It isn't a user sandbox as claimed. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Huntington_Seward]. [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster ]] [[User_talk:Kittybrewster|<font color="0000FF">☎</font>]] 17:40, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
It isn't a user sandbox as claimed. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Huntington_Seward]. [[User:Kittybrewster|Kittybrewster ]] [[User_talk:Kittybrewster|<font color="0000FF">☎</font>]] 17:40, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
== Searchable content ==
i created an article, but i t doesnt come up when i search for it. how do i make it searchable? [[User:Cheimread|Cheimread]] ([[User talk:Cheimread|talk]]) 17:48, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Correct. I'm not sure of the practice if the year of birth is unknown but the decade is known. In this case the year is known and there is no reason to also add the decade. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:11, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Some categories exist almost solely for organizing other categories. This is one of those example. A list of every possible year of birth would be thousands of categories, so for the sake of organization the categories themselves are broken down into smaller subunits. Most of the decade (and century, etc.) categories should be lightly populated; the only articles which should be categorized there are ones where the person's birth cannot be narrowed down to one specific year. If the year of birth is known, then it should be only in the year category. --Jayron3201:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How do I get rid of unwanted visible code above / below an image from Wikimedia Commons in a Person Infobox?
Resolved
So I've created a very simple Infobox for a person....please see below exactly what I have written for it (minus the person's information)
I would like to request a bio on Drąsius Kedys and several other people from Lithuania, but I don't know how to do it. There is no page for victims of a crime. There is no page for people from Lithuania.
Kedys is the father who allegedly shot judge Jonas Furmanaviczius, 47, and a female accomplice after police ignored his complaint that his daughter Deimantela was abused by a paedophile ring while in her mother's care, and instead his daughter was removed from his custody. He made pleas for help via the Internet, and created quite a stink in Lithuania. The day of the shooting and death, he disappeared, and his body was allegedly found in a reservoir some seven months later near his home town April 2010. Despite what the local authorities say, from his autopsy photo, he does not appear to have ever been in the water. The scratches on his face still have their scabs, he has a black eye, there are what looks like burn marks from a stun gun, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.17.140.107 (talk) 02:43, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Problem with the Scanning Electron Microscope page
Hi, as a chemist with arachnophobia I highly suggest you take down the gold plated spider on the SEM page. It is too much for me and has really nothing to do with the SEM. The fact that it is gold plated says that as the microscope only measures so many nano-metres so the surface would be gold atoms...which could have been placed on ANY surface, not that of a spider.
So my question is...why do you have that picture? Why does SEM need a picture of a spider at all? This has to do with editing because I would do it myself...but I want to know a reason if I should not edit it first.
Well I suppose that if there were an image available which illustrated as well as this one how SEM subjects are gold plated, you might persuade the other editors of the article to accept it as a substitute. Discuss your proposal at the article talk page. —teb728tc05:18, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is very unlikely it would be removed (although, you are welcome to discuss it on Talk:Scanning electron microscope) - it seems like an appropriate, encyclopaedic image.
Some people dislike images of naked/semi-naked people, or of Mohammed, or pictures of meat, or snakes, or vomit, or... whatever.
...articles may include text, images, or links which some people may find objectionable, when these materials are relevant to the content. Discussion of potentially objectionable content should not focus on its offensiveness but on whether it is appropriate to include in a given article. Beyond that, "being objectionable" is generally not sufficient grounds for removal of content. - from the policy, WP:NOTCENSORED.
By the way, the way you could have purged it was to go to the documentation template, click the edit button at the top, and then change the very end of the URL in your browser's address bar from &action=edit to &action=purge and then click enter.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:12, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, unless they start harassing through email. We can block the email function as well should this become a problem. --Jayron3205:13, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'm just suspicious on what's behind him contacting an editor that was previously supporting him blindly. Anyways, I'll just keep watching their activities. 174.50.135.86 (talk) 07:21, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Most likely they're looking for a friendly voice of support, perhaps one that can convince admins to undo the block. That's usually a blocked user's goal. - 194.60.106.17 (talk) 07:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
what happened to my new article "Google Ideas"?
Hi,
I am new to writing/editing on Wikipedia. I wrote an article, called "Google Ideas", and posted in the uncontroversial confirm section. Google Ideas is a new team/venture that Google has recently launched.
It looks like someone has moved my article, but I am unsure where.
You need some internal citations, see WP:CITE. And "Far from traditional philanthropy" looks like your personal opinion, if you can find a source saying that you could however quote them (but see WP:VERIFY and WP:RS first. Dougweller (talk) 05:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Still, I must say that AndrewJohnMatthews seems to have done a nice job on finding a good topic for a new article. It looks like a solid, notable, enterprise for which there is no article currently at Wikipedia. 99% of the time, new users don't create articles on such solid subjects. The kind of stuff that needs to be done from here forward is merely cleanup; I think the article (while well substandard content wise) is ready for the mainspace, insofar as moving it to the mainspace will raise its visibility so more exprienced Wikipedia users can take a crack at cleaning it up as well. --Jayron3205:37, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
by spending part of your time in India writing for Wikipedia? A 'content writer' is anyone who provides content - you don't need to do anything other than provide it, in accordance with the required policies etc. (And, just in case you are under the misapprehension that it may be otherwise, you don't get paid for it - this is a voluntary project, as Jayron says). AndyTheGrump (talk)
If you are specifically interested in topics about India you could take a look at WikiProject India.
We would love a good content writer in India-related topics; three users do most of the work to combat the incessant POV pushing that goes on there. I'm sure they'd be happy to have someone else helping them. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 14:52, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Jesse Lee Peterson and Linda Christas
I am a student attending Linda Christas College, an online, accredited institution.
As you can see by visiting our College front page (www.lindachristas.org), Rev Peterson is one of an impressive list of celebrities who have accepted honorary chairs at the College. Also: www.bondinfo.org
The College was established in 1997, and currently, among its 5,000 students, it enjoys students from all over the world. From Nairobi Kenya to Shanghai, China, Linda Christas has become known as a College that maintains the highest scholastic standards.
My question is, Wikipedia has consistently rejected listing Linda Christas College, even though several reputable professors and students (along with a few clowns after the School was rejected several times) have tried to get it listed.
The College has written to all the known executives of Wikipedia without result, and we are told basically that no one is in charge of making decisions about who or what to accept or reject.
So, once rejected, there is no court of appeal. Editors simply put any article about the College on the fast track for deletion.
At the same time, small elementary schools are listed on Wikipedia without any trouble at all.
Early on, Wikipedia editors evidently said that they needed third party verification of the existence of Linda Christas College.
However, once someone like Rev Peterson accepts a Chair at the College, they no longer qualify as a third party for verification purposes.
At one point, the 250 instructors who teach with the College had a fund into which the instructors were contributing to send to Wikipedia, since they use the service often and are grateful for it.
However, once the College was rejected as not credible by Wikipedia editors, that fund quickly disappeared.
So, here I am, a senior at a College that Wikipedia editors say doesn't exist.
Employers are falling all over each other to hire Linda Christas graduates because their reasoning, which parallels the Federal Department of Education's reasoning, is that anyone who can study for four years without the parties and the sports spectaculars HAS to be a self starter, and has been disciplined in terms of completing projects without the built in props of a standard university.
At any rate, it would be wonderful if someone at Wikipedia were to champion Linda Christas College for inclusion.
I certainly would be happy to write the article. But, I don't want to write an article only to follow in the long line of good hearted folks who have written such articles only to be told that the College isn't credible.
Certainly Rev. Peterson, Pat Boone, Sue Grafton, Dr. Paul Davies and Efrem Zimbalist Jr believe its credible. They have all personally felt honored by their chairs at the College, and, have personally contributed to the material appearing under their names on the College web site: See http://www.lindachristas.org/advisory-board-chairs.php
My personal e-mail address is: (Redacted)
If anyone would like to help me overcome what has been a long and hard journey for Linda Christas College (www.lindachristas.org), I would very much appreciate it. The School has tried everything else. Sincerely, Leslie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.34.205.151 (talk) 10:14, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just because there is no article, does not mean we claim the college doesn't exist! Wikipedia has no article on me, but I exist!
The existence of other Wikipedia articles, which may not meet the requirements for a new article, isn't a good argument; some articles were written years ago, and standards change. Others, we simply have not got around to either fixing (adding references), or deleting (if they don't meet requirements). Anyone can help with that, including you.
All that is required for an article in Wikipedia is, evidence of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources - such as, for example, several respected newspapers with articles substantially about the thing. I've checked Google News [1] and only see 'passing mentions'. If you could supply other appropriate references to satisfy the notability requirement (more specifically, WP:CORP), then we could help further. The individuals who work at, or attend, the college are irrelevent in determining notability.
If there is not sufficient verifiable information to support a separate article, then it may be appropriate to mention the institution in other article/s, such as, the town/city that the institute is in. That would still require a reference to verify the claim, but that would be considerably easier. Chzz ► 10:27, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
when rating an article and dragging the mouse while hovering over the stars, the stars become permanent and do not disappear anymore (at least in Firefox 5.01). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.62.126.153 (talk) 11:45, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's interesting. I believe this is an issue with your browser as I am using FF 5 right now and it works fine. You can try to make sure javascript is installed properly and try re-installing your browser. If that doesn't work, you can file a bug at bugzilla.wikimedia.org and the developers can take a look into it. I'm sorry if this wasn't the most helpful answer, it's in a beta stage, so it still has some bugs :). JoeGazz ♂ 11:54, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I want to write an article about ritual abuse based on reports from a conference of survivors and therapists held in London.
Badouk Epstein, Orit, Schwartz, Joseph & Rachel Wingfield Schwartz, eds(2011). Ritual Abuse and Mind Control: The Manipulation of Attachment Needs. London:Karnacs.
The SRA article already on Wiki is highly biased against the reality of ritual abuse. The article I have in mind is a report from survivors and clinicians who treat survivors of this form of organised abuse. When I have tried to add balance to the existing SRA article it is always deleted by activists who patrol the site. Talk doesn't help. No evidence is consider acceptable. Any suggestions?
86.166.93.5 (talk) 16:14, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, you cannot create an article to discuss the same issues from another point of view: see Wikipedia:Content forking. If you think that the SRA article is being manipulated against Wikipedia policy, you should raise this in the appropriate place. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:54, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Two Users
how do I indicate that we are two users of this account collabarating on India for exact citations and good literary sckills. How do we both use the same site, use separate signatures and have separate profiles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bernadette&mukesh (talk • contribs) 15:16, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Only one person may operate each account; your current account will probably be blocked, and you will be given instruction on how to create separate accounts for yourselves. Role accounts are not permitted. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 15:28, 15 August 2011 (UTC
It seems to me, that the desire is to have 2 users edit from the same computer. One person should retain use of the original account and another should create a new account to use.RyanVeseyReview me!19:26, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Given the account's name, and the admitted fact that they have both been using this account, it would be far better to abandon this account and get two new rules-compliant accounts. --Orange Mike | Talk19:40, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How do I make some vertical gridlines extra thick in a table? For example, at Viomycin#Biosynthesis, the table is really just two columns of information ("Gene" and associated "Function") but wrapped to take up less space. So I'd like a thicker line (or any other layout solution obviously) that would help make the column-pairs more distinct from each other. DMacks (talk) 16:23, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Multicolumn list looks fine. The table definitely stood out more, so I was trying to be conservative--I assume editors who added it wanted that to happen--but I agree it's not necessary in this context. DMacks (talk) 17:19, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Griffon Corporation Logo
The logo on the Griffon Corporation page is not up-to-date. The current logo can be found at www.griffoncorp.com. Is it possible to have this changed? It is a non-free logo and I do not have authorization to upload it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by EME712 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, DMacks! I have another version of the logo that is easier to read with black text and a white background. I realize the one on the website is white. Is it possible to provide this? I'm not sure how that works. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by EME712 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It would have to be something verifiably official (somehow we have to be able to see that they actually use it, rather than wikipedia editors choosing to recolor it ourselves). Easiest is if it's available from the company's website somewhere or some other publication. An alternative is that I can recast the current one to have a black background, since that's how it appears to be used on the corp site. DMacks (talk) 00:25, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You would go here and state your opinion, whether you support or oppose its promotion. And it's not a vote exactly, rather a means to establish consensus through communicating with other editors and yadda yadda yadda--GroovySandwich17:40, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My legitimate edits were flagged as vandalism
I made a few edits to an existing page; however, my additions were removed and flagged as vandalism. How can this be? I didn't change any of the existing content, and all of my additions were properly cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmollohan (talk • contribs) 17:36, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Some of your edits seemed rather promotional, and all of them were poorly sourced (or not sourced at all); but I agree that these were not vandalisms. --Orange Mike | Talk17:42, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Where does it say that they were vandalism? I see nothing on your talk page and the page's history just shows that they were reverted. -- kainaw™19:05, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re: "Bill O'Neill (media)."
I compiled a number of references to verify the text. They are listed below the biography but I do not know how to list them in compliance with Wikipedia's format.Wolfeton (talk) 17:43, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have been editing a new stub about a film and television producer named David Katz. However, there is already an article named "David Katz." How can I change the article name to "David_Katz_(filmmaker) if I'm not autoconfirmed? Do I have to do that through "requested moves"?
(edit conflict)Facebook mirrors Wikipedia for many articles; however, Wikipedia has no control over what Facebook does with the content. The wikipedia page for Ice Theatre of New York has a link to the website. Consider contacting the people at facebook and see if they can create the link for you.RyanVeseyReview me!20:38, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.7 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. Intelligentsium21:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As of tonight, when using Firefox, Wikipedia doesn't remember me, even though I told it to remember me for 30 days, etc. I've tried it several times, and it does not automatically log me in as it used to. Is this a known problem? Bubba73You talkin' to me?02:05, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article Steinway & Sons has for years ago been rated as "This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.", see the template in the top of the talk page Talk:Steinway & Sons. I am not sure about what C-Class is. If it is about the quality of the article, then I think the rating must be upgrated to a higher level, because many things have changed in the article since it was rated C-Class. --Peoplefromarizona (talk) 03:44, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note also that, if you feel comfortable applying the criteria yourself, you can reassess the article to a different class. For example, if you feel the article clearly meets all of the criteria laid out for a "B" class article, feel free to just upgrade the rating. Note, however, that general "B" class is the highest class which can be unilaterally assigned; the higher classes (Good, A-Class, and Featured) require independent review. --Jayron3204:19, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
...and that size isn't important :-) It's more critical that the article is well-referenced; take a look here, and notice the marks indicating reference links that don't seem to be working. Chzz ► 04:44, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It simply is not clear what independent references means. The clinical literature all in respected journals discounted as biased and not independent. There was an arrest and conviction in London: ..."A man has been found guilty of leading a "satanic" sex cult from his home in a small Welsh town." The Guardian 9 March 2011. Is this independent?
What is the policy? Right now ritual abuse is being classified as nothing more than a version of alien abduction. Is this classification set in stone or what?
86.166.93.5 (talk) 07:04, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
First, I suggest you create a user account. It's not essential, but I do recommend it.
Newspapers are almost always good references, yes; just remember that the article needs to give a fair view of the entire subject, so beware giving any undue weight to one point of view. But, keeping that in mind, just go ahead and edit it; discuss any potentially controversial edits (or, if someone undoes your edits) on the talk page, Talk:Satanic ritual abuse.
List of conglomerates has been tagged with Template:Split since May 2011. The editor adding the template started a thread on the talk page at Talk:List of conglomerates#Proposal to split article. Despite my reply, this has not generated any additional responses. How long is this template supposed to be on an article, after no further input is put into the discussion? Should I remove the template from the article? Should I ask the user who tagged the article to remove it? Does this "discussion" need to be formally closed? The documentation of the template says nothing about how to handle that. Any advice on how to proceed is welcome. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 08:30, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Every time you click 'Save', there's a note saying that By clicking the "Save Page" button, you [..] irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License....
If there's something wrong with an article, then fix it; no need to delete it, unless it's not an appropriate encyclopaedic topic. Chzz ► 15:42, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can't contribute to referendum
I'm logged in as Apuldram and planned to make a contribution to your Image filter referendum. When I click on the link to that page I'm asked to log in again. When I do so a message appears "There is no user by the name Apuldram. Usernames are case sensitive. Check your spelling, or create a new account". I have now tried several times. Is there another way of contributing? Apuldram (talk) 10:33, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
hello My Name is Nathan L King I'm trying to find more Info on a new file ext.(?). I down lodead a omanual from internet archive.org
on several ifixits to repair Sony Playstation 3's,Canon cameras and there in a omanual format witch is a xml and something else.
I'm not sure how to do what im recomending so im just doing something in hopes it gets to the right person to get things asked the
right people. I use your en.wikipedia all the time and try to use freeware in the hope that someday will be able to DONATE someday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.135.163.250 (talk) 15:49, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Twice today, my Talk Page has been vandalised by 93.139.9.145.
On the first occasion it was spotted by another person and returned to the original. However, the same IP address has again vandalised my Talk Page. There is no Talk Page for 93.139.9145, how can I prevent this vandalism occuring again?
A) Warn the user, see WP:WARN - which I just did [2].
B) If they carry on, maybe give a 'final warning', then ask for them to be blocked - WP:AIV or, if more complicated, WP:ANI.
Note, both those actions are much easier if you use the WP:TWINKLE gadget.
C) If your page was being vandalised frequently by different IP addresses, you could request page protection - but, that's not necessary in this case, at the moment.
Please clarify why you mean by "clear the comments"? The last edit of that page and it's talk page was June 12 (I am assuming that you are talking about this page. Rabbitfang18:25, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect you are referring to the maintenance tags at the top of the article. The article will likely need to be re written to have them removed, as all the issues they represent still appear valid. The article has been built over a period up by a series of single purpose accounts which can signify a conflict of interest and a possible effort to promote the subject rather than write a balanced encyclopaedia article. Яehevkor✉18:31, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The category Category:Olympus cameras lists several compact cameras made by Olympus Corporation. This question concerns the Olympus mju, or Olympus µ, line, which is also known as Olympus Stylus in North America. The category includes articles whose names come from all three styles of the name: mju, µ, or Stylus. It's the same product line - it's just named differently. Shouldn't all the articles be named either "Olympus mju" or "Olympus µ" to make them consistent? JIP | Talk18:32, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for this intrusion into your busy day, but I wanted to follow up on a biography that I’ve recently submitted to Wikipedia.
My name is Alan Lohner, a journalist with more than 25 years of experience in Portland, Oregon. I was recently commissioned by Michael Jingozian, one of the prominent leaders of the Libertarian National Party, to rewrite his Wikipedia biography in a journalistic style. Wikipedia had tagged Mr. Jingozian’s prior biography with three objections.
These three objections were:
--“This biography of a living person needs additional references or sources for verification.”
--“It is written like an advertisement and needs to be rewritten from a neutral point of view.”
--“It may have been edited by a contributor who has a close connection with its subject.”
I relied on these very valid objections to rewrite Mr. Jingozian’s biography so that it may meet all of Wikipedia’s high standards. I believe that I’ve created a biography that’s accurate, informative, balanced, and enlightening for Wikipedia readers. The new biography was posted on Wikipedia two weeks ago. However, the same three objections are still posted.
I greatly respect your time, and I realize your workload must be enormous, given the wealth of information on Wikipedia. At the same time, I am concerned whether I may have missed the mark in any way. My goal is to follow your direction to create content that is completely within your guidelines.
With that in mind, would it be possible to expedite a review of Mr. Jingozian’s biography to determine whether I’ve satisfied those prior objections? I apologize in advance if this is an inconvenience. But I am eager to ensure that the biography is written honestly, impartially, and fairly.
I eagerly await your response and further direction.
"I was recently commissioned by Michael Jingozian, one of the prominent leaders of the Libertarian National Party, to rewrite his Wikipedia biography in a journalistic style"??????? Oh, yeah, that's really gonna take care of that pesky "edited by a contributor who has a close connection with its subject" problem. I'm sorry, Alan, but that's the worst possible kind of way to deal with a problem biography, however strong your own background may be. --Orange Mike | Talk20:40, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also please note that the people who write the articles and reply to questions here are all volunteers. None of us are being paid to do it, and we certainly are not professionals.-- Obsidi♠nSoul21:19, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article revision problem
When previewing the last eight edit revisions of Howling Bells (album), the whole block of text in the Singles section is completely red each time. The first instance of this happening was on July 24, when the section was expanded, but every edit to the section since that date has been minor. Does anybody know why this is happening and what can be done to fix it? Mattchewbaca (meow) 20:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, I am referring to diffs. If you look at the diffs do you see what I am talking about? I really need to update, I am still using Firefox 3.6. Mattchewbaca (meow) 00:49, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you can see the whole section as red too than that must mean there is something wrong. Do you know of anything that can be done to fix this? Mattchewbaca (meow) 00:49, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's a known issue that the diff engine often produces a lot of red without identifying a simpler way to display the difference. The section in question has a source line with around 10,000 characters. Help:Diff#Miscellaneous says: "The diff shows differences per line. Some editors find that adding manual line breaks improves the diff function." It doesn't have to be blank lines. It should be enough with single newlines without effect on the rendered page. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:27, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so it's a glitch in the system. I might try to create a second paragraph in that section to see if that corrects the problem. Thanks for your help. Mattchewbaca (meow) 02:53, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
information missing in an article
In the article "tim alexander" (the drummer) there's information missing in discography. He produced, co-composed and performed on the album "The brides - Dalmatian car" from 1997. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.31.123.150 (talk) 21:28, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How to insert a photograph into a wikipedia article from your computer
Hello
I have tried to insert a photograph into a wikipedia article and it doesn't turn out. First I downloaded the photograph from my computer onto webshots, since it doesn't appear that you can download a photograph directly from your computer. I cut and pasted the http into the formatting link. I still get no photo. can someone please give me clear and concise instructions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wordswerth (talk • contribs) 23:06, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
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.
If you want to add an image that has already been uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, 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. I hope this helps.Template:Z40PrimeHunter (talk) 23:22, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"<p858snake|l> that is the, we have no limits, the message that we used to display was because some older browsers had issues displaying and saving pages <p858snake|l> *that is the answer <p858snake|l> i would assume the bot is designed/based off the same size suggestions as we used to display in that interface message"
Pay no attention to the messages, also I'm having a look as to why this bot is making those edits as I can't see a task approval for it. Peachey88(T·C)00:32, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It affects pages like Peer Review, GA, and FA in particular, because they transclude many large pages of discussion, and because of a longstanding bug that causes the same bytes of output to be counted multiple times if the transclusions are nested. — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:26, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed the size problem by changing the largest three peer reviews to partial transclusion. I was offline and did not see the notice until recently. Please keep this warning function as it is very useful. Ruhrfisch><>°°02:11, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rename and Redirect?
Resolved
In response to a needed page, I created the page Rattus salocco, because of the multiple pages that linked to it. After starting it, I realized the general consensus was to name the article after the common name instead of the scientific one. My question is how can I rename the article after the common name (Southeastern Xanthurus Rat) and then redirect all links to Rattus salocco to the newly named article? Any help and solutions are appreciated. Wmcscrooge (talk) 23:55, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)The way to do this is to move the page. At the top right of your article you should see a drop down and there should be a link to Move. A new page should come up and you can put in the new name and a reason why. It will also create a redirect from the current name to the new name. If you have any questions please ask. GBfanplease review my editing00:02, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The links at the bottom of the page supposedly for the League for Spiritual Discovery instead take you to a spam site with automatically downloads something, either malware, a virus or a trojan horse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.128.169 (talk) 01:48, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why does the article on Bach's Minuet in G have a link only to a promotional arranged score that is not the original when the original is available for free? And only positive survey questions? ==
There are much better free versions online that don't contain self-promotional dreck.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.34.142 (talk • contribs) 01:54, 17 August 2011
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.
Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Chzz ► 01:56, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Touchscreen Article
Please include a section explaining about the ElectroMagnetic Fields generated by the various touchscreen technologies, and the effects upon users of the EMF and/or ElectroMagnetic Radiation that the devices in which touchscreens are used produce.
Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).--Jayron3202:16, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am having browser problems, especially with Wikipedia. I have Firefox 1.x on Linux 9.0. The problems really began this recent April.
When I try to do any editing, the browser crashes. I find that my login has been cancelled. I sometimes have crashes when I am just reading, but thus far not on your Main Page. Scott Tillinghast, Houston TX (talk) 02:42, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I believe {{WikiProject Formula One}} is slightly broken. As I understand it, if you specify the "class" parameter as "redirect", "category", "template", "disambig", "file" or "portal", the template is supposed to automatically include the talk page in Category:NA-importance Formula One articles, without you having to specify a value for the "importance" parameter. Currently, if you specify the "class" parameter as one of the listed values, the template does correctly include the talk page into Category:NA-importance Formula One articles, but it also incorrectly leaves the talk page in Category:Unknown-importance Formula One articles, unless you provide a value for the "importance" parameter. Could someone knowledgeable in the intricacies of {{WPBannerMeta}} please have a look? P.S. The template is currently protected. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 03:55, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PayPal Topic Hacked / Hijacked
Hello,
I just came across what appears to be a hacked or hijacked Wikipedia topic page. This page was navigated to by simply typing "paypal" into the search field.
This does NOT look like your usual vandal edit, as it appears to have its own scripted box that continuously floats at the top of the page, regardless of where it is scrolled vertically.
This is what has lead me to believe that it has been hacked or hijacked.
The floating box contains the following text and links:
Since it covers over the top of the usual edit/version links, I tried to guess the URL required to revert to an older revision, but could not seem to get the right one.
Before I clicked on the "Save Page" button to send this message, I quickly checked to see if the PayPal topic had changed at all, and the floating box had disappeared.
I presume that the problem has been fixed, but still the question remains of how easy it can be to do this kind of thing. Is there a way to prevent this king of thing from happening? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.221.229.165 (talk) 07:39, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No hijacking going on. He coded the spam in such a way that it remains visible no matter where you scroll. Someone already reverted the changes and banned the editor who was responsible for it. - 194.60.106.38 (talk) 07:44, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have been sent a German version of what I need, but can't find an English translation, or way to translate it.......... Following is a copy of headings sent...............rgs, Tony
Pigment-Volumen-Konzentration
aus Wikipedia, der freien Enzyklopädie
Wechseln zu: Navigation, Suche
Die Pigment-Volumen-Konzentration (PVK) oder Packungsdichte ist eine Kennzahl zur Beschreibung von Farben und Lacken.
Inhaltsverzeichnis
[Verbergen]
•1 Definition
•2 Kritische Pigment-Volumen-Konzentration
◦2.1 Definition
◦2.2 Berechnung
•3 Einfluss auf die Lackeigenschaften
◦3.1 Glanz
◦3.2 Bewitterungsverhalten
◦3.3 Mechanische Eigenschaften
◦3.4 Deckvermögen
•4 Anwendung der PVK
◦4.1 Unterkritische Formulierungen
◦4.2 Überkritische Formulierungen
•5 Einzelnachweise — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.26.54.10 (talk) 11:24, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reference number 28: <ref>[http://www.denstoredanske.dk/index.php?sideId=164606 "Steinway & Sons"], ''[[Den Store Danske Encyklopædi]]'' (''The Great Danish Encyclopedia''). Retrieved July 27, 2011. {{da icon}}</ref>
Problem with reference number 28: "Steinway & Sons" (info) [denstoredanske.dk]. HTTP: 301. Analysis: Changes searcher."
Reference number 108: <ref>[http://movies.nytimes.com/2007/11/07/movies/07stein.html "What is black and white and made in Queens?"], ''The New York Times'', November 7, 2007. Retrieved August 17, 2011.</ref>
Problem with reference number 108: "assembled by 450 people. "What is black and white and made in Queens?" (info) [nytimes.com], The New York Times , November 7, 2007. Retrieved August 16, 2011. HTTP: 206. Analysis: Partial Content."
Neither of them are a problem. The tool indicates "things to check" - it doesn't necessarily mean anything wrong. In the case of 28, the tool has no way to know that the URL used is a perma-link. The warning of an error in ref 108 just indicates that that specific NY Times page has some invalid code - but that isn't our problem. Chzz ► 16:30, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(should have been an edit-conflict but not?) Reference 28: Consider changing or removing this reference. It's a bad idea to reference an encyclopedia in any setting. This is why we include references. You should cite the references from the other encyclopedia, if they exist. Xenon54 (talk) 16:32, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. Unsurprisingly, we have articles on HTTP 301 and HTTP 206 if you want details. There are style issues: a mix of citation templates and not template and a mix of sentence and title case in citation titles. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)talk16:34, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that must be considered to be not important details. But thank you for notifying me about it. If I fell for it, I will maybe change it sometimes in the future, but it will take a very long time to do so, because the article is very long and has many references.
Some of the references use the {{cite book}} template, others use {{harvnb}}, and others just have bare information between the <ref> and </ref>; it's better to use a consistent style throughout (and becomes very important when heading towards GA-status). Additionally, some refs do not give enough information to allow the reader to locate them, such as 116. ^ a b c Piano Buyer's Guide, p. 13. - which could refer to a number of different publications; ISBN/publisher/author would help. Chzz ► 20:35, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
– The {{harvnb}} template are used when a reference is listed in the section "Further reading". For example: When clicking on reference number 18 you are directed to "Giordano, Sr. 2010, p. 137." and when clicking on "Giordano, Sr. 2010" you are directed to the book in the section "Further reading" and here the book is listed: "Giordano, Sr., Nicholas J. (2010). Physics of the Piano. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-954602-2.". That is the correct way to write the reference, right?
OBS: The {{harvnb}} template are not used with reference number 1. Because when using the {{harvnb}} template in the infobox, the {{harvnb}} template does not work.
– Before I start changing anything about the references, I would like to be sure to do it the right way. I am thinking of using the {{cite book}}/{{cite journal}} when the reference is a book/journal/magasin that is not listed in the section "Further reading". If the book/journal/magasin is listed in "Further reading" I will use the {{harvnb}}. When the reference is a website I will use the {{cite web}}. Is that the correct way to do it? --Peoplefromarizona (talk) 09:17, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is no right/wrong way. Like many style-issues, the formatting of references isn't dictated (even for an FA) - the editors (for a specific article) can choose to do things whichever way they want; the only concern for GA/FA is, that the formatting is consistent. At e.g. "FA review", the reviewers don't *care* which templates are used (if any) - but they do care that, for example, all the dates in refs are the same - e.g. "1 June 2011" or "June 1 2011" or "1-6-11" or whatever - and, that all the refs have the title/date/author/isbn in the same order, same font, same punctuation; sticking to one format helps with that.
Harv can be used in an infobox; if there's a specific problem, there's always an answer.
Personally, I do like harvard-style most of the time - especially if almost all refs are books, and/or lots of refs are re-used. I also (personally) don't bother with "Cite Web", "Cite Book", "Cite Journal" and all those, but instead I just use {{citation}} for all of them - because it makes it easier to be consistent. But others really don't like harv, because it does make the rendered page code longer (slower to load) - and/or, prefer using specific cite templates because they sometimes allow for more specific parameters.
Sorry I cannot give a clear "do it THIS way" answer; but it's a matter of personal preference. As long as the resultant output is consistent, and serves the purpose of refs, that's fine.
See Wikipedia:Citing sources - Each article should use the same citation method throughout. If an article already has citations, adopt the method in use or seek consensus on the talk page before changing it. While you should try to write citations correctly, what matters most is that you provide enough information to identify the source. - and note that that guide does not even mention specific templates; that's left to the editors of an article to decide. Chzz ► 17:30, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
pronunciation
Hello,
I'd like to offer an idea to improve the Wikipedia experiance. It would be very helpful if you could include a pronunciation of the key word or phrase (similar to a talking dictionary). Hope you will consider this improvement. Otherwise great job, I love your website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.240.90.36 (talk) 16:22, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Some articles include this already -- mostly articles with foreign-language titles or names that are otherwise unfamiliar to the average English speaker. Remember that you are at an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. Wiktionary, Wikipedia's sister project, includes recordings of many more mundane dictionary words. Xenon54 (talk) 16:25, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Remember also that the pronunciation of some words varies quite a lot around the English-speaking world. Not a reason against putting pronunciations in, but it means that you need to be careful about their generality. --ColinFine (talk) 20:39, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Image 'gremlin' in infobox template?
I've set up a new page with a infobox, using the standard 'organization' template, for Oxford Policy Management yet when I load up the logo it incorporates this text above the image: [[Image: |200px|alt=]] . This appears to be embedded in the CSS for the infobox template, which is protected so I can't alter it. Any ideas of how to remove this unwanted bit of text above the image? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KeithConlon (talk • contribs) 17:29, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Creating an article based on a foreign language stub
We don't have an article about the Austrian pioneer of the Kayak roll, Edi Hans Pawlata; he was the first non-Inuit to master the skill. He has a type of rolling technique named after him; it's the first roll that a beginner learns, so most kayakers will have heard of him. He's mentioned in a couple of English WP articles and probably should be included in a few more. There is a stub article about him on the German WP [6]. Could I use a translation of that to create an English stub about him or should I wait until I can find a decent bio in English? I'm struggling to find anything worthwhile on the net. Alternatively, could I link his name from an English article to the German one? Alansplodge (talk) 18:16, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find enough information in English reliable sources to show notability. The problem with using the info from the German one is, we don't really know if all the information in their article is covered in the book under "Literatur".
You shouldn't link to the German article since this is the English WP and people expect to be taken to an article in English when they browse. You could use a translation of that to create the stub (a stub is better than nothing) and add English sources as you find them. Foreign language sources aren't prohibited. Dismas|(talk)18:28, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice - I may go with Chzz's suggestion of a redirect. I have a dim recollection of reading a brief biography of him, but it was probably in a canoeing mag long since recycled. Alansplodge (talk) 12:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
About the section of Ancient Egyptian Mythology in popular culture.
i have just edited the section on Ancient Egyptian Mythology in Popular culture. i am not sure how to leave a reference or if i should, i wrote about the author Rick Riordan and his Books, 'The Red Pyramid' and 'The Throne of Fire' and how that is also connected to Egyptian Mythology. How can i leave a reference or a note? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.131.249.116 (talk) 19:18, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, My name is Tamishia Moats. My husband is an NFL player who is currently a free agent. Some how Wikipedia says he has announced his
retirement. This information is not accurate and it's causing him not to get contacts from certain people. It's really hurting our family and
his endorsements. If you would please remove this comment. He is not retired. Thank you for your help. Tamishia Moats — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.129.132.226 (talk) 19:23, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
First, simply remove it (actually it has already been removed). It was unsourced vandalism - the result of a page that anyone (including you) can visit. Second, NFL teams actually go to Wikipedia to see who is retired and who isn't? -- kainaw™19:26, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Hello Tamishia. I have removed the text, as it was not attributed to any sources. As Kainaw said, it is nearly always acceptable for anyone to remove unsourced text from an article on a living person. Thank you. Яehevkor✉19:32, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Adding sources to Wikipedia biographies of living people
I added three sources to Frank Sanello's biographical article on Wikipedia.
The formatting has a minor problem. Two sets of references appear on the page. One with links but not the title of the references/books. The other reference section has book titles/authors, but no links.
Can someone with superior computer skills to mine PLEASE fix the formatting?
How to give a different colour to templates' lower lines.
Resolved
Hi.
I want to solve a problem in a it.wikipedia template, please don't consider me as an idiot if I'm asking this to you, because I consider you as more experienced and skilled for solving it.
I'm asking you about this question because all navigation football templates in it.wikipedia like this one here is different than yours where no background colours at all are defined in the first two lines like in this one (even last line colour isn't defined, but could you ?)
I think I've seen such a thing. I'm editing 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement, and would like to flag the page to request that we stick to British English, which I claim is currently prevalent. Is there a standard template for this? I tried some searching, but I couldn't find it. Thanks -- Jo3sampl (talk) 00:34, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, sorry, the article already has a notice on the talk page, saying This article uses Indian English dialect and spelling - and shouldn't be changed without discussion/consensus.
Those type of announcements are always put on the talk page, not the article - because the information is relevant to editors, but not to readers. Chzz ► 00:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Better than ref label note label?
I'm working on a page with 22 different ref labels note labels and they are out of sync. I saw on a page (and now can't find) a way to do ref labels/note labels that output similar to the ref label note label, but you could assign a name to them so even if things moved around on the page, the letters would be assigned in order. Can anyone help me with this?Naraht (talk) 01:04, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can you give a little bit more information? What page has the 22 different labels? If you would like to put notes into your article, you can use {{#tag:ref|TEXT GOES HERE|group="note"}} another simple way is to use <ref group=note>TEXT GOES HERE</ref> If you use the second method, you cannot give a citation to your note. At the bottom of the article, above the references, you should included a section title Notes with the tag {{Reflist|group=note}}RyanVeseyReview me!01:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
FIFA Soccer 12 Cache
If a user is (and has not been) logged in, the page FIFA Soccer 12 shows the page FIFA 12 but only as it appeared yesterday, which has some incorrect information, like the infobox release date as August 27th instead of September 27th. See screenshot from moments ago. To be clear, this was taken from a browser I almost never use, so it was not some stored cache on my computer. I assume this is due to some delay in server-side caching, but usually Wikipedia is very good at always showing the most up-to-date page. This is a difficult problem to reproduce, but I wanted to know if anything can be done about it. Thanks. Allstar86 (talk) 01:50, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The caption is incorrect. No Russians are shown in the photo. The man wrongly identified as a Russian is in fact from an Australian colonial force sent to assist the 'Mother Country' (Britain). I have the same photo in a text book on this contribution - Bluejackets and Boxers by Bob Nicholls where it is correctly labelled.
Adding content on Transport related issues to Wikipedia
Dear Madam/Sir
We would like to add some content to your website which we believes adds to, and enhances the knowledge already posted on Wikipedia. . Our core business is education about transport related subjects, but in addition to teaching, our aim is to make it easier for transport planners, academics, social workers and other members of the public to have easy access to quality peer reviewed research papers and reports that help them with their jobs. It is not our aim to promote any one academic Journal or Transportation Institute, but rather the advancement of academic knowledge on Transport, Public Transit or other.
To this end, I seek your advice on how we ago about adding either a link or well thought-out knowledge to your site. I have been looking at your site and External Links and References appear to be suitable.
As an example, I have chosen tram as a subject heading. I have a link that will take you to 358 peer reviewed academic journal articles from Journals, The Transportation Research Board and Transportation Institutes around the world. Every single article that appears on our website has been approved by the Journal or institute in question. How do we go about getting permission to add this to Wikipedia. I am aware we can add information, but I thought I would try writing to you first to ask your permission rather than find a link we placed on your site later redacted.
If you require any further information, or if you have any queries for me, I would be only too happy to try and resolve any issues you might have?
The best way to handle this is to ask at the talk page of the articles you wish to add the links to. To do this, click the "discussion" tab when viewing any article, and there you can post your link and seek opinions about their relevence and complaince with Wikipedia's policies on external links (see Wikipedia:External links). It may take a few days to generate some robust discussion, but that is the best way to judge the appropriateness. Alternately, you can ask for input here at the Help Desk, say "I want to add the link XXXX to article YYYY. Is it appropriate to do so?" This page gets a LOT of activity, so people will give you a good response fairly quickly. --Jayron3203:34, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
since i cant seem to find the actual link cause of the numerous links available then i will asked a new question. since you are i guess public domain and free to millions of peoples worldwide why dont you ask uncle sam for some monies.they or should i say we spend billions of dollars on crap each year anyhow. at least this is something i can see where the money is going. something i can actually use and maybe you should call it wikipediationary or the new i guess version wikimediationary. thanks for you time and efforts. rick wright — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.225.68.134 (talk) 04:17, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not public domain, actually. It's content is under what is known as a "free content license", which is not the same thing as public domain. Wikipedia's content is dual licensed under both GFDL and CC-BY-SA. As far as money, Wikipedia does fine. The parent organization, known as Wikimedia Foundation, makes enough money via its annual fundraising drive that there isn't any real need to ask for government handouts or other sources of cash. Wikimedia works very much like Public Broadcasting in the U.S. in terms of how it is funded. --Jayron3204:27, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dear friends, during last weeks I was involved mainly in adding the German version of this template de:template:Normdaten to dozens of pages; adding the required parameters where required. Today, I activated the linking to WorldCat identities containing the works from / about authors. I never have seen trailing zeros as template parameters to the third part of parameter LCCN. example:Abraham Lincoln#normdaten contains now the link http://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n79-6779Lincoln, Abraham 1809-1865
Works: 22,532 works in 36,882 publications in 66 languages and 1,323,107 library holdings
This information is very important for readers. They will find books in smaller languages.
The template did not work from the beginning. It was necessary to remove the leading zeros before the third subpart of parameter LCCN:
{{Normdaten|LCCN=n/79/006779}} changed to {{Normdaten|LCCN=n/79/6779}})
Entertainment technology as an article category for Applied Technology
I am inquiring about the desirability of an Entertainment technology category within Applied Technology to place together articles about the diverse technologies related to various entertainments. For example, musical instrument technologies, the physics of roller-coasters, various facets of stagecraft, as in the article titled Entertainment technology, and others, of course, to illustrate the wider range of technologies that are integral to various entertainments. --Kensor (talk) 05:41, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is User:Talktalk a misleading username?
On a certain Wikipedia, an administrator thought User:Talktalk is a misleading username which is not allowed by Wikipedia:Username policy and blocked the user forever. The reason is the administrator personally thought User:Talktalk looks like a user's talk page. Do you think the username is misleading? Please give me your comments, thank you. --Merry Rabbit07:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unless that certain Wikipedia is the English one, I don't see the problem. Other language Wikipedias use different words to indicate talk pages -- which would cause the confusion to disappear. For example, in Dutch it would be Gebruiker overleg:Talktalk, which would be no problem at all, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.60.106.38 (talk) 07:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We can only help you with issues concerning this Wikipedia, if you want opinions about actions elsewhere you need to ask there. I'd block that name here as it's the name of a company. Dougweller (talk) 10:46, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dj Mike Whitfield
Plays soulful house music on the internet does he pley anywere ??
i have found the link for a few mixes. soundcloud.com/mikewhitfield
This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Entertainment 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 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. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:28, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Barnicklemusic
Hi, I have a page here, Barnicklemusic. Can I possibly change it from a user page to a Wiki page please? If yes, how will I do this? Thank-you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.181.90.78 (talk) 09:30, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I guess you are referring to your user page User:Barnicklemusic. In order to have a topic included in Wikipedia, you have to establish its notability (see Wikipedia:Notability for more information). Briefly this means you have to show that sources independent of the subject (in this case Barnicklemusic) have written or reported about Barnicklemusic. See also Wikipedia:Introduction for a brief overview of what Wikipedia is and how it works. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:38, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have tagged the userpage for speedy deletion as it is far too promotional in tone for a user page or an article. The username has also been reported as a WP:CORPNAME in breach of the the user name policy. – ukexpat (talk) 13:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I gave my feed back at foot of page on Orthomolecular Medicine. I then got an email asking me to click on a link to verify my email address. It would not respond. I copied and pasted it into my address bar and lo and behold, up came YOUR EMAIL IS NOT VERIFIED. What kind of nonsense is this? Clearly someone is hijacking anything to do with nutrition because it is viewed as a threat to drug company profits. Can you explain?
I don't think your first action (editing the page) had anything to do with the second (getting the email). Wikipedia does not email people who edit articles. I do not see where anyone has edited Orthomolecular medicine or its discussion page from your IP, or anything close to your IP. Perhaps you could be a little more specific with the contents of the email you received and from whom it was received? TNXMan16:19, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just for clarification, it appears that he rated the page; however, an email should not have been sent. Where did the email come from and have you attempted to create an account?RyanVeseyReview me!16:22, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Stupid question
I suspect that I'm just computer-retarded, but I can't seem to install Timotheus Canens' AfC script properly (see my monobook.js page; I've bypassed my cache and it's not displaying). Did I do something wrong, or is it my computer's fault (I'm on Firefox 4, if that means anything. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:33, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved
Facebook community pages may incorporate content from Wikipedia— such use complies with Wikipedia policies on reuse of content. We at Wikipedia have no control over how the content is included nor can we help to remove it. Facebook does have a topic on Community pages and profile connections on their Help Center. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 20:36, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Doing... Chzz ► 00:04, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top.
We cannot offer medical advice. Please see the medical disclaimer, and contact an appropriate medical professional. Avicennasis @ 19:16, 17 Av 5771 / 19:16, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Entertainment 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 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. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:28, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
