Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:50, 25 March 2011

↑ To top of page

Shortcuts

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

Search the frequently asked questions

Search the help desk archives and other help pages

Skip to bottom

March 22

Aria Tesolin - wikipedia page

Hi there, I have just started a wikipage on the above topic and need some help. I'm not sure i did it correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IntuiWiki (talk • contribs) 00:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The page is at Aria Tesolin. You need to learn about references; try WP:REF. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned it up some. Your referencng was removing text from the article so I removed all of the inline references. I agree with David that you need to work on the references, another place you might try reading is, Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. GB fan (talk) 01:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a page you made?

I would like to delete a subpage of my userpage and I forgot how. (I made the subpage, obviously) Does anyone know how to delete your own page (not remove the contents, but actually delete the page). Thanks! User:4myself4 21 March 2011 20:40 UTC-5

Add {{db-user}} to the page in question. Bencherlite ^Talk 00:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bencherlite is correct. For more information, the process is explained here.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:48, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Offline wikipedia editor

I often draft and copyedit articles that I want to upload while offline in normal word processing software. I am pretty familiar with the wikipedia formatting language and so forth so it's not a massive issue, but is there some sort of software that I could use that could display the text I enter, wikipedia style? Postrock1 (talk) 01:15, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other than installing a personal version of the Mediawiki software I'm not sure but previewing what you've written is easy if you get used to control (pc) or command (apple) shortcuts. Just have a window open to any random article in edit mode with the content blanked. When you want to preview your offline content, ctrl+a (select all), ctrl+c (copy) → Wikipedia page ctrl+v (paste) → show preview button. Written out as I have this may seem laborious but this should literally be about a three second process.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:29, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found this, but I don't know how reliable it is or what operating system it's compatible with. Goodvac (talk) 01:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think we might be misunderstanding each other Fuhghettaboutit, I mean for situations when I have no active internet connection. Trying as you suggested just gets me a page error, unless I'm missing something. Good find Goodvac, but alas the download button on that seems to be broken. Postrock1 (talk) 02:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether anything at mw:Alternative parsers is useful. I haven' tried any of it. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:19, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I asked this on 10 September ukexpat suggested:-

The Word2MediaWikiPlus macros for Word do a reasonable job of converting Word text to Wiki markup, but some post-conversion tweaking may be required. You can download them from Sourceforge.

It worked for me Arjayay (talk) 11:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the documentation here this only works on Windows, but I'm a mac user. thanks for your help though, I didn't know such a programme existed. Postrock1 (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Knife wire cutter

Can you tell me how does the knife blades are used for cut the wires with the hole in it? Thak you for your ilustration. Emilio —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.75.32.50 (talk) 03:38, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know which illustration you refer to. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.5 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

contacting the author

Is it possible to contact the person who edited a page last? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.206.46.233 (talk) 03:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, click the "history" tab at the top of an article, and that will give a list of all of the recent editor. Next to each editor's name is a "talk" link, which will take you to their talk page. You can contact them there. --Jayron32 03:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) The "View history" tab at top shows the page history. You can click "talk" next to a username or IP address to get to their talk page where you can write a message. If it's an IP address then it's uncertain whether they will keep that IP address and ever see a message you leave there. If it's a username which hasn't been active lately then they may have email enabled but you will need to create an account with email enabled to mail them. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may find that the most recent editor was a software program making an automatic edit, or someone making a quick spelling correction. You may have to look at the "diffs" in the page history to find the editor who last made a substantial edit. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:19, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help With Infobox

I have created and infobox. It can be found on my user page. I would like to know how to name the fields like instead of label1, birth_place... Also, I need help with the documentation of it as I really don't know how to do that.Crowned jester (talk) 04:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You'll find {{Infobox person}} much easier to use than {{Infobox}}. Its documentation is here. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a sidenote, you should probably move Template:Crowned jester's infobox to your userspace, as well. ^Avic _ennasis @ 11:09, 16 Adar II 5771 / 22 March 2011 (UTC)

{{Infobox user}} is more appropriate. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 13:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the infobox from template space to User:Crowned jester/Crowned jester's infobox and tagged the redirect at Template:Crowned jester's infobox for deletion. – ukexpat (talk) 13:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks! But I will be creating more templates in the future and would like to know how to name parameters. Crowned jester (talk) 14:22, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can name parameters using the same technique that Infobox user does. Look at the Wiki source in Template:Infobox user. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:11, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COMMONNAME

This introduce how to define article name is use Common name, and it recommend how to survey what is common name, use Search Engine. But, This way is maybe original research because surveying itself among wikipedian users then decide that is common name without verify citation. isn`t it? In Korean wikipedia, There is sim~~ple~~ilar Guildlinge still in proposed, ko:user:Sz1161 said that.--Altostratus (talk) 08:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The guidelines at WP:COMMONNAME suggest using a search engine to check which terms are used by "major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies and scientific journals". To me, using search engines to find good-quality reliable sources seems an essential part of writing Wikipedia articles, and not original research.

I'm afraid that Google's translation of that Korean Wikipedia page was not good enough for me to get a clear idea of your proposal. Perhaps another of the Help desk regulars can read Korean? -- John of Reading (talk) 11:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good, your answer is that it. not problem. thx.--Altostratus (talk) 11:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Original research is allowed on talk pages and in edit summaries. Claiming inside an article that "The common name is ..." could in some cases be considered original research, but it's OK to name an article partially based on original research about the common name. Articles must be named something even if there are no reliable sources saying "The common name is ...". PrimeHunter (talk) 13:01, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

is there any ground about your this opinion such as en.wiki guildline?.--Altostratus (talk) 14:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You guys are all confusing the difference between research and original research. If I ask my friends and associates "What do you all call XXX" and then I go to Wikipedia and say "everyone I polled in my own survey calls it XXX." then that is original research in that it is based on data I collected, which is not published anywhere else. If I go online and find what reliable sources like major publications and style guides call XXX, that is NOT original research, because it is based on what is already published. It is perfectly OK to argue that since other published sources use a term commonly, it should be considered a common name! --Jayron32 14:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I and Almost participate in ko:위키백과토론:외국어의 한글 표기 개정안 ko.wikipedians are not confuse the difference between research and original research. but there is just one insistence. That`s it. not all.

But The user ko:user:Sz1161 said, the using reailable source also, is original reserch too. because, there seem so many many same or commonly name (although that is reailable source) but it can just show there is so many same name then it cannot conclude that is Real COMMON NAME. How think you about this insistence? WP:SYN--Altostratus (talk) 14:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's plainly rediculous. It isn't original research to report what other sources report. If the sources use two names commonly and interchangably, then see WP:ENGVAR, which basically says, as long as the article is at one of the multiple common names, don't change it to the other equally valid name. If there is only one name ever used, use that one. This isn't complex stuff. I have no idea what situation is going on at korean Wikipedia, but it has zero to so with policies going on here. If you need outside help to break a deadlock, you can get independent review from other editors by filing a request at WP:3O or WP:RFC or any of the other dispute resolution methods listed at WP:DR. --Jayron32 19:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wirtinger derivatives

Hello, I think I've found a probable bug on the code by editing the entry "Wirtinger derivatives": as you can see, it appear the following error message on the entry page

"Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{Reflist}} template or a <references /> tag; see the help page."

However, as you can again see click the "Edit" button, the {{Reflist}} macro is present in the body of the entry, and also this error message disappears and the entry preview shows correctly by clicking the "Show preview" button without doing any edit. What could it be? This is a task for you, SW boys. :D Daniele.tampieri (talk) 09:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've no idea what caused this. I have purged the page, and it is now displaying correctly for me. How about you? You may have to bypass your cache as well. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The page now displays correctly even for me, thank you John. I'll report all news (good or bad) here. Daniele.tampieri (talk) 12:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Updating References?

I'm trying to work on the article for "Louis Effrat", he has written over 7500 articles for the New York Times and is oft cited.

There are numerous citations of him in the NYT as "Effrat, Louis" all throughout Wikipedia. Is there a bot or an automated way to link these "Effrat, Louis" links to point to the "Louis Effrat" article? He was a man of significance with his face on the side of the New York Times trucks for a long time, and would like the article to stop being in danger or listed as an Orphan.

Thanks for the amazing resource, looking to make it better. Anacreo (talk) 09:53, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the "orphan" notice, since there are several articles linking to this one. This search only lists 22 pages that contain the words "Louis" and "Effrat", so I don't think it is worth looking for an automatic solution. I've added one link as an example of the kind of edit that you could make. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or you can use the {{Cite news}} template which displays the reference data in a consistent format. – ukexpat (talk) 13:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me more about the world's largest crocodile in captivity, the Chao Yai crocodile, over 6 meters in length and 2450 pounds as of March 22, 2011?

Can you tell us more about the famous crocodile named "Chao Yai" of Thailand? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.54.130.139 (talk) 11:40, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This helpdesk is for editing help, for assisting people with Wikipedia itself; it isn't a general knowledge forum.

I suggest you;

Look in Wikipedia - try Largest reptiles and Crocodile#Size.
If the articles do not answer, try asking on the reference desk, which deals with questions not related to Wikipedia itself.

Thanks, Chzz ► 11:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

edited info still coming up in the search tool

I've deleted an incorrect fact from an article, but when I search the key words in the search bar, the search still brings up the deleted section. When reviewing the whole article, the deletion doesn't appear. How do I delete from the search tool? Cissiem (talk) 12:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please link to the article? I would also assume suggestions in the search bar take time to update, and there isn't anyway (that I'm aware of) to delete what comes up in a search. CTJF83 12:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The search index is updated once a day -- John of Reading (talk) 12:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)The article is presumably Philip Green? The search database takes a little while to catch up. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think, probably, the user is referring to an external search engine in their toolbar?

Cissiem, if you mean a "search bar" in your browser, then that is probably using Google, Yahoo!, Bing, or some other search engine. They search their own cached information. Those websites periodically re-check pages, including Wikipedia articles, and store the results. That is beyond our control, but they tend to update within few days. Chzz ► 13:00, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shown and hiding Wikipedia principles page

On my User Page I put up a box with Wikipedia's principles using {{Wikipedia principles}}. Is there a way to get wikimarkup to default to being shown rather than hidden / collapsed when a user visits the page? Also, I added a section I call "Useful links." Is there a way to get it to default to being hidden / collapsed rather than shown? I really want to put the emphasis on the Wikipedia principles, not my useful links. Guy Macon (talk)

{{Wikipedia principles|state=uncollapsed}} shows the links expanded by default.

To hide your useful links you could surround them with {{Collapse top}} and {{Collapse bottom}} -- John of Reading (talk) 13:21, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Worked great. Thanks! Guy Macon (talk) 15:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

newbie.. please help... thank you and sorry in advance

Hello-

I just created an article on my user page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:VickyLNY/Spatcave_Studios

and I needed help with a few things please: 1- how can I ask for it to be reviewed to make sure it's OK with your standards 2- if it's OK how can I change the name of it so that my username (VickyLNY) isn't included on it and "Spatcave Studios" shows only 3- how can I move it over to the main space so people can search and see it..

Thank you.. I've been reading up on how to this, but it's very confusing to me as I'm not really that computer savvy :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by VickyLNY (talk • contribs) 13:22, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The page you need is this one, which describes how to request a review, and how to move the page once it has been reviewed. When the page is moved to main space, your user name will no longer appear in its name.

Even before you request a formal review, you should read the Notability section of the "So you made..." page. The article does not yet make it clear how the company is notable enough for a Wikipedia article - the guidelines for that are here. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for getting back to me and helping me... I will try and submit it for review.. also another question if you don't mind.. I was reading that there are other branches of Wikipedia that might be more suitable for certain articles if they don't qualify for the main site.. how can I find out about that please.. or better yet.. do you have a suggestion for me? :) thank you again!! :))) — Preceding unsigned comment added by VickyLNY (talk • contribs) 13:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's a list at Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. The site Wikicompany has been mentioned here several times - but note that this is not a Wikimedia Foundation project as Wikipedia is, but an entirely unrelated site. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU!!!!!!! :) going to go try and ask for a review now.. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by VickyLNY (talk • contribs) 13:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New article

I have created an article on the Durban Automotive Cluster and saved it but I don't see it on Wikipedia. How do I know if it has been added to the content on Wikipedia? What has happened to it? There are no comments or responses. When I do a search for it I can't locate it. Please advise. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rested (talk • contribs) 13:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You created the article as a draft on your user page. I have now moved it to a user subpage at User:Rested/Durban Automotive Cluster which is the appropriate place for a draft article. Please take a look at WP:CORP and WP:BFAQ for help with the notability requirements for companies and similar organisations. Then take a look at WP:SYMUD for assistance with what to do with your draft now that you have created it. – ukexpat (talk) 13:45, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

page doesn't recognize references

Hello! I have added appropriate, peer-reviewed journal references to a page, but the page continues to display a message that says there are no references on it. How is that removed? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drrozz (talk • contribs) 13:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The message at the top of the page is a template that needs to be manually removed. This is usually done by another editor who reviews the addition of the references. TN X Man 13:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the tag to "refimprove" (as there are still some unreferenced statements in the article) and cleaned up the formatting a little. – ukexpat (talk) 14:21, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Urdu language

Hi, Wikipedia is in a number of languages, like Persian, Arabic and even in Punjabi but I could not find Urdu language which falls, perhaps, in top ten bigger languages. Would you please include Urdu language in Wikipedia also so that the people who understand English a little or not at all, could be benefitted from Wikipedia. Regards, Muhammad Akhtar <address and e-mail redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.201.185.156 (talk) 14:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mr Muhammad, I have no knowledge of the language at all, but is this not the urdu wikipedia? Postrock1 (talk) 15:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the complete list of wikipedias at the moment. As you can see, the Urdu one currently has 16,361 articles. --ColinFine (talk)

Infoboxes

Okay, is there any guidelines that states how many infoboxes are to be used for an article? There the thing regarding the Transformers character articles, where people are giving infoboxes for every character's incarnation. I seem to recall there being something that stated that there was to be one infobox per article. But I don't know.

There's also a quandary regarding how much content is to be added in said infobox. Sarujo (talk) 15:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Checking... I will see if I can find a rule or guideline applicable to this. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 19:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have no specific guideline, but a hint for you. I will drop you something on your talk page. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 20:00, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I gave you a pointer to an article with a more or less similar issue. I hope this is of some help. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 20:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changing a Logo

The logo used on our school page is incorrect and needs to be changed. The current logo is Benildelogo.png‎ on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benilde-St._Margaret%27s page. I thought I got the image uploaded into the gallery, but now cannot find it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carenhansen (talk • contribs) 15:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You uploaded File:BSM Logo 2010.jpg to Wikimedia Commons. I'm not a copyright expert, but I am surprised to see it marked {{PD-ineligible}} - logos are normally uploaded to Wikipedia itself, not to Commons, and tagged with {{Non-free logo}}. Also the new logo does not match the image on the school's website, so you may wish to check you have uploaded the right file.

To install a new logo in the article, click "Edit" at the top and edit the line that says "image = Benildelogo.png". -- John of Reading (talk) 16:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think File:BSM Logo 2010.jpg is only part of the logo and is missing the shield element. In any event I have tagged it for deletion on Commons as the school's website clearly displays a copyright notice and I don't think the image is simple enough not be copyrightable. In addition, although permission is claimed, no evidence of it has been provided. – ukexpat (talk) 16:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Small Austrailian Flag ..

Hi, I can display a small UK flag using United Kingdom .. is there an equivalent for the Austrailian flag? .. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.75.233.178 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What does {{AUS}} do for you? Does it give

Australia? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But before you start adding it to articles, please take a look at WP:MOSFLAG. – ukexpat (talk) 17:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a flag without the country name "label" use {{flagicon|Japan}} which gives -

.

You can also do it for any country as well as a number of other supranational organisations such as the

United Nations -

-

OAS -

-

WHO -

. Roger (talk) 17:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thank you very much for your help.

How can I find info opening a cold case file?

Hello,

I have found new info related to my daughter's death. Is there a way to have this case reopened for little or no cost. The Shiff's office doesn't seem to want to do the extra work neccesary. 174.96.223.191 (talk) 17:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This Help Desk is for questions about using Wikipedia. I am not sure that we can help you here or anywhere else on Wikipedia. Maybe you should talk to a lawyer? – ukexpat (talk) 17:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, see WP:NOLEGAL. BurtAlert (talk) 20:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pastrami

Currently, a user is writing the article for pastrami to become offensive. The page is littered with slangs and profanity and has become absolutely unreadable. Please fix this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.166.76.15 (talk) 18:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are talking about one edit by an IP editor. You have reverted the edit. I have warned the editor. Nothing more needs to be done here.

Done - David Biddulph (talk) 18:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Preferred, or required way to link to Wikisource for use strictly as a reference.

Hello,

over at Wikisource, I've been discussing with a few other people the proper page to link to as a reference for verification and there does not seem to be a consensus at this time. The two methods are to link to the page in which the text is transcluded from the set of pages (and referenced in the left column numerically): see here for an example; or to link to actual page with the scanned copy of the work (original copy appears on the right, arrows to return to the transluded work in the mainspace): see here for an example. Which is preferred to link to in a reference? I would like to get as much feedback as possible, thank you. - Theornamentalist (talk) 18:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your second link is a redlink, so you may wish to reformulate your question. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the redlink but can't answer the question. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:55, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've copied this to the reliable sources discussion page; are there any other appropriate places you are aware of where I can receive feedback? - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

etown radio program article - not an advertisement - rewritten in more neutral tone

Hello,

We have recently edited the "etown radio program" article to reflect a more neutral tone. Since the organization is a nonprofit that does not sell products or services, we are hoping that the tag above the article claiming it is written like an advertisement could somehow be removed, given the edits that have been made in the last two days. If additional edits need to made to help expedite this process, we (the organization) are happy to make them.

Thanks,

Zack Littlefield etown Zradio (talk) 18:53, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is still too much "puffery" in the article - eg the lists of performers and guests are, IMHO, too long and should be cut back. I also removed some fluffy stuff from the "Future" section. I also have a question: how can a radio show have 501(c)(3) status? I am no tax lawyer, but that status is for corporations and other such legal entities. So presumably the entity that creates the show has 501(c)(3) status? – ukexpat (talk) 19:04, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First, please note that whether the organization is commercial or non-profit has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not it reads like an advertisement: the comment is about the tone and content of the article. "I want to tell the world about my wonderful cause" is just as far from the aims of Wikipedia as "I want to tell the world about my wonderful product". The question is whether a dispassionate observer coming to the article would think it read like an encyclopaedia or like promotional literature.

Actually, in my opinion the article in its present form doesn't read like an advertisement; but it's not properly encyclopaedic either. I think there is too much information which is not really relevant to the station: Ukexpat suggests the lists of performers and guests; I would cite the biography of Nick Forster: there is far too much there which is not relevant in an article about the station (and should either be deleted, or moved to an article about him, if he is notable enough). --ColinFine (talk) 00:38, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

possible error in an article

How do I comment on an article without actually editing it?Coolmanoh (talk) 20:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Use the article's talk page. You can access it by following the "Discuss"-link on top of the article. Alternatively, just type "Talk:<article name>" in the Search box. Of course, you can also voice your concern here, I'm sure someone will help you. Enjoy editing Wikipedia! Zakhalesh (talk) 20:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New unreviewed article

Hi -

How long does it typically take for the "This page is a new unreviewed article" template to go away? I have searched through the archives and learned that there is a large backlog, but I'm just curious when I should expect it to go away. It's about James Mejia, a Denver politician who is the front runner for the upcoming Mayoral election. Thank you. CJPowell 22:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some cleanup on the article and removed the userspace draft tag. I did put on a tag asking for more references, The article is basically sourced to one article. GB fan (talk) 23:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have added more reference links for more articles. Thank you for the help, and please let me know if you would like me to add more to the article. CJPowell 11:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Missing article

Good afternoon. I was working on a page for my father, Karl W. Aschenbrenner, and it took me a couple of months to assemble the bibliography. When I returned, there is no page for him. I also forgot my user name and had to set up a new account. Did that have anything to do with his page not appearing? Any help you can give would be appreciated. My new user name is peteralolaw. Thanks.--Peteralolaw (talk) 23:05, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean User:El Vereda/Enter your new article name here? Bencherlite ^Talk 23:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Entry on the Eastman Kodak Company Wikipedia Page is Misleading and Should be Removed

The following misleading entry appears under the heading "Company History" for the Eastman Kodak Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak

"2011

Kodak is presented with an offer to go private on March 18, 2011 by Sterling Global Holdings. Offering a premium of 46% above it's closing price in an all cash transaction. Sterling Gobal Holdings, Managing Partner is Mr. Al Weintraub from New York.Sterling is a privatly held company who purchases distressed companies. The transaction is subject to Board and shareholder approval. But Sterling has solicited all major shareholders to obtain majority shareholder ownership, in case the board balks at its offer.[citation needed]"

This entry is misleading because it suggests that a tender offer to purchase Eastman Kodak Company has been made. Under the U.S. securities laws, a party wishing to acquire a public company must submit a filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission demonstrating that the party has the capability to make such an offer. (See http://www.sec.gov/answers/tender.htm) No such filing has been submitted to the SEC. See the following link which shows all SEC filings to date for Eastman Kodak Company: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=115911&p=irol-secfilings

Therefore, no lawful and legitimate offer to "go private" has been made. To suggest otherwise is misleading to current and potential investors of Eastman Kodak and a violation of Rule 14e-8 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (See http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=e9e81d0ff3c93d265acb1f271f391554&rgn=div8&view=text&node=17:3.0.1.1.1.2.81.256&idno=17).

Please remove the reference quoted above immediately because it is misleading and furthers a violation of the U.S. securities laws. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.170.128.65 (talk) 23:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the content, just as you could have, under WP:BURDEN. All that you've said above is besides the point, but note that you have not parsed the statute at all correctly in stating positively that there was a violation. There are multiple conditions precedent in its language that you cannot know are true.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the IP resolves to Kodak's network, so its probably better that they didn't remove it themselves. Nanonic (talk) 23:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 23

DELETE MY PROFILE PLEASE!

I am on the marketing team for Trinity Entertainment Company. I made the mistake of creating an account with Wikipedia. I work for a nightclub. We have no interest in posting anything on this site. Please remove my user name and password. Please delete my account.

Username: advancedwarning.

I tried everything, and somehow I cannot manage to understand this website.

Thank you for your help. Trinity Entertainment Complex Marketing Team — Preceding unsigned comment added by Advancedwarning (talk • contribs) 04:06, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In short, am I right to say that you want to be blocked and banned from editing on Wikipedia? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 05:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is no way to delete your account. If you don’t want to use it, just stop using it. —teb728 t c 05:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for not trying to use Wikipedia for marketing. As you may know, we have rules against that. Accounts cannot be deleted, but they can be renamed if you don't want the user name to be listed. See Wikipedia:Right to vanish. However, it's simplest for both you and us if you simply refrain from editing. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:31, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign Internal Links?

Is it best practice to use a foreign internal link if there is no page created in my native language? For example is it best to link a French Wikipedia page to an English article or Link it to a non-existent English article to point out that it is missing? Or is there a grey area for notability? Keith (talk) 06:42, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Make it a redlink. When en-wiki readers follow a wikilink in an article they expect to be taken to an article in English. Suddenly dumping them into an article they cannot read helps nobody and defeats the entire purpose of redlinks. Use interlanguage links to link English articles to their equivalents in other languages. Roger (talk) 06:56, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had reformed Help:Interlanguage links to say something to this effect a while back and was reverted by an IP on the sole ground that the prior text had persisted for some time on that little edited page. I have reverted now.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Racist Caption on Wiki Page

So I was browsing Wikipedia and I came across a RACIST caption to a picture of Macon Bolling Allen, the first African-American to earn a law degree in the United States. Underneath his picture, someone HATEFULLY posted that he and his wife had "a nigga child." I take issue with this comment for two real reasons. First, it is evil, ignorant, and rude to refer to any African-American in such terms, let alone the offspring of an important person in American history. And second, it is inaccurate. As the article itself states, Mr. Allen and his wife produced five sons together. Here is the link to the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macon_Bolling_Allen

Please correct this irresponsible oversight immediately.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.234.106 (talk • contribs)

Done. Seaphoto^Talk 06:32, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The tenor of your post is as if to convince us that this should be removed. This was vandalism, plain and simple, that legitimate editors would remove on sight. In fact, you could have and and can help revert such filth yourself. By the way, the IP address that added this is now blocked from editing for one month. If this was a registered user account we could block it indefinitely, but IP addresses cannot because they get reassigned to new people over time.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Fuhghettaboutit - the time, energy and indignation you expended on this "issue" could have been far better spent on simply reverting it and others of the thousands of similar vandalism edits that occur every single day. Short answer - just fix it yourself instead of kicking up a huge fuss about it. Roger (talk) 11:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could bite a bit less? CTJF83 12:02, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken - I apologise for biting. Roger (talk) 14:40, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To the original poster of this request: thank you for bringing this to our attention. Chzz ► 14:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the number of the contributors on English WP

When looking at stats.wikimedia.org, I can see only how many users had edited once within a month and how many users had edited at least ten times since English Wikipedia launched. I would like to know how many users have edited or contributed once since English Wikipedia launched. Let me know how I can get the informationcooldenny (talk) 13:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it'd have to come from a database query - which you could request on tswiki:Query service. (Others might have other ideas though; so maybe wait a bit for more responses here, first). Chzz ► 13:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conrad Hilton

I read that Conrad Hilton was married to Elizabeth Taylor in Paris May 31, 1950 and I did not see it on his profile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.175.137.182 (talk) 14:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be Conrad Hilton, Jr., who is the son of Conrad Hilton - and his marriage to Elizabeth Taylor is indeed mentioned. Chzz ► 14:07, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly....

I wince whenever I see "interestingly" in Wikipedia articles, and it occurs a lot (37,680 hits). Is this acceptable or am I just very sensitive? I'd appreciate examples of where it might be justifiable.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:20, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should it not be used? I've not heard of a case where it would not be acceptable. TNXMan 14:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In short, no. See WP:EDITORIAL. Rehevkor ✉ 14:29, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

I don't think it is acceptable. I can't think of much; if it was in a quotation, or a book title, or something, it'd be OK. But I just skimmed through the first hundred hits, and couldn't see any that were valid - I'd remove them all as NPOV. I wonder if a bot could handle it, or are there chances for too many false-positives? It will be interesting to see what others think. Chzz ► 14:35, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see what you mean. I thought you were referring to incorrect grammatical usage. My mistake. I agree that it shouldn't be used a descriptor in articles. TNXMan 14:38, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Also WP:PEACOCK. We shouldn't be telling people what they should be finding interesting. If something bears mentioning in a Wikipedia article, we write about it. But interestingness is a subjective quality, and it isn't all that important what the writers of an article found interesting. Be aware, however, that I wouldn't say that every use of the term should be disallowed, nor should anyone go on a crusade to erase the word from Wikipedia. If you come across an inappropriate use of it in a specific article, feel free to rewrite to a more appropriate tone. But don't make it a single-minded effort to eradicate the word; such behavior is likely to run into opposition... (@Chzz post EC) Yeah, I wouldn't do this by bot or make it a "thing". If you find an inappropriate use, fix it; however mindless and repetitive style changes like this always cause social troubles at Wikipedia (i.e. once someone sees one person making hundreds of repetitive, and mindless, changes like this to articles, they freak out). So, no it doesn't belong, but from a pragmatic concern expect (perhaps irrational) resistance if you try to correct it en masse and all at once. Work it out slowly, make the changes as part of a larger rewrite of an article (i.e. make the entire article better, don't just excise that one word), and that will go over much better. --Jayron32 14:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the past, several editors have tried to say that certain words are "banned" or should always be removed, but Wikipedia:Manual of Style (words to watch) opens with the statement:

"There are no forbidden words or expressions on Wikipedia, but certain expressions should be used with care" (my emphasis)

Sometimes, some editors will think that "Interestingly", or any other word, is appropriate. You cannot eradicate a word. Arjayay (talk) 14:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot think of any instance (other than quotations and titles) where this word would not contravene our core policy of neutrality. Chzz ► 17:50, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. "Interestingly" is a purely subjective judgement and at complete odds with WP:NPOV. – ukexpat (talk) 19:13, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak/limited agree, in the cases where it's an uncited editorial statement (and I see it a lot). However, sources might describe something as "interesting" or "of particular interest to X", so if article cites the source, it's certainly appropriate to summarize a reliable-source analysis (WP:NPOV isn't "no opinions", it's "say and attribute the sources' opinions"). For example, a chemical might have unique properties that make it citedly of interest for that reason. Could (and maybe should) word it as "of interest to XX because of YY" rather than "interestingly, it is YY". Definitely a poor word, but not mechanically/bot-replaceable for "forbidden to use". DMacks (talk) 19:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could a bot search for it and put the articles into a CAT like "NPOV suspects"? In my experience, auto-replace bots are usually a bad thing. They tend to generate false positives and/or get defeated by "clever" writers. Auto-detect and report bots are often better because they don't have to pass the Turing test to do reliably what they're supposed to do. - (User.0.0.0.1) 09:51, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Who or what would ever use the category? -- John of Reading (talk) 10:00, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops.... Some one have the File mover or Admin tools

I accidently uploaded File:4348-1.JPG in a pretty non desrcript file name. Could some one rename it to something like Inheritance2011 or something similar? The Resident Anthropologist (Talk / contribs) 14:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now at File:Inheritance2011.JPG. TNXMan 14:45, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx The Resident Anthropologist (Talk / contribs) 14:47, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article name pronunciations

I just thought it would be cool for someone to upload a sound file that could be played next to the name of the Fukushima I nuclear power plant to show how the pronunciation is. I'm interested in doing this. Can I get any suggestions as to where to look for this? I'm tired of news people slaughtering the word "daiichi". Like, what format should I use and are they any helpful templates for this? I can use Audacity to record my own voice. -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)}

Hello. This might help: Wikipedia:Creation_and_usage_of_media_files#Audio. The file needs to be in Ogg format and uploaded at Wikimeda Commons. To use it next to the name in the lead, you will use the {{audio-IPA}} template.--Obsidi♠n^Soul 15:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm almost there and I've uploaded the file. Can you give me an example? -Theanphibian ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:02, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is OK? I used {{Audio}}, rather than {{audio-IPA}}, because that line is already getting a bit crowded. I'm sure if it is not quite right, someone will fix it. Thank you very much for doing that - it's great. ありがとうございます。 Chzz ► 17:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Theanphibian: I would take it as a great favor if you would do the same for Masako Katsura with your native pronunciation. This is a featured article I spent just gobs of time on, and I try to improve it any way I can.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:28, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can I reuse an old account?

I have create peter.lawrey and peter_lawrey in the past but no longer have access to these accounts email address.

Can I update/merge these accounts to my email address of <email removed to prevent spam>? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.175.193.34 (talk) 16:09, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but if you no longer have access to the email accounts, we have no way of proving it was the same "you", and no way to recover the account.

You can, however, mark the old accounts, with {{FormerAccount|<new account name>}} - which will produce a box like this;

This account was formerly used by Example. It is not a sock puppet, but is an account to which the password has been lost, or which the user has abandoned.
The user who legitimately owns this account has created a new account as Example.
(see: block log • contributions • page moves • current autoblocks)

You can also put a note on the user page of your new account, saying what your old one/s were. Cheers, Chzz ► 16:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The first letter in usernames is automatically capitalized, and underscores are automatically changed to spaces. User:Peter.lawrey has no edits so you can try to request the username with the procedure at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. User:Peter lawrey has edits so usurpation may be declined. The name similarity between the names User:Peter.lawrey and User:Peter lawrey may also cause concern if you request the former. It is easiest for us if you just create a new account instead of trying to take over one of the old names. We have around 14 million accounts and one more doesn't matter. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:53, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The former replies all assume you have forgotten the passwords but you didn't explicitly say this. Accounts and passwords never expire so if you remember the password then you can just log in and set a new email address at Special:Preferences. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The question is worded a little fuzzily, but one interpretation is he still has access to those accounts, but not the email address associated with the accounts. If that is the case, then yes, you can still use one of them, as long as you remember the password for the account. Once logged in, in Special:Preferences you can update your email address without having access to your old one. If you no longer remember the password for either account, then the advice given above is correct. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:00, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good point; thanks, Floquenbeam, I missed that possibility. Chzz ► 17:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Account vs. No Account

Hello, I just want to be sure I understand -- if I create an account I can create articles (multiple/different subjects) etc. along with links and images, as long as they pass through WikiScanner. There are no restrictions, such as having to create x amount before they will be live or having to edit x amount of times, etc. ? Or I can select to have an article created for me here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation.

There is a lot of info on having an account that is confusing so I want to make sure I understand if there are restrictions or not, etc.

Thanks in advance. Natalie <email removed to prevent spam> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.38.120.149 (talk) 16:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct in thinking that you can start articles as well as make edits to other articles straight away. To upload images, sound files, etc, you would need to wait until your account was confirmed. Wikipedia:User access levels may be of help here. Dismas|^(talk) 16:31, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

Welcome to Wikipedia!

There are no such restrictions; any registered user can create live articles. However, I highly recommend that, for your first article, you use Wikipedia:Article wizard and choose "Submit for review" rather than making it live, so that others can check it.

I also suggest reading Wikipedia:Your first article.

Best of luck, Chzz ► 16:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Wikipedia:Why create an account? lists many benefits of accounts. One of them is being able to create articles directly in the mainspace encyclopedia. When the account becomes autoconfirmed (after 4 days and at least 10 edits) you get additional benefits, for example ability to upload images to the English Wikipedia, and not having to enter a CAPTCHA when you add external links. I'm not sure what you mean by WikiScanner but I suspect it is not WikiScanner which is an external tool that records some actions at Wikipedia but has no influence on them. Wikipedia has some automated filters and bots that can prevent or revert certain edits. There are some edits which will only be affected by this if they are made by unregistered users, but there are also many edits which will be affected for most or all users. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:41, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am a published poet with five volumes of poetry in two languages; how can I list my books in Wikipedia? Please respond to me. Thank you

Dr.Kahtan Mandwee(Ph.d) Professor of World Literature. Poetry books Shade and Sahdows,Englishp.135 Nights of Wine and Insomnia. Englsih P.159 Country of Tears. Arabic poetry p. 120 The Doves of the Sultan. Arabic Poetry p.137 Songs for the Morning Rose. Arabic poetry p.143 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.241.184.51 (talk) 17:19, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If by "list my books in Wikipedia" you mean having articles about each of these books you will have to show these books are notable. You can do this by showing these books satisfy one of the criteria in WP:NBOOK. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 17:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Asking "how can I list my books in Wikipedia" sounds like you have a misconception about what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is not for promoting anything - commercial or non-commercial, literary, charitable, political, humanitarian ... no matter what it is, if you come to Wikipedia wishing to spread the word about it, you have come to the wrong place. Wikipedia is exclusively for articles about subjects which have already been written about by independent reporters of commentators. --ColinFine (talk) 22:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Need help formatting new article

Problem: They are all showing in one continuous line. I'd like them to be listed one reference link at a time.

Any help would be appreciated. --Sbarie (talk) 17:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a bulletted list? However, you're better off using inline citations rather than just a bibliography-list at the end. DMacks (talk) 17:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and changed it to a bulletted list. This might help you add the inline citations, Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. GB fan (talk) 17:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken the liberty of correcting the link at the head of the section from using Template:La (which gave a a broken talk field) to using Template:Lu. (The talk link is a redlink, but at least it is the correct one). - David Biddulph (talk) 18:00, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You should also take a look at WP:CORP and WP:BFAQ for guidance about writing articles about companies and the related notability requirements. – ukexpat (talk) 18:20, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ur-Hamlet

I am trying to supply a missing reference to the Wikipedia "Ur-Hamlet" entry, but I'm afraid I have only damaged the original entry. What do I do now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.206.239.102 (talk) 18:44, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed this for you, the problem was mainly unclosed reference tags (</ref>). Rehevkor ✉ 18:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template coding

Hi,

I'm working on a collapsible table template based on template:table, it is currently here. I've almost got it except for one issue. Unused column header varibles are rendered as carrige returns on the last column. Most annoying! Help would be much appreciated. --Trappedinburnley (talk) 20:12, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, see here for an example of what I mean--Trappedinburnley (talk) 21:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody??? --Trappedinburnley (talk) 08:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See if the coding at User:John of Reading/X1 works for you. I'm hiding all the newlines inside HTML comments, and using !! to separate the headers from each other. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox 4 and preview windows

I have installed Firefox 4 and now the preview windows do not come even close to working correctly. Can this be fixed? SMP0328. (talk) 20:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a Firefox problem, but in any event is best discussed at WP:VPT. – ukexpat (talk) 21:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Showing as one long line

In the article i started "insulin transduction pathway and Glucose blood level regulation" the second paragraph of the second section is showing as one long line, why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rshadid (talk • contribs) 21:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A leading space causes special formatting. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:13, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed the space but that article is in need of some serious help and, IMO, is not ready to be a live article. I don't have the time right now, could some more experienced editor take a serious look at it? Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 22:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've boldy moved the article to the creator's userspace, User:Rshadid/Insulin signal transduction pathway and regulation of blood glucose. Rehevkor ✉ 22:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting an account I didn't put an email to

How can I delete or recover http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fitting the User Fitting. I know for sure it was my account and there is no email attached to it! I want to recover it. It's not an active account. Is there anyway I can get this account back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.30.186.89 (talk) 23:48, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RRp0423Rrp0423 (talk) 23:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, you can't delete it. However, it can be usurped, or renamed. Since you do not have many edits in either account, this will be possible for you to have done. Sumsum2010·T·C 01:35, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sumsum2010 can you help me with this? Thanks.Rrp0423 (talk) 02:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind I figured it out Rrp0423 (talk) 02:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 24

Article text reliability

Is there any system to mark recently edited work to alert casual users that this text is a bit less reliable than the text which has been reviewed by the community for a while? For example, I was just on the Mickey Rooney page and the heading indicated that he was the Antichrist. It got fixed within five minutes or so by another user, but it would be nice to give readers a bit more of a confidence estimate with a special color for relatively new text, perhaps? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.76.25.63 (talk) 03:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added a header to distinguish this question from others on the same day.

An intriguing idea and possibly one to raise at the village pump. Then again, maybe Wikipedia:Flagged revisions provides some of the functionality you are looking for. Astronaut (talk) 04:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sandy / University Line

Something's wrong with the infobox in the article Sandy / University Line: it's taking in the main body of the page. I'm an experienced Wikipedian and have tried to fix it but can't. There are no stray {{ that I can see. Anybody know what's wrong? --Lincolnite (talk) 00:01, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is not in the article. It's either Template:Murray Midvale University TRAX Diagram or something transcluded by that template. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem appeared with this diff. DuncanHill (talk) 00:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link showing that diff which transcluded Template:Murray Midvale University TRAX Diagram. I don't believe the article has been broken since 2009. Something probably happened to the template recently. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:36, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Recently" was 23 October 2010, apparently. I find these route templates to be something of a black art, but by some trial and error I think I've cured the problem. - David Biddulph (talk) 01:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'd felt bad that, after 5 years of editing, I couldn't solve this myself but it seems that these particular templates really are the most specialist of areas. Glad someone knows their way around them! --Lincolnite (talk) 02:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mouseover preview

Something has just happened to my mouseover previews and I don't know how to reverse it. Now, when I mousever a bluelink, large text appears starting with the line "Wikipedia:FAQ" the next line has the word actons and then a bullet point list of actions (edit, history, most recent edit, move page, what links here, related changes, un|watch, talk page, edit talk, and new topic) then it says popups with a bullet point list of enable previews, reset and disable popups. The text on the mouseover text is much larger than before. I notice an SP icon in the toolbar at the bottom for search preview option. I don't know if this has anything to do with the change. Previously I could see a modest size print in a box of the beginning of the page being previewed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:44, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting the same thing here. There might be something at WP:VP/T. Dismas|^(talk) 04:05, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, see Wikipedia:VP/T#Did something happen to popups? Dismas|^(talk) 04:07, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit updates only occasionally appearing in searches?

1. I'm not sure what is wrong but when I enter the search string "Joanneum" I am sometimes taken to a disambiguation page and sometimes taken to a redirect page that leads to an outdated version of the English wiki entry on the subject. There are 3 different articles to which the name Joanneum accurately applies and the disambiguation page is correct however it only rarely goes to that and instead goes to a redirect to an outdated English wiki entry.

2. I have recently translated the entire German wiki entry into English and re-did the entire "Universalmuseum Joanneum" article with the updated information, however this doesn't show up in my watchlist and only sometimes comes up when I enter the "Joanneum" search string, it usually goes to the old English version as if it had not been updated in the last few days.

Any ideas on what the problem(s) is/are? Thanks Smf77 (talk) 07:19, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried searching Joanneum and Universalmuseum Joanneum a few times each on a couple of different browsers and haven't had any problems, and both articles' histories look normal. I'd guess it's some kind of temporary glitch in the database that will sort itself out soon, if it hasn't already. You might want to post a note here tomorrow if the problem is still occurring. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 10:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see any problem but some glitches with outdated versions only affect some of our servers and you may get different results depending on which server serves your request. I have purged Joanneum so all servers should hopefully give the current version now. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:18, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

writing an article about author Aleksandar Obradovic

Dear Colleagues, writing an article about the author Aleksandar Obradovic I met with a problem that I do not know to solve. In fact, I wrote the text and cited credible sources of data and after that, when I clicked on the preview, it did not looks like the text that I wrote. Parts of some sentences and sources of data were missing, and so the sentences are losing there meaning. Can you explain me how it happened? Yours sincerely Nobelovac (talk) 10:19, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is missing, Nobelovac? The Interior (Talk) 10:28, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't see anything in edit mode that's not appearing in the article (which I have just given a copyedit). If you only previewed, we can't know what was missing. However, it is quite common that when we get similar questions to yours—mysterious disappearing text that is present in edit mode but missing in regular view—the issue resolves to a missing ending ref tag or one that was not coded properly, such as leaving off the closing forward slash in </ref>. By the way, the submission has been declined, for lack of citation to reliable sources. I suggest you start replacing the web sources currently in the proposed article, with those from here and here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:08, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

pop ups

Resolved

Hi, my pop ups appear to have altered, they used to be clear and in a box format and now they are showing as a shadowy long list that remains on the screen even after I have moved my mouse pointer away? Off2riorob (talk) 11:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're not the only one. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Did something happen to popups?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:41, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link Fuhgettaboutit, one of the fixes there appears to have sorted it out. Excuse me for having my blinkers on and not being able to see the previous threads above. Cool, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 11:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. You could have searched all day above; it's at WP:VPT:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Multi function tab not working

In my row of tabs, I have a read tab, edit tab, new section tab, a watch list toggle tab, a purge tab, and a final tab that has a whole bunch of functions, including page history. For some reason, I cannot access that last tab, which is there because of a preference I secected. When I mouse over it, nothing is show. When I click on it, nothing happens. It took all the functions like page history away from the left side bar, so now I don't have access to those functions. What is that name of this tab, where is it in my preferences, and how can I fix this? -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:35, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, the "Add page and user options to drop-down menus on the toolbar" in Preferences > Gadgets is what no longer is working. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:41, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added importScriptURI('http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&title=User:Haza-w/cactions.js'); to my vector.js book[1] per this suggestion, purged the page, then unchecked the "Add page and user options to drop-down menus on the toolbar" in Preferences > Gadgets and things seem to now be working. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:05, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Young (Sad Café)

Hi the wikipedia page Paul Young has a title Paul Young (Sad Café) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Young_(Sad_Caf%C3%A9)

It's true he was in Sad Café but he is more famous for being in Mike + The Mechanics, so shouldn't the title read: Paul Young (Sad Café, Mike + The Mechanics)?

This would provide better search results for people who are looking for this Paul Young and not the other Paul Young of "Wherever I lay my Hat" fame. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Young

This is very relevant at the moment because Paul Young of Mike + The Mechanics and Sad Café although dead has a new album titled "Paul Young Chronicles" which has been produced using material recovered from the musicians home studio, and the album features members of Genesis and 10cc.

Featured famous musicians: Paul Carrack: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Carrack Mike Rutherford: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Rutherford Eric Stewart http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Stewart Graham Gouldman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Gouldman

I hope the title can be changed as I feel this will help others who are searching for info relating to this musician and his new material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.62.25.74 (talk) 12:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a reasonable suggestion, but I think it'd be best proposing it, and giving it a little time, to see if anyone objects. You could do all that yourself, it is quite easy.

First, I'd suggest you create a user account. That isn't essential, but it makes things easier.

Then, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Rm#Requesting a single page move to start a discussion on Talk:Paul Young (Sad Café) - saying why you think the page should be moved.

If you need any help with it - or, if you'd simply prefer someone to do that for you - I'd be quite happy to help. You can contact me on my own talk page, or you can leave a further message here.

If I do not hear from you, within a couple of days, I will add the 'requested move' myself.

Best, Chzz ► 13:20, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The usual way of dealing with this in articles for sportspeople is to disambiguate by date of birth rather than by team etc so I would suggest by analogy with that practice, that this article should be moved to Paul Young (singer born 1947). No one is likely to search for him by band name so the hatnote on Paul Young should be sufficient disambiguation. – ukexpat (talk) 13:38, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox 4

Popups gadget not working

I've just installed Firefox 4, which is pretty impressive. However, all the "hover" functions (blue links, diffs, hist, actions etc) on Wikipedia now produce gibberish instead of the expected content. Is it just me, in which case how do I fix it (I run Windows 7), or is a project-wide problem that will be sorted in due course? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimfbleak (talk • contribs)

Are you referring to popups? If so, Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Did something happen to popups? may have the info you need (it worked for me!). TNXMan 13:08, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, following solved problem,

@import url('http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=raw&ctype=text/css&title=User:Lupin/navpopdev.css'); Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Log Me in Globally"

What is this "log me in globally" business about on the login page? I found someone's answer to the question from Feb:
Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2011_February_16#Log_me_in_globally
Which stated: "It means that you can log into Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons, etc...", which sounds like a great answer, but it doesn't appear to be true. I logged in globally just now and am not logged into those other sites. Is there more information on this someplace? Could there be a link to information on the login page? Or the Help:Logging in page? Thanks! Kenirwin/(talk) 13:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've only actually experienced being logged in globally once - when I first logged into Wikimedia Commons. The rest of the time, I have to separetely log in each time to the different properties Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons, etc...". I don't get it either. If I globalize my account (Special:MergeAccount), have "log me in globally" checked, and I log into English Wikipedia, I should be able to jump to Wikimedia Commons without having to then log into Wikimedia Commons. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have you created a unified login, see WP:SUL? – ukexpat (talk) 13:40, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out that checking the "Log me in globally" option does not log you in globally as the phrase implies. It merely gives you the ability to log in to any wiki site of the Wikimedia Foundation without creating a new account. You still have to log into each editable online resource community. A fix would be to change "Log me in globally" to read something like "Give me an ability to log me globally without creating a new account". Until then, I clarified this at Help:Unified login. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uzma Gamal (talk • contribs)

If I log in to the English Wikipedia then I'm automatically logged in if I view a page at another Wikimedia wiki, and my account is automatically created there if it didn't already exist. It's the same for many others (some of them come here because they receive welcome mails in languages they don't understand) so I think you should revert your edit. It may depend on browser and settings but I don't know the details. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:09, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:34, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Semicolon or relative clause?

Which is preferred, a semicolon or a relative pronoun/word? Thanks Kayau Voting IS evil 14:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Like all such stylistic issues, there are no hard-and-fast rules. It depends on the specific case, and either could be appropriate. In general, I'd suggest avoiding over-use of semicolon, because it can interrupt the flow of prose. Some info is in WP:MOS#Semicolons, and also you can read the opinions of one very experienced editor in User:Tony1/How to improve your writing - if you search that page for 'semicolon', you can see some specific examples of usage. Chzz ► 14:37, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was just wondering; if I see any cases where I'm unsure I'll ask at the HD again. :) Kayau Voting IS evil 14:51, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help Needed Adding Tsunami Images to Article on Devastated Japanese Town

Here is the discussion area, there are two requests for help in adding images.

- I have been reading some of the Wikipedia Help info on adding images, but find it very confusing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Minamisanriku,_Miyagi

50.16.18.34 (talk) 16:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to add an existing image to an article, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information.
If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must determine the proper license of the image (or whether it is in the public domain). If you know the image is public domain or copyrighted but under a suitable free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure of the licensing status, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy. I hope this helps.Template:Z40 TNXMan 16:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A six year Government Intrusion including officially documented incidents of actual torture

To whom It Concerns :

I am very ignorant on how to go about addressing official misconduct. But I have a case of Government intrusion that will impeach even a Governor and possiblly include Federal officials as high as the United States Attorney General. I am not in any way being knave or misinforming, I can literally prove by a Federal Rules of Civil Procedures rule 34 and 33 the actual and factual official acts of torture as a means to persuade me from my free action. Here is my problem, I do not have the assistantance nor the equal influences of those who electronically monitor me 24 hours a day, not because I am doing anything wrong but because I am pursuing such gross malicious misconduct such as elecontric sodomy, forcing suffering of sleep deprivation and inflictions of torture by means of Government property Please would someone help me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conpiracy371 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot offer legal advice. Please see the legal disclaimer. Contact your lawyer. Sorry, but you are asking in the wrong place! -- John of Reading (talk) 16:35, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Crazy AfD/Twinkle problem (Probably needs administrator attention to fully fix).

Resolved

Here is my problem. I tried to AfD Kevin Leckner, it failed to twice. It made 2 AfD nominations, but without listing them, nor notifying talk page of original author, nor actually putting a tag on the page saying it was up for AfD. Where I am at the moment has strict internet rules, so I can't directly edit articles (I have no idea why). I was wondering if you could fix this by listing the AfD or by just deleting them. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kevin_Leckner and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kevin_Leckner (2nd_nomination), thanks everyone. Bluefist^talk 16:36, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2nd AfD deleted, first listed on the AfD log, original author notified. TNXMan 16:46, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Bluefist^talk 16:48, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

authority to upload files

How do I get the authority to upload my own files and/or photos to a biography of me created by someone else? I think I must be "confirmed." I must not be autoconfirmed because I have made only 4 or 5 edits. So, how do I get to be confirmed without making many edits?Chsubextra (talk) 17:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to be confirmed, because you can upload them at Commons - and them you can use the pictures on Wikipedia. Cheers, Chzz ► 17:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you own the copyright to the images, you can upload them to Commons. If you don't own the copyright and you cannot get the permission of the copyright owner per WP:IOWN, then you should not upload them, either to Commons or here. – ukexpat (talk) 17:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What if password lost and emailaccount has been closed?

Good Afternoon!

I got confronted with the problem that I lost the password for the english page of wikipedia. Furthermore realized that my account on that page uses an old email address to which I have no access no more. At last I know my username.

Thanks in advance ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.109.205.157 (talk) 17:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but if you do not know the password and have no access to the assigned email address, then there is no way to recover the user account; you would have to create a new one. You could state, on the new account, what the old one was. Sorry, Chzz ► 17:16, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thats bad luck. So I assume it's not possible to delete this account if I submit you my name and username. I'd like to connect both accounts, the englich and the german one.

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.109.205.157 (talk) 19:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really sorry, but no. If the enwiki account had no edits, you could usurp it (take it over). But, I think from your description, you've edited with it.

If you'd had a unified account, you would not have had a separate different password for enwiki and dewiki - and this wouldn't have been a problem. All new accounts (since about May 2008) are automatically able to log in to sister projects. Again, I am sorry - I know that doesn't help in your case - but at least, in the future, we shouldn't have these problems. Cheers, Chzz ► 21:03, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If your enwiki account had edited its userpage saying that it was the same person as the dewiki account, and you know what the email address is for the account, then we could likely get that account back to you. Prodego ^talk 23:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great! How I send you my username and email address? Shall I post both right here?

someone else is using our name

I work for CTO Forum, Inc. and someone else is using that name in Wikipedia. What do I do?

Maria Canul CTO Forum, Inc. www.thectoforum.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.75.232.202 (talk) 17:07, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I removed your email address and phone number; they're not appropriate here (plus, you might get lots of spam). Chzz ► 17:09, 24 March 2011 (UTC

Are they using it inappropriately? Could you provide a link to the user/talk page or the exact user name? Zakhalesh (talk) 17:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or do you mean this article? The magazine is called CTO Forum and thus has a reason to be there. Zakhalesh (talk) 17:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

If you are referring to the article CTO Forum then please read our business FAQ, and take care regarding your conflict of interest. You may suggest edits to that page on Talk:CTO Forum. Cheers, Chzz ► 17:15, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i don't understand how to use user/talk pages

The exact user name is CTO Forum. I imagine that no one can use that name, since we have CTO Forum, Inc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.75.232.202 (talk) 17:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No one is "using" that name, someone has created an article about a publication with that name. That's how Wikipedia works. – ukexpat (talk) 17:24, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no user with that name - or anything like it [2]. There is an article about the magazine. User names are not related to article names. Chzz ► 17:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not often, anyway. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am seeing the info on COI, but I am confused about what steps to take. Do I just write an article and post it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcanul (talk • contribs) 17:47, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have a conflict of interest and I am

confused about how to rectify it. I work for CTO Forum, Inc. and someone else is using that name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcanul (talk • contribs) 17:37, 24 March 2011 (UTC) I am confused about how to go about dealing with a COI[reply]

See above. Thanks, Chzz ► 17:45, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CTO Forum is an Article about a magazine - most probably the magazine that you work for. It is not a User name, nobody is using it. How to deal with your conflict of interest is explained here. The fact that you work for the subject of the article is the source of your conflict of interest - it simply means that if you choose to edit the article you need to take care that you do not introduce biased material. Roger (talk) 18:01, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a shot at this, if I may. We have the article CTO Forum, describing an Indian IT magazine. We could also have CTO Forum (thinktank), which would be about the organisation at www.ctoforum.net, if and only if it meets our notability standard for organisations. Maria, we call this disambiguation and it's very common.

Now, you would certainly have a conflict of interest in writing CTO Forum (thinktank), and you've been given links to some info there. Does that help? --AndrewHowse (talk) 18:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's the gist of it, see the parallel discussions at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#CTO Forum 2 and on my talk page. – ukexpat (talk) 18:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Page swap request

I think that NASA Causeway (now an article) and NASA Parkway (now a redirect page to that article) should be swapped. The article concerns the parkway, and even notes that the causeway is only a section of the parkway. I would do this myself but can't figure out how to swap, since my attempts have just produced page blanking. Might be above my pay grade?

Thanks for any help,
RadioBroadcast (talk) 17:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at Requested moves. – ukexpat (talk) 18:03, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See also WP:COMMONNAME. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:19, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit

Resolved

Wikipedias section edit links look different today, and the edit urls are going via http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=clicktracking rather than the usual http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php. Why? Is there a discussion on this somewhere? I had a quick look at WP:AN and the Village Pump and couldn't see anything obvious relating to this change. 82.43.90.38 (talk) 18:09, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When I edit this section, I get the edit URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=66. I don't see anything unusual about the appearance of the section edit link. Perhaps the situation you describe is not affecting all Wikipedia users at this moment. --Teratornis (talk) 19:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia Technical Blog is another place to look for notes about bugs and changes to Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 19:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that had some info on it. Apparently people are being selected at random for a UI design experiment. I cleared cookies and it has gone back to normal. 82.43.90.38 (talk) 19:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It also happened to me last week. I was first worried that my browser might had been infected but I found the explanation. http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2011/03/ui-design-experiments/ says: "The experiment is scheduled to be conducted on English Wikipedia from March 9th, 2011 to March 16th 2011". It appears from your post that it was extended. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:47, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

pictures

when i right-clicked and got mistaken,in wikipedia page,, all pictures in the page got hidden. how can i resume pictures on pages? i want to see the pictures also , when i browse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.5.158 (talk) 19:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks as if you've accidentally added the domain http://upload.wikimedia.org to your browser's list of blocked websites. If you can't work out how to undo that, tell us which browser and version you are using, and someone will give you exact advice. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This usually happens for Firefox users. With Firefox you may need (possibly some details depend on the version): Tools - Options - Content - Load images automatically - Click the "exceptions" button and delete http://upload.wikimedia.org from the list - Highlight - "Remove site" button. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Page

A page I created seems to have been "hijacked" and I now cannot edit it. I also seem to have mislaid my "login" details........ Help?!! please! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.21.1 (talk) 20:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean by "hijack". Can you post the name or URL of the page?

For login problems, have a look at Help:Logging in#What if I forget the username? and Help:Logging in#What if I forget the password? -- John of Reading (talk) 20:57, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The page has almost certainly not been "hijacked", though we can't tell for sure because you haven't told us which page. It may well have been edited, perhaps in ways that you disagree with, but when you edited it you would have been shown the message "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." on the edit page. It may have been vandalised, but most vandalism is noticed and reverted quite quickly - and if you cannot now edit the page, it may be that it is semi-protected, which is normally done only when a page has been subject to repeated vandalism. --ColinFine (talk) 23:18, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

is my article neutral

I need a second opinion. --Mcanul (talk) 22:30, 24 March 2011 (UTC)mcanul[reply]

It would have been helpful if you had told us what the article was. I presume User:Mcanul/CTO Forum, Inc.. --ColinFine (talk) 23:22, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It might be helpful to read WP:NONPROFIT. Generally the organization must have been the subject of multiple reliable third party sources in order to be notable in the sense of Wikipedia (see also WP:RS and WP:THIRDPARTY). Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 01:16, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editing difficulty

I was trying to edit the bio page about me. The Personal section is inaccurate, but when I tried to change it, the software put the changes under the "Reference" heading. Now the personal section says I'm married and the reference section says I'm single. I would like to put the entry from the reference section to replace the current inaccurate entry in the personal section. How can I make that happen? Many thanks, Bill Ransom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billransom (talk • contribs) 23:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it up for you. You have to click the edit link above the section you want to edit, not below. Prodego ^talk 00:06, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March 25

Template:Space has porn, I think

I was looking at List of songs in Glee (season 2), and was greeted by a picture of a penis ejaculating. I tried to remove it from the page, but found no sign of the offending code. It looks like the 's' template has been edited to include this image, but I am not sure how to get there to edit it myself. Help, please? dstumme (talk) 02:34, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, looks like someone got to it in the time it took me to type this up. dstumme (talk) 02:38, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. It was fixed with this edit. Dismas|^(talk) 02:46, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 398: / Line 398: @@
 ::If your enwiki account had edited its userpage saying that it was the same person as the dewiki account, and you know what the email address is for the account, ''then'' we could likely get that account back to you. [[User:Prodego|<font color="darkgreen">''Prodego''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Prodego|<font color="darkgreen">talk</font>]]</sup> 23:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
+Great! How I send you my username and email address? Shall I post both right here?
 == someone else is using our name ==

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