asserts that the added effort was a creative effort, then the creator may assert copyright in the creative effort that went into the deritative work, but not in the original. The GFDL would then apply to the derivative work but would not prevent someone else from deriving a separate work from the original PD work. -Arch dude (talk) 19:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Correct Article template

Hello Wikipedia! I've stumbled across a few articles (not talk/userpages) that I feel require a large amount of clean up because of recent vandalism and spam. Is there a certain template I use for that or do I just use the general clean up template? Thanks! Renaissancee (talk) 00:43, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the best thing to do with an article that has been vandalized to is to be bold and try fix it yourself. If you mess up, it's OK. Undoing mistakes is a simple process (just click on the "history" tab at the top of the article and click undo by the edit you want to undo). Alternatively, if you know the name of the article, just let us know here and a help desk volunteer can take a look at it. Finally, if you just want to draw other editors' attention to the issue, there is a list of clean-up templates on this page. TNXMan 00:49, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

IP Address

I recently created an account, and I would like to link it to a couple of edits I had done previously. Is there a way I can link my account with the IP address I used to sign those edits? Thanks. --Tdp2010 (talk) 01:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

It used to be possible years ago to reattribute edits from IP addresses to username accounts. However, this is no longer done. Edits can be reattributed from one username to another. TNXMan 01:30, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. However, this is sometimes a good thing because your logs are cleared and you left the unexperienced edits behind. ZooFari 03:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Age in BLP?

Is there something in BLP that suggests that birthdates are not permitted in BLP articles? I noticed that here.

See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of personal information. It says that 1) birthdates should always be included when they have been published in a reliable source and it can be inferred that the person does not object to such information being published, and 2) the birthdate is otherwise widely published or well-known. So, for example, the (alleged) birthdate of Jimmy Wales is listed in the Encyclopædia Britannica and is therefore listed here. Dates of less-notable people, such as Ms Letourneau, should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis; if the birthdate is not already published in a reliable source such as Britannica, then it should probably be left out. Xenon54 (talk) 01:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia access

I am having a current problem with my wikipedia pages. For a few days now, for some reason I cannot seem to access any of the wikipedia websites that I have joined such as http://kingdomhearts.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page. I never had any problems like that before, but when I tried to access them on my home computer, it would take a long time to load, then it would stop and says the page was taking too long to load so it was canceled. However, when using my laptop, I had no problem accessing it. Is there anyone who could know what the problem might be? Is it the cookies? IP address? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.226.36.188 (talk) 02:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it is Wikimedia (by the way, the website you provided isn't powered by Wikimedia) maybe it is your Internet server. Do you have access to the navigation bars? or is it just the articles? ZooFari 03:31, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

The page you mention is not part of Wikipedia. However, you can ask this question at the computing reference desk, where you're likely to get a better answer. This page is only for questions on editing Wikipedia. Chamal ^talk 03:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Locate Huggle on my computer

Resolved

 – Chamal ^talk 04:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I recently installed huggle and worked on it for a couple of minutes to familiarize. I exited it, but don't know how to go back. Where does huggle get installed so I can open the application? ZooFari 03:43, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

What internet browser do you use? Renaissancee (talk) 03:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I use both IE and Safari, but I'm assuming you want the browser I used to install it. I think I was using Safari... ZooFari 03:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Search for huggle using the search facility in your operating system. It's probably saved in the default download folder your browser uses, which you can find from the browser preferences/options. Chamal ^talk 03:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Tried that, but nothing about Huggle. I will search my Internet files... ZooFari 03:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, it got saved on my desktop. ZooFari 04:17, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

That confused me the first time I tried to use it. You don't actually have a shortcut to huggle, it just puts the file there. I think it should have some sort of installer like a normal program, sigh. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 04:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

HELP REGARDING ROBOTICS

Hello everyone,

I think it would be better if WIKIPEDIA keeps about the building of ROBOTICS and TACTICS involved in it.....and this WIKIPEDIA really helps me a lott in understanding different types of problems involved in my subjects.

Thanks to all of ur team, Regards Shri! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srinivasan9 (talk • contribs) 08:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

"Wikipedia" is whatever the people who use Wikipedia want to make it. If you want Wikipedia's robotics articles to improve, the most efficient method is to improve them yourself. To learn how, read Wikipedia: The Missing Manual and Wikipedia:WikiProject Robotics. The vast majority of Web sites you have seen do not allow you to improve them. Thus you naturally assume that if you want something to change, you have to beg someone else to change it. On Wikipedia that is not true; here you have as much power to change things as you are willing to earn through your own hard work and study of our policies, guidelines, and procedures. On Wikipedia, everything is subject to change, but some things are easier to change than others. --Teratornis (talk) 20:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

NPWatcher

Hi guys. I have a problem with NPWatcher. When I open the deletion tab I can only see speedy delete, article criteria, and redirect sections. I can't see the stuff to it's right. I've tried to expand the window, maximise/minimise, nothing seems to work. Can someone help, please? Antivenin 11:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't use NPWatcher, so I couldn't tell you for sure. However, I did find a link to the NPWatcher help page, which can be found here. Best, TNXMan 13:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I posted my question there too. Thanks for telling me about that page! People there have got to know the answer. Antivenin 14:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

prctical topics

i wants some practically implementable topics related to ppt's.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinay ppatil (talk • contribs) 11:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Could clarify what "ppt's" are? TNXMan 13:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps PowerPoint files. Are you aware that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia run by volunteers? Xenon54 (talk) 14:29, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

email evidence for permissions

I would like to provide permission evidence for an image I uploaded. As per instructions I need to email it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. However the permission I have is from an online chat.

1. Can I email the chat transcript as evidence, or is it mandatory that I email only the email of the copyright holder as a forwarded email?
2. How is a forwarded email better than any other piece of textual evidence? What if someone types up an email in the form of a forward and mails it as evidence?
3. How can I request for postponement of deletion of the image until I get the evidence ready?

Jay (talk) 12:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

• To postpone deletion, leave a note on the image talkpage. An email from the copyright holder is better evidence because the OTRS people can check where it came from. If you send them a chat transcript, there's no way to find out who you were actually talking with . - 87.211.75.45 (talk) 13:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

hello to every1

can any 1 send me a case study on any 1 of d following topics 1)The blood of the workman is to be borne by the industry 2)fair days wages for fair days work 3)person's care is more important than profit 4)industry moves the wheels of commerce

i want case study in reference to industrial law subject. plz if any 1 can send me dis to my email address i.e, <blanked> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Innocentdevil 90 (talk • contribs) 14:13, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

At the help desk we help with procedures and policies. Doing your homework is a bit beyond our scope. Antivenin 14:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Unfortunately, I don't believe we provide case studies. You may find what you're looking for on our sister project, Wikibooks, which provides free textbooks. However, please be aware that none of the Wikimedia projects will do your homework for you. TNXMan 14:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Burning a dvd ,without a graphics card installed..

I am having a computer built, and the person building it tried to use the burning program that came with the motherboard's CD .. He left me a message last night telling me that it wouldnt burn the dvd without using a graphics card .Is this true , the computer needs a graphics card in order to burn dvd's &/or CD's .??? I thought a graphics card just was used to play graphics ,and didnt have anything to do with burning dvd's or CD's ....Thanks for all your help as I am computer illiterate and would like to know as much as I can .. Thanks again !!!<blanked> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.28.42.61 (talk) 14:36, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Have you tried the Computing section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. TNXMan 14:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Photo credits / links

Resolved

Hi there,

I'm an amateur / semi-pro photographer. By that I mean, I take pictures, mainly landscapes and scenery shots, on my own for enjoyment. I sometimes sell them in small quantities to partially offset my costs, though, since they are significant.

I've been a user of Wikipedia for many years and would like to contribute some high quality photos in various places. However, I would like to ensure that I get credit for these photos, and if possible, put a link back to my photography website.

I have read conflicting information on what is allowed and not allowed in this regard. I've seen some cases where photos included linkbacks, but others where they did not. Can anyone clarify?

Thanks.

Charles —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charleskoz (talk • contribs) 15:46, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Might want to read our image policy. BTW, just so you know, Wikipedia does not pay for the services of its editors; they are all volunteers. Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 16:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

A few additional links: WP:CMF, WP:LOP#Legal_and_copyright, and WP:IMAGE. However, I'm not too sure about your last question; could you please clarify? Thanks. Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 16:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

In addition, I'm afraid that placing a link to your own website would be a Conflict of Interest. Transcluded from WP:COI:

If you expect to derive monetary or other benefits or considerations from editing Wikipedia, then we very strongly encourage you to avoid editing Wikipedia in areas where there is a conflict of interest that would make your edits non-neutral (biased). Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy states that all articles must represent views fairly and without bias, and conflicts of interest do significantly and negatively affect Wikipedia's ability to fulfill this requirement.

Thanks. Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 16:09, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Hope I'm doing this right. Thanks for the response, but I'm still a bit confused. Just to clarify, I do not expect to make money from editing Wikipedia. I only mentioned what I did out of a desire for full disclosure. I am willing to donate the images to Wikipedia, I just want a link to my website (where other similar images can be viewed for free). I have seen this done in other places so I'm confused by your reply. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charleskoz (talk • contribs) 16:24, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Here's one example of what I want to do: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bow_River-27527.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charleskoz (talk • contribs) 16:29, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Placing a link to your website on the image description page (as opposed to the article) is perfectly fine. This is done frequently, by many photographers. So that there is no problem later with people questioning whether User:Charleskoz is the owner of whatever your website is (that is, whether someone is impersonating you and uploading images from your website without your permission), you may want to add a note somewhere on the website stating that it is owned by the Wikipedia user User:Charleskoz. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:17, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Oh...whoops, misunderstanding on my part. Yes, you are perfectly entitled to link to your website on your userpage (though not promoting it; see WP:USERPAGE) and the link on the uploaded image. Hope that helps. Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 17:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

What's the point?

is it true that wikipedia has no point and it will be deleted? 78.149.69.226 (talk) 18:01, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Truth and trolls are much the same; Obvious to many, ignored by few. — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 18:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC) (sad case in point)

Actually, wikipedia has at least 35 points. :) Franamax (talk) 19:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

See Ozymandias and Heat death of the Universe. Everyone and everything will one day be forgotten, so one could argue that ultimately Wikipedia has no more point than the person behind 78.149.69.226. However, at the moment Wikipedia is temporarily important to lots of people, as it is the world's fifth most popular Web site or thereabouts. --Teratornis (talk) 19:49, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

New user log

The user creation log tags each new user with either new user account or account created automatically. What does the latter mean? -hydnjo (talk) 20:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

The latter means it was automatically created as part of Single user logon. Basically, account created automatically means that it was an account created on another Wikimedia controlled wiki, and due to SUL it automatically creates it on different wikis."Vivio Testarossa^{Talk Who} 20:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Got it, and thank you for that fast response :-) -hydnjo (talk) 20:33, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

problem logging in

i am having problems logging in to my account, i can't get in with my password, can you please help me, because i want too become a member of the tagged family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.224.2.202 (talk) 21:41, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

If you've forgotten your password, the only way to recover it is to type in your username and hit "E-mail new password" on Special:Userlogin. If you didn't set an e-mail address, then you'll have to create a new account. Xenon54 (talk) 21:50, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Full Page Protection?

I am requesting clarification regarding Full Permanent Page Protection. Is it possible for an article to have this from the very start? From what I understand, all articles are open to editing by anyone, until there is a conflict. What would be the circumstances for gaining full permanent protection for an article? Thanks! Sarah sko1221^talk 22:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)