Jump to content

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 74.233.33.147 (talk) at 06:29, 5 February 2011 (→‎EDITORS: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
    ↑ To top of page
    Shortcuts
    Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)
    Ask a question
     Skip to bottom 


    February 1

    Automobile Driving

    This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page.
    This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis or prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page. --~~~~

    Saturday Night Special

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Special_(film)

    This Wikipedia entry is totally self-serving and laudatory in a creepy way. There's a page about himself that is equally self-promoting. It looks like he wrote both pages

    This gentleman runs a "film festival," The New Mexico Film Festival, which is apparently intended to promote his own projects.

    Please advice and/or refer to the proper Wikipedia authorities. I'm wary of this whole situation.

    Thank you --

    cc: Withoutabox; the Federal Trade Commission. Mig (talk) 00:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Saturday Night Special (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    You are quite right. I've added another tag at the top of the article so that readers can see that the information is suspect.
    But there are no "proper Wikipedia authorities", since this is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. You are welcome to improve any sub-standard articles you run into. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:49, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Charles Edward Stuart: Talk Page

    I have logged in to Wikipedia, but I cannot figure out how to contribute to the Talk Page indicated in the Subject/Headline item above. Can you assist me, please?

    Thank you.

    Dr M WimsattCupstid123 (talk) 02:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Just go to Talk:Charles Edward Stuart and click edit at the top of the page. ~~ GB fan ~~ 02:27, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    help with editing at all

    Here's the thing: I understand that when I edit something there's a good chance that it will be changed in a few weeks or even a few months, but there's one article in particular that, when I replaced it with my own, my article was submitted but in less than a day it was replaced with the original article. I thought it was a glitch so I did it again, but the same thing happened. I never had any problems with any other articles I submitted, so why is this happening? Is there something about my account that I don't know about. By the way, all the articles I submit are my own handwriting and no one else's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluegirl285 (talk • contribs) 05:30, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Have you read the edit history where the reversions were explained? If, after reading the link provided in the edit summaries, you wish to discuss changes to the article, please do so on the article's talk page, or discuss it with the editor who reverted your changes. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:56, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    It's fine to be bold in Wikipedia, and there are certainly times when "replacing an article (or article section) with your own" produces an improved encyclopaedia. But see WP:BRD. If you boldly erase the cumulative work of all previous contributors and rewrite from scratch, and someone promptly reverts your change (and gives reasons why), it's a sign that your new wording may not be better in all respects than what was there before. The next step is discussion, and (ideally) consensus. Karenjc 11:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    RE: Saved page but can't find it on wikipedia

    I've saved the page for "Nanyang Polytechnic (NYP) Marketing Hub" but unable to find this and it says there is no such page.

    Please advice on what to do.

    Regards, Don — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donny1990 (talk • contribs) 06:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    The page appears for me at Nanyang Polytechnic (NYP) Marketing Hub. The article seems not to satisfy some of Wikipedia's policies, most notably WP:NOTE and WP:SOAP and thus might be deleted soon.Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 07:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I have tagged it for speedy deletion as it appears to be nothing more than an advertisement masquerading as an article. – ukexpat (talk) 15:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    nationality

    Why is Welsh not permitted as a nationality? Christian Bale was born in Wales but is cited as English. This can not be corrected which seems a little silly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.86.189 (talk) 08:02, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    That statement in the article has a reference. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    ....specifically "I was born in Wales but I'm not Welsh – I'm English". See also nationality.--Shantavira|feed me 12:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Trojan in web page

    I viewed the information on Nicholas Pettas and when I clicked on to his official web site & blog, my computer blocked a Trojan virus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.78.171 (talk) 08:08, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Hm, I tried that but my computer didn't detect anything. Maybe you could contact Pettas? Kayau Voting IS evil 09:03, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    McAfee thinks the site is OK (McAfee report). It is always possible that the problem is malware at your end. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:06, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Removing dead links from a wikicommons page

    Hi,

    In the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2005carrot_and_turnip.PNG, there are dead links to Faostat, the statistics website of the FAO of the UN. According to our logs, they are used a lot. The Faostat team would like to change them for the general address of the faostat website: http://faostat.fao.org. It is impossible to join the author of the page, for his account is a sock puppet of Shinas.

    Can you help ? Faostat (talk) 08:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

     Done [CharlieEchoTango] 09:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    <edit conflict>The image is hosted on a separate site, Wikimedia Commons. The page you linked to merely reflects the description page at the Commons. You need not contact the uploader to alter the description. You only need to log on to the Commons and edit it. Here is a direct link. Kayau Voting IS evil 09:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    European Air Group

    I have a remark about the existing article about the European Air Group or EAG. The crest that is pictured in this article is not theactual crest of the European Air Group.This can be verified by going to the official website of the European Air Group (www.euroairgroup.org. Besides that, the information is outdated and not comprhensive and the article is mainly talking about other organizations like EACC and EATC. I tried to correct things by discussion, but there is no reaction on the discussion page. Keesbleijerveld (talk) 10:28, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Just stopping by to add a section header to your question, and a link to the article in question, European Air Group, to help those who will try to help you. Dismas|(talk) 10:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Your note on the article talk page does not say much about what is wrong, and does not mention your conflict of interest. Your proposed rewrite, on your user page, was based entirely on the text of the organisation's own website and was deleted as a copyright violation. Can you come up with any reliable sources, independent of the organisation, showing where other people have written about it? Without these, the article could be deleted entirely as non-notable. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Redirect for discussion - HM The Queen

    The "this redirect's entry" link is pointing at nothing. Kittybrewster ☎ 10:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    At WP:RFD#HOWTO there are two steps to follow, and it looks as if the second step hasn't happened. I've run into similar problems when trying to list an article for AFD using Twinkle. I think you'll just have to do the second step manually. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that 31 Jan and 1 Feb both don't list a redirect created using twinkle. Kittybrewster ☎ 15:09, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Sometimes a server purge is required after a Twinkle Xfd nomination so that the servers all synch up and the redlink turns blue. – ukexpat (talk) 15:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Picture problem in the "Paris By Night" series of articles

    The series "Paris By Night", including one main article and more than 60 "episode" articles is having problem with the infobox. The picture in the box can not be displayed in many articles (In Vietnamese edition of Wikipedia, the pictures display normally). Any help please. Thank youMemberofc1 (talk) 10:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Paris By Night (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    I'm sorry, I haven't understood your problem! The infobox in the Paris by Night page does not ask for a picture to be displayed, and there is no picture in the Vietnamese version of the page. Can you give an article name and an image name, please? -- John of Reading (talk) 11:08, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm sorry, the main article Paris By Night don't have any picture. The "episode" articles , for example : Paris By Night 66, Paris By Night 99, Paris By Night Divas, ... is having problem in some articles, few of them , for example Paris By Night 80,Paris By Night 100 don't have the problem with the picture, I don't know why.Memberofc1 (talk) 11:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Oh, I see. To use the Vietnamese picture for episode 66, you'll have to download it from the Vietnamese Wikipedia and then upload it here with a non free use rationale. Pictures at Wikimedia Commons can be shared by all projects, but, sadly, these film posters cannot be uploaded at Commons because of copyright restrictions. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:22, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Regarding sock puppetry

    I want to confirm if an anonymous user is using two different IP addresses for editing, does that come under sock puppetry? For Example I think that User:205.242.229.69 and User:205.242.229.70 are the same (because of the similar edit patterns). As the latter IP was banned for vandalism, the other IP is still active. Can I report this to WP:SPI? --- Managerarc talk 12:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't know a lot about SPI, but, I know you need a sock master, which, I generally think is a user who has been indefinitely blocked, and then creates new accounts/IPs to edit. In the case of two IPs, I would personally go to WP:ANV and use a reason of "block evasion"...you'll get much faster results. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. CTJF83 13:04, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't need an SPI for something as "ducky" as this. If the IPs are obviously being used by the same person, an administrator can issue a range-block on the range being used, so long as the range is sufficiently small and there would be no collateral damage (i.e. inadvertantly blocking good users). If you install the correct gadget in "My Preferences" you can view the contributions from all users with the 205.242.229.XXX range (specifically the 205.242.229.0/24 range) here: [1]. Using unliscenced sockpuppet-smelling equipment, I can positively identify at least 2 and possible 3 or more unique persons using that range, based on behavioral patterns. The OP's user appears to be using solely those two IP addresses, again based on behavior. The WHOIS data for the two cited IP addresses above, AND for a random number of other IPs from that range does all resolve to the same place. --Jayron32 13:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Your link to the range contributions isn't working, maybe admin specific? CTJF83 13:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    No, you have to turn on the correct gadget in the "My Preferences" tab. Click "My Preferences", click "Gadgets" then place the checkmark in the box next to "Allow /16 and /24-/32 CIDR ranges on Special:Contributions forms..." I am pretty sure this is availible to all users, not just admins. You merely have to turn it on. --Jayron32 14:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Ahhh, yes, thank you, CTJF83 14:12, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks a lot:) - Managerarc talk 14:56, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    LiquidThreads

    I just read about WP:LiquidThreads. When will this new system be implemented in Wikipedia Talk Pages?Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 14:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    "This year", according to this thread. But don't hold your breath. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 15:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Keep getting advertisement message

    Hello, I am designing a Wikipedia page for a large company, and keep getting a statement saying this is written like an advertisement, and demands a immediate re-write. However, nothing on my site is promotional in nature. I state the company history, officers, services offered (in an objective manner, not stating why they are good or bad), and professional memberships. Really, my Wikipedia page is like most any other company, but why will min not post to the open web? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesbuscaglio1 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    As a retained (paid?) editor you have a massive and, I would say, insurmountable, conflict of interest, and you are strongly discouraged from creating such an article as it will be almost impossible for you to maintain a neutral point of view. Also bear in mind that we have inclusion criteria for companies and that reliable sources are required to demonstrate notability - that means that very few companies of the millions out there will have the required notability for a Wikipedia article. I would suggest that WikiCompany would be a better outlet for your client. – ukexpat (talk) 15:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (e/c)Well, for a start, the draft article on your user page is, in large part, a copyright violation or close paraphrase of the company website, which is unacceptable at Wikipedia. Even if you are associated with the company, we cannot take your word for it that you have the right to copy that material here. There is a process for donating copyright material to Wikipedia, but in almost every case, the content of a company website is not suitable for use in a neutral, independent article, simply because a company website's purpose - reasonably enough - is to present the company in a positive light.
    Look at featured articles such as BAE Systems to get an idea of what our best articles look like. Of course, not every article will be as detailed as this, but it can give you an idea of the structure of an article. For example, we don't find out what this company does until the third sentence, and even then "interior specialty maintenance" requires an explanation of what that means.
    Lastly, if you have a conflict of interest with the company, you should most likely not be writing the article. If the company is an appropriate subject for a Wikipedia article, someone will independently write one. --Kateshortforbob talk 15:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I have tagged the user page draft for speedy deletion as copyvio and I have also tagged the logo for deletion as the reservation All rights of this logo are solely for the use of Corporate Care is incompatible with public domain. – ukexpat (talk) 15:55, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Let's be careful here not to jump down this editor's throat while of course maintaining our standards, people! There are positive things he can do--Wehwalt (talk) 16:04, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    That is certainly not my intention, but we need to clear up some misconceptions about what Wikipedia is about, see below. – ukexpat (talk) 16:10, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (e/c)Also, I think it is worth clearing up one other apparent misconception. Users here do not engage in "designing a Wikipedia page" for anyone or anything. We write articles about notable subjects. Those articles will be edited by other users, sometimes ruthlessly, that's the essence of Wikipedia. Wikipedia does not host pages for anyone. – ukexpat (talk) 16:10, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Some excerpts from your short deleted page: "... successfully led the company through many positive transitions to become a leader in the industry. ... able to partner with small, medium or large commercial clients to provide a personalized, local service on a nationwide basis. ... has been working to continuously to refine it's services offered."
    Above you wrote: "nothing on my site is promotional in nature. I state the company history, officers, services offered (in an objective manner". I think most people would disagree strongly with that. Maybe you have worked so much with marketing that this doesn't strike you as promotional but others wouldn't and Wikipedia shouldn't describe the company like that. The page was deleted for copyright infringement of the company website but the advertisement tag was also appropriate. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Changing page title

    I mistitled the page Written World Publications, which should be Written World Communications. How can I fix this? Swimmerwinner72 (talk) 17:55, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    The "Move" tab at the top of the page. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Article has been speedily deleted. – ukexpat (talk) 21:18, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    recent visits to Wikipedia

    I searched an instrument for measuring distances on a map. I was sure I found one. No I am positive I found an answer and now can not find it. No matter what i do I can not find it again. How do you look up when and what you last visited Wikipedia so that I can find my page again. The instrument I found was a pisometer. I think! There was a description and a photographic illustration of this instrument. It is called a mechanical map measurer in sale rooms but its classical name is a pisomenter (I think!). Hope you can help me "get back to the place I was before"! Zeatal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeatal (talk • contribs) 19:37, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Opisometer! Found by entering "measure distance on map" into the "Search" box. -- John of Reading (talk) 19:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia does not have any public access or tracking data, so there's no way "where did I read most recently?" or any similar question could be answered on-site. However, this sort of history of website browsing is often saved and available in the "History" or similar menu of the web browser on your own computer. DMacks (talk) 20:04, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    sometimes this feature in web browsers is called chronic.(i mean that was so in firefox) mabdul 20:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    broken account pevents me from adding it to my global account

    Hi,

    maybe someone can help with the following problem:

    In 2007, I created an en.wikipedia account, as I had found out that my account created on de.wikipedia was not valid for en.wikipedia. I used the same name and password as for my de.wikipedia account.

    With this initial login (right after creating the account), I made exactly one edit.

    However, from that day on I could never ever log in again to en.wikipedia with this account, for a reason that I never understood.

    So I continued to make edits to en.wikipedia without being logged in as I did not want to create a second account without any understanding why the first one wouldn't work.

    In the meantime, global accounts have been installed by wikipedia - a change that is highly reasonable! I happily transformed my account to such global account,

    however my "en" account was not connected, as can be seen here:

    http://toolserver.org/~vvv/sulutil.php?user=Jbuechler

    The fact that I could never log on with this account seems to fit to the weird fact that the one edit made (and counted!) won't display if one clicks on the (c) field behind "enwiki". It also claims (when I click on "Send new password" at the login screen) that no e-mail address is known connected to this user name. This can't be true either.

    Is there any way to re-activate the en-account so that I can add it to the global account?

    Thanks, Joe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.157.196.238 (talk) 22:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Figuring out why you can't log on to your en account would probably be the first step here. Why can't you? Password not accepted? Rehevkor ✉ 22:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (It may also be possible to usurp your own account, see Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations) Rehevkor ✉ 22:24, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no e-mail address recorded for User:Jbuechler at the English Wikipedia. An e-mail adress at the German Wikipedia does not work at the English when the accounts are not unified, and you cannot unify them without knowing the English password. The only edit by Jbuechler at the English Wikipedia was deleted. Only administrators like me can see deleted edits. The edit created an article at Mr. Ady. If you don't know the right English password then you either have to create a new English account or request usurpation. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    That en account meets the requirements for usurpation, which you can do even if you are one who created it. Go to WP:CHU/U and follow the instructions on that page. You may technically have to leave a message on the en account's talk page asking if it is OK to usurp, but since it is you, there should be no objection raised. ArakunemTalk 18:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    February 2

    The beautiful city....

    There are uncountable number of villages,town, cities etc across the world. But, to everyone of them,there is a peuculiarity. some of these pecularity sometimes makes take a braek and have a deep breath. On this note, come a town called Ajowa Akoko. This a community of a little more than fifty thousand people. He was founded in 1955. With the coming together of eight diffrent villages, each having her local dialet. as such, each community has a king. Each king rulling her immidiate commuity in full capacity . In a way ,its a town where eight oba rule. Yet, they experience peace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Obabigbusayo (talk • contribs) 02:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    How can we help you with using or editing Wikipedia, though? BencherliteTalk 02:01, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You could try reading Akoko. CaptRik (talk) 08:51, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    contributions

    I first found wikipedia via freelance writer job ad from which I got the impression contributors would be paid for contributions, is that the case or are submissions purely volunteer? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bimkerly10 (talk • contribs) 04:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Everything here is done on a volunteer basis. No one here has been paid by the Wikimedia Foundation (Wikipedia's parent company) to do anything. It does happen that third-parties will "pay" to have someone edit Wikipedia for them, we cannot deny that this happens, though when it does it usually violates Wikipedia's strict Conflict of interest guidelines; getting money from a company to write a Wikipedia article about them means that your writing will tend to be overly favorable towards that company, either deliberately or subconsciously, and that lack of neutrality is a violation of Wikipedia's core policies, see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. So, do people get paid sometimes to edit Wikipedia? Sure. Are they supposed to be? Probably not. As it is modeled, everything here is created purely on a volunteer basis. The articles are created, edited, and maintained by people who are primarily interested in spreading knowledge around the world, and for no higher purpose than that, and without any need for more personal gain than a sense of satisfaction of a job well done. --Jayron32 04:48, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The survival rate of such "commissioned" articles seems to me to be very low anyway. The articles get deleted for being irredeemably biased or failing to comply with the notability standard, so the company concerned is generally just throwing away their money. Roger (talk) 11:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Only the ones that get caught... It's like saying that our jails are full of criminals, so we must be doing a good job getting them off the street. Buddy431 (talk) 17:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    That is sadly, probably, very true. For really large companies, they can often afford to have people who can figure out how to subtly influence the content in Wikipedia articles in ways that reflect well on them, and still avoid the appearance of doing so overtly. McDonald's therefore is more likely to get away with whitewashing its own articles than Bobs Burger Barn would be. I have no specific companies that are doing this (my McDonald's example was purely hypothetical). For that reason, I tend to believe that Wikipedia articles on certain subject (corporations, political groups and figures, etc.) are inherently less trustworthy than Wikipedia articles on subjects where there is less motivation to fudge the truth to boost the subject. To take a recent example from the Main Page, there's very little motivation to cover-up or whitewash the article on the Common Firecrest in the same way that there would be for doing so on an article about a company. All that taken into account, we can only say that paid editing is not supposed to be happening at Wikipedia; when it is known to have occured it has always gone badly for both the editor and the articles in question, and it undoubtedly goes on at some small level undetected by people who are just very good at covering their tracks. --Jayron32 17:39, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Please assist me

    How do I share wikipedia articles on facebook? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnnaVeileroglou (talk • contribs) 10:55, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Still, there is no automatically way for that, because Facebook and Wikipedia didn't make an agreement about it. However, you can publish URL of desired article on your Wall on Facebook. It's like sharing! Alex discussion 11:02, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The (only?) way to share a Wikipedia article on Facebook is to copy the article's URL or address and paste that onto your Facebook wall. We don't have any "share" buttons here on Wikipedia. Dismas|(talk) 11:06, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    But if you want to ass share buttons, see User:Gadget850/FAQ#Sharebox. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 15:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    add? -- John of Reading (talk) 15:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll pass on the ass share buttons, thanks. TNXMan 17:25, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Double-matching categories

    I don't know how to gain articles together located in two or more categories. Actually, I need to find non-existent category Living writers, in which coincides following categories: Living people and Writers. Thanks in advance! Alex discussion 10:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I think WP:CATSCAN is what you're looking for. Dismas|(talk) 11:04, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    High traffic site

    Should I add the Template:High traffic (or maybe a template for "in the news") to the Cello (web browser) since st 20 April 2010 a news article on favbrowser.com quadruplicated the views on the 22.4.2010 as I wrote at the talkpage? mabdul 11:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm not convinced that either template applies here. For {{High traffic}}, the page has to link to Wikipedia. That page does not; it only has the link to the article traffic statistics that you posted there. For {{Current}}, you need "live" news, not a newly-written page describing something from 1994. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:05, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    A tool to generate a list of selective contributions

    Hello, I'd like to find out, if there's any tool that will generate a clickable list of all my posts on AN/I for the last 5 months for example? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:51, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    What about this link? *g* mabdul 14:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    That includes a number of pages other than ANI. I think this may be a bit more selective, but it may still include references to Mbz1, rather than just posts by him. And of course it doesn't list each contribution separately, so each of the archives may have numerous contributions. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you both for trying to help me!--Mbz1 (talk) 16:47, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    How to get article live

    I'm trying to get an article called DiGa LLC live. The info below popped up after requesting the move, but it has not appeared in the discussion list. Can someone please help? Thank you.

    It has been proposed in this section that User:SunshineSachs/DiGa LLC be renamed and moved. A bot will list this discussion on Wikipedia:Requested moves within 15 minutes of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed after 7 days of being opened, if consensus has been reached. More information about closing discussions is available at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions. Remember to base arguments on article title policy, and to keep discussion succinct and civil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SunshineSachs (talk • contribs) 14:47, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    To be blunt, it isn't ready, and may well be deleted if moved to main space. More details shortly.--SPhilbrickT 14:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (ec)To start with, think about WP:Notability, and use a Google search to see how notable an organisation DiGa LLC is. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    And more for your reading list. Sunshine, Sachs & Associates seems to be issuing press releases about DiGa, so please read WP:CORPNAME and WP:COI. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:06, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Blatant user name violation reported to WP:UAA. – ukexpat (talk) 15:39, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    IMHO that's biting the newbie. He/she hasn't done anything in mainspace yet - no harm, no foul. He/She has come to this page for help - not to be beaten up. Roger (talk) 06:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, but I don't have much sympathy for a "newbie" whose only contribution is to promote a client. – ukexpat (talk) 15:41, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Slight bug on search results display?

    I did a wikipedia search on the two words: Iranian Shahs . The output appears to have a slight bug. On the second and third answers, Pahlavi Dynasty and Shah, the bolding of the search words in the result is odd, instead of Iranian being bolded, 'Iran' is bolded and the a space appears to be there before the unbolded 'ian'. Looking at those articles, they have used the quite normal trick of doing [[Iran]]ian to make Iranian point to Iran. I'm not sure where to report this (I'm not quite sure I'm up to making a Bugzilla entry) and I can probably be argued out of viewing this as a bug (though it will take work 1/2 :) ).Naraht (talk) 17:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    That's not a bug, it's a feature! (without ironic undertone) mabdul 17:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a feature to have "ian" stand by itself in some articles but not in others? It means that the search results don't show information based on the shown text in those pages, but rather the information "below" them.Naraht (talk) 18:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I misunderstood you at the first. Do you have really whitespaces in iranian like "iran ian"? Which browser do you use, because with my web browser there is no problem. I do think you found a bug in your web browser! mabdul 18:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I do, I copied the text into notepad and there is an actual space. Could you try the same thing? BTW, I am running Chrome.Naraht (talk) 21:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You could try changing the text to [[Iran|Iranian]] rather than [[Iran]]ian so that the whole word is linked to the article on Iran. -- Bk314159 (Talk to me and find out what I've done) 21:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The entire word is linked there anyway. [[Plum]]s displays and does the same thing *in the article* as [[Plum|Plums]], it just apparently shows up differently in the results of the search. And Help:Link indicates that they should be the same *and* that [[Plum]]s is prefered.Naraht (talk) 21:49, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    USER:XXXXXXX I want to add the title

    Hello, I have no idea how to get ride of the title of my article. I want to put Spanish White WIne (Bogatell) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chadturnbull

    Can someone please just change it for me and explain it too me. I spent a lot of time research and i just want to have the right title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chadturnbull (talk • contribs) 17:39, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    You have to move your article. In the tab "move" above the article is the option to move the article into mainspace. mabdul 17:42, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    A bit more, you need to also read Wikipedia:Article titles for more on choosing a proper title to move the article too. The title "Spanish White Wine (Bogatell)" doesn't follow Wikipedia's article naming conventions. The proper name for the article, after reading it, is probably just Bogatell. --Jayron32 17:49, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Jayron — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chadturnbull (talk • contribs) 17:53, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't see the "Move" option because your account is too new - an account has to be registered for four days before it is given the autoconfirmed user status. However, I'm not going to move the page for you because this LinkedIn page suggests that you have a close connection with the brand that you are writing about. Because of this conflict of interest, at the very least, the page requires careful review by other editors before it is moved. Please see the FAQ for Organisations. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (ec)I was going to say that you may need to convince the copyright experts in Wikipedia that you are indeed the holder of the copyright in the labels, but now I see that you apparently are (but would probably need to go through the appropriate processes for allowing their use), you probably ought to read WP:COI to consider whether you ought to be writing the article at all. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    See WP:IOWN for the process to communicate copyright permissions. – ukexpat (talk) 18:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Note that by licensing File:Bogatell's offical label.jpg under commons:Template:Cc-zero you are granting anyone the right to use the image for any purpose, even commercial, without asking for permission. See the links under commons:COM:EIC#Trademark for additional information about trademarks. --Teratornis (talk) 19:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Can it be used under the fair use rule - that way the owner's rights are still protected? Roger (talk) 06:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I need to contact wikipeada

    I accidentally forgot to log in when editing a talk page and my IP address is on show. I would like to get it hidden this is a genuine error and once I saw what I had done I re signed the edits with my account name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruth-2013 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Please contact our Oversight team at Wikipedia:Requests_for_oversight, as this is the best place to request assistance. TNXMan 19:49, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Just a quick note here, to avoid any misunderstanding:

    Don't post requests for oversight on Wikipedia - doing so can just make the problem more complex; instead, use Special:EmailUser/Oversight, or email oversight-en-wp@wikipedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requests for oversight.  Chzz  ►  11:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    How to cite an Associated Press article?

    How do you cite an AP article when it's reproduced by a different news organization? For example this article is an AP article, but it's posted on The Japan Times. Do I cite The Japan Times or do i cite AP and simply post a link to The Japan Times? Thanks --TorsodogTalk 19:48, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Use the |work parameter for the AP, and the |publisher parameter for the Japan Times. Albacore (talk) 19:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, got it. Thanks! --TorsodogTalk 19:58, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Ancestors of Qais Abdur Rashid

    I am looking for genealogical information of Qaid Abdur Rashid. It is said in Wikipedia that Qais Abdul Rashid is the 37th descendant of King Saul, but I couldn't find the genealogical ancestry tree anywhere. I would be grateful if furnished with the requested information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.211.121.46 (talk) 20:01, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    This question is not suitable for the helpdesk. People over at this reference desk might be able to answer your question. Jarkeld (talk) 21:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Any Admins about?

    Hi everyone, I tried to archive my talk page today - for various reasons - and made it into a subpage of my user page instead of a subpage of my new talk page. I moved it to the intended location, and then ended up with a superfluous page that I would now like to delete. Can anyone help me out? My main user page is User:KageTora. The archived talk page is at User_talk:KageTora/Archive 1, and the new talk page is at User_talk:KageTora. The superfluous page is User:KageTora/Archive 1. Is it possible for me to delete this myself, or do I need an admin? Cheers. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:13, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

     Doing...... BencherliteTalk 23:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Cheers. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict)x2 If you want a page within your userspace to be deleted: add {{db-userreq}} on that page and an admin will come along to delete it. Jarkeld (talk) 23:18, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. There are bots that will archive your talk page if you want; see Help:Archiving a talk page (or click "edit" on my talk page to see what I've done, for example). BencherliteTalk 23:19, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, excellent! Very useful, thanks (to both of you). --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:32, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    February 3

    What article is a featured article in the most languages? Albacore (talk) 00:42, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    This actually came up a while back. The long and short of it is that it appears to be Julius Caesar with 13, though no one was able to be sure.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:41, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    And we aren't even one of them :( CTJF83 01:51, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    If this question was multiple times asked, why doesn't anybody write a bot that checks every weeks (or so) for identical articles? Can't be so hard since every (interwiki-)article is connected... mabdul 15:24, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Anon whistleblowing

    Is there anyway to whistleblow on Wikipedia policy breakers anonymously? My experience today (see diff) is that anonymous whistleblowers are not taken seriously and their edits are erased, but I'm afraid to speak out under a username for fear of retaliation/harassment by potentially offended editors. 128.253.26.82 (talk) 01:40, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    That's not the case. I'd assume from the edit summary, your post was disruptive somehow? Clarification with User:SarekOfVulcan would be warranted to see why s/he removed your post. CTJF83 01:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The issue as I read it is clearly explained at WP:SOCK. Longtime users should not mask their identity (either by logging out or by creating new accounts) when they are working outside of the article space, especially in regards to discussing policies and behavior of editors. If you want to be taken seriously, you need to stand by your accusations with your user name. --Jayron32 04:36, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Whistleblowing is where someone within an organisation knows of abuse or bad practice of which the authorities are unaware, and reports it even at the risk of real-life repercussions. Wikipedia routinely seeks community consensus on everything from content to policy to user conduct, so raising the issue of another user's behaviour here is hardly "whistleblowing". The user you report can't try to get you fired or threaten your family (well, in theory they could if you chose to disclose your real-life identity, but the likelihood is very low and we have police for that sort of nonsense) so why should you be allowed to report anonymously? If someone accused you of misbehaving here, wouldn't it be fairer to know who they were and what your history, if any, was with them? Karenjc 11:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Can anyone explain to me how List of assassinations and acts of terrorism against Americans (USA) can be a copyright violation of List of assassinations and acts of terrorism against Americans, of which it is an identical copy, when the latter is another article on the same Wikipedia and not itself a copyright violation? And why is it not even allowed to replace the former with a redirect to the latter? JIP | Talk 06:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Uhhhh, you're the one that deleted it, you tell us. CTJF83 07:05, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I only deleted it because I was told it was a copyright violation, I'm not the one who decided it was one. JIP | Talk 07:35, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, so basically it's because it doesn't give credit to everyone who's edited the article. Wikipedia's licensing specifies that you can use, modify and redistribute any article at will as long as you credit where it came from. Ideally, this should be a link to the history, which lists all the contributors. I hope this helps! --- c y m r u . l a s s (talk me, stalk me) 07:40, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Who told you to delete it? Why would you as an admin, do something you didn't agree with? I see no reason why a redirect wouldn't be ok. CTJF83 07:43, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    User:Seb az86556 placed a copyvio tag on the article, and after I replaced the article with a redirect, he undid the change and restored the copyvio tag. I thought that I'd just delete the article, because it was redundant with List of assassinations and acts of terrorism against Americans anyway, being an exact copy of it, and no one would search for the title with "(USA)" in it anyway. JIP | Talk 08:06, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Redirects are cheap...but either way is fine I guess...CTJF83 08:10, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    For reference, I believe that where all versions of a page are copyright infringements, it's preferable to delete the page entirely than simply to remove the latest version of the infringing content (which is what the conversion to redirect effectively did). However, in this particular case, perhaps the creator was trying to split the list at List_of_assassinations_and_acts_of_terrorism_against_Americans and create a new list limited to acts that took place in the USA? (Caveat: I haven't actually looked at the deleted page.) If that was so, firstly I don't think the original list is long enough to warrant splitting, but secondly (assuming it had been) there's a procedure for repairing inadequate attribution of material copied within Wikipedia at WP:Copying within Wikipedia. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The page started out as an exact copy of the already existing page List of assassinations and acts of terrorism against Americans, which should mean that its edit history didn't credit the contributors of the earlier page, whose material it copied. I presume the author was trying to move the page under a different title, but was doing it incorrectly by copy-pasting the content to a new page and then converting the old page to a redirect. I would undelete only the version of List of assassinations and acts of terrorism against Americans (USA) that contains my redirect to List of assassinations and acts of terrorism against Americans, but I don't think the title with "(USA)" added is a plausible search target. JIP | Talk 19:48, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, and another link: Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. --- c y m r u . l a s s (talk me, stalk me) 07:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    In my opinion, unless the editing histories are also identical, JIP should have reverted Seb az86556's revert of his redirect and explained in a nice admin-like way that even though the "(USA)" version was an unlikely redirect, it was necessary to do that due to the need to preserve the editing history as required by the licensing conditions. Perhaps now, the best action would be to restore List of assassinations and acts of terrorism against Americans (USA), immediately redo his redirect to List of assassinations and acts of terrorism against Americans and then drop a note on User talk:Seb az86556 explaining what's happened. Astronaut (talk) 15:10, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Alexandra Powers

    Hi! I was wondering if someone could edit the Alexandra Powers page. I found this article online that talk about her personal life: http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,308844,00.html Would it be ok to use this article as a reference? Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 06:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't see why not, EW is a reliable source. CTJF83 07:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I should remind Neptunekh2 that it's not really proper (or necessary) to post this question on several users' talk pages, as well as the help desk. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 07:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Format display

    I use my smartphone about 90% of the time for browsing and research. I'm using an HTC-HD2 Cell phone with TMobile as my carrier. the OLD Wiki page layout style that would display on my phone say about 6 months ago and earlier LOOKED better, UPLOADED FASTER, and EASIER TO READ WITHOUT having to SCROLL ALL OVER THE PLACE like the "NEWER" FORMAT LAYOUT of say 2 months ago.

    Am I missing something? In other words, is there a page layout similar to the "old" one that's specifically designed for the approx. 3" x 6" smartphone screen? I understand the "new" layout provides a great deal of info that, perhaps the "old" style did not. Personally, I liked the OLD one BETTER.

    Please advise. Joel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.5.147 (talk) 11:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Just a thought: Did you perhaps switch from en.m.wikipedia.org to en.wikipedia.org? —teb728 t c 12:06, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    alternatively create a account and change the design as long as you are logged in! mabdul 13:48, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) The last time there was a site-wide style change was last June when we switched from the monobook skin to the vector skin (what you are using now). You can still access monobook by either registering an account and setting it in your preferences, or appending ?useskin=monobook to the URL (like so). As for the mobile gateway there are 2 that I am aware of: en.mobile.wikipedia.org and en.m.wikipedia.org. The first (.mobile.) is the old one, which is designed for the pre-iPhone era. Other than that as Teb suggested you may be viewing the full (non-mobile) version of the site. At the bottom of the page there is a link to "permanently disable mobile site", which likely sets a cookie to do so. Additionally there are quite a few third party applications available to view wikipedia. Android for instance has a few dozen. While Windows Mobile 6.5 isn't the greatest platform for third party applications I would try checking the windows marketplace and seeing what you find. It is possible to put another mobile OS on the HD 2, so if it's that important to you could always consider doing that. Note that doing so will typically void any warranty or insurance you may have on the phone if it is discovered that you had anything other than stock settings on there. --nn123645 (talk) 14:04, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Would like to usurp German and maybe Finnish user account for unified account

    I irregularly edit on other language wikis (usually adding photos, bibliographic citations, etc. nothing heavy requiring linguistic skills). I have a unified account under my user name "Quartermaster" that covers almost all of the wiki universe. The exceptions are for the German and Finnish wikipedias. I.e., there were pre-existing users named "Quartermaster" on both of those. My question is specific to the German wikipedia - it appears that there is no one inhabiting the "Quartermaster" user name on that wiki and I don't know how to usurp it. What's odd also is that all of the edits by that user name were ones that I did while originally logged in as "Quartermaster" on the English language wikipedia. It appears that the German "Quartermaster" has never made an edit (but appears to get credit for my English wikipedia edits). Is there any way you can point me in the direction or assist me in usurping the German "Quartermaster" name so I can include it in my unified ID? The Finnish one is more problematic since there appears to be a real user "Quartermaster" but their last edit was in 2008, and they only did 84 total edits over a period of a couple of weeks. Nothing earth shattering or time sensitive here, I'm just anal retentive enough to want to have a REAL unified account. --Quartermaster (talk) 13:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't know about the details of unified login, but the German wiki anomaly is likely caused by importing revisions from English wiki in order to write a translated article. This causes a known bug where the edits of the user on the home wiki get attributed to the foreign-wiki user of the same name. I'm not sure if anything is being done to fix this or not.... Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:42, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a common practice at de:wp — they like to import English-language pages and then translate them; it's the simplest way to attribute a translation. See Bedford Village Archeological Site for an example: all of my edits to it are made in English, and Heironymous Rowe and Piledhigheranddeeper have edited it, even though they don't exist on de:wp. In fact, Piledhigheranddeeper has 94 edits at de:wp without having ever registered. Nyttend (talk) 01:40, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Disambiguation for Kazuhiko

    Kazuhiko currently redirects to an astoroid, but there are several people with that name. Shoudn't a disambiguation point to them (and the astoroid)? --88.130.134.32 (talk) 15:27, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Be bold! mabdul 15:34, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    intitle:Kazuhiko does indeed show many people. Kazuhiko to 26170 Kazuhiko is one of around ten thousand redirects to numbered asteroids created by User:PotatoBot in April 2010. Here is a link to the last 500. Many of them look questionable but creating huge amounts of disambiguation pages would be very time consuming. I'm considering to examine a few hundred of the redirects and as a test case make a mass deletion nomination of the inappropriately looking at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. I think many of these asteroids will rarely be the wanted article in searches, and a search results page will serve users better than a redirect. Now I'm just wondering how to examine the rest of 10,000 redirects if there is consensus to delete the test cases... PrimeHunter (talk) 18:04, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I do think anybody will start then a pool ;) mabdul 18:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I've change Kazuhiko to a disambig, and made a start on it. (Please, of course, feel free to improve it).  Chzz  ►  10:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Ownership Transfer

    Dear Wikipedia,

    We would like to ask more information about the process to transfer ownership of some pages on Wikipedia.These pages originally belong to our company and have been created by our former employee. However, this employee is not with our company anymore and we do not have username and password to log in to these pages for editing and updating. So we need to ask you the process to transfer the current ownership(username, password and all other related information) to one else'name

    We really appreciate your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.6.14.2 (talk) 18:27, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    You seem to be laboring under a severe misapprehension. Nobody "owns" any article in Wikipedia.. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:34, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Additionally, I will point out that "role" accounts, those belonging to more than one person or to some form of collective entity, are not permitted here; and that we have a very stern policy militating against editing by persons with a conflict of interest. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Your request is fundamentally flawed. First, all Wikipedia user accounts must belong to private individuals, not to companies, organisations, or other collective entities. Second, all Wikipedia material is licensed under the GFDL, which is non-refutable. If the author of the pages had the right to create them in the first place, they are now under GFDL, and cannot be transferred to new ownership. If the original author did not have the right to create them (because of copyright or disclosure reasons) they should never have been created. Anyway, what you ask simply cannot be done, it goes against Wikipedia's fundamental policies. There is nothing stopping another employee of your company from creating a new account and editing these pages however, provided that he/she does this as him/herself and not as a representative of your company. JIP | Talk 20:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi, It is not our point. we all that our previous employee had already set these pages semi protected. SO now we want to know how to update, change information on these pages. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.6.14.2 (talk) 20:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Oh, you are asking how to be able to edit semi-protected pages rather than about ownership issues? In that case, it would depend on what pages they are. Please point them out. JIP | Talk 20:24, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You didn't read the policy WP:COI: you have a conflict of interest and aren't allowed to edit the article about your company. semi-protection means that users that have autocomfirmed (a few edit and a few days old) accounts are allowed to edit these pages. mabdul 20:30, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not quite correct - editors with a COI are strongly encouraged not to edit where they have a conflict, but rather they should use the article's talk page to discuss requested changes, supported by references to reliable sources. – ukexpat (talk) 20:51, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Your ex-employee did not set the protection. Protection is set by administrators.
    Please tell us which pages you want to edit.  Chzz  ►  10:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    These pages are Tarique Mustafa,nexTier Networks, and 4th Generation Data Leak Prevention. Can you tell me more detail about the process to set up protected pages?My Wiki Username is nextiernetworks. Thanks a lot for your help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.6.14.2 (talk) 16:52, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    A page will be protected by administrators if it is being subjected to repeated vandalism. Your user name nextiernetworks sounds like a corporate identity, and therefore a breach of WP:CORPNAME. You have also been told, more than once, about WP:COI. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:04, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Tarique Mustafa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    NexTier Networks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    4th Generation Data Leak Prevention (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
    User:Subn4u (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    None of the articles appears ever to have been protected. So there is no protection reason why you could not edit them, but because of your conflict of interest you are strongly discouraged from doing so. The pages' creator is User:Subn4u; that account still belongs to your ex-employee and cannot be assigned to you. —teb728 t c 04:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    In direct answer to your question: For Wikipedia’s protection policy see Wikipedia:Protection policy. Your talk about protection makes me suspect that you think that Wikipedia is like some other sites (e.g. Google) where a company is allowed to control the page about them. Wikipedia is not like that: Unless there is a problem with vandalism, anybody can edit any page. For example anyone can edit General Motors or DuPont. At Wikipedia the subject companies have if anything less control than other people. —teb728 t c 05:07, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Permian extinction

    I have prepared a paper on the cause of the Permian extinction. This occured 240 milion years ago when most of the marine live was killed. I have exhibits that explain my position and are included as figures in the paper. I am a retired geologist and currentlly do not belong to any to any geological society, consequently I thought of publishing it on Wikipedia. Please advise.19:40, 3 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyenstone (talk • contribs)

    I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place of first publication. Your research would need to be published in a reliable source before it could have an article here. TNXMan 19:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Looking for a specific Wikipedia policy

    Hello. I asked a question about featured topics, and a user kindly replied mentioning a certain consensus on treating featured topics and their subtopics as a tree. I am looking for the specific page on which said consensus was reached, can anyone help me out? Thank you very much. Leptictidium (mt) 20:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't know the discussion history but Wikipedia:Featured topics says "A featured topic represents Wikipedia's best work by thoroughly covering all parts of that topic", and Wikipedia:Featured topic criteria point 1 (d) says "There is no obvious gap (missing or stub article) in the topic. A topic must not cherry pick only the best articles to become featured together". PrimeHunter (talk) 01:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Transliteration of Cyryllic text

    hello,

    which transliteration system should I use to romanize the Russian cyryllic alphabet; is it ISO 9?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 20:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    You may want to ask at either Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language or Wikipedia talk:Translation or Wikipedia:WikiProject Russia. --Jayron32 21:35, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    For romanization of Russian for Wikipedia see Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian. —teb728 t c 01:33, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't like this romanization... Can I use ISO 9?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 11:20, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I think not on Wikipedia. See also WP:CYR, which says, “Generally, Cyrillic is provided only where transliteration alone cannot convey the original spelling. Since many of the conventional systems are non-deterministic, this means that very often both the Cyrillic and transliteration are provided in a word's first occurrence in an article.” Does that resolve your concern about the modified BGN/PCGN? About Belarusian, CYR says explicitly that ISO 9 is not to be used. —teb728 t c 00:24, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Still more about SUL usurpation

    I originally started to use SUL on 30 December last year, and found out that my username was already taken on two WikiMedia projects: the Danish Wikipedia and the Russian Wikipedia. So I left a SUL usurpation request at both. The Russian Wikipedia soon accepted the usurpation, but the Danish Wikipedia has so far done exactly diddly-squat. I have left a message both at the SUL usurpation page (in Swedish, as I was told Danes understand it) and on the Danish user's talk page (in Danish, from a ready-made template), but nothing has ever become of it. The Danish Wikipedia is the only WikiMedia project where the account "JIP" belongs to someone else than me. And the user there doesn't even have any edits ever. What can I do to usurp this account? JIP | Talk 21:01, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Did you post any request at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations? I can't find anything in the archives... mabdul 21:11, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    That is for the English WP only. He did post at the Danish WP but there has been no action on that request. Interestingly enough, the user who handles the Danish usurps has done some since your request. Perhaps a note to him on his user page to inquire about any reservations or questions he may have regarding your request. His page is at: [2]. I don't see any edits from JIP or the IP he used for the usurp request on the Bureaucrat's talk page or in the archives. ArakunemTalk 21:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, what do you know? I was just about to contact Kaare on the Danish Wikipedia asking him to finally usurp the account JIP on the Danish Wikipedia, when I found out that he had already done so, about four hours ago. Now, at last, I have the account with the username JIP on every WikiMedia project there is. (Of course, that doesn't mean I have that username on every wiki project using MediaWiki there is, but that is not WikiMedia's problem.) JIP | Talk 20:57, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    My pages aren't visible?

    Hi. I created three pages in January but don't see them visible. I spent some time on these so am concerned. Can you tell me where they might be? They were for Camp Edmo, Camp EdTech and Edventure More. Thanks.------------ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtsegal (talk • contribs) 22:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't find any in deletion log. Did you create with this user name or an IP? CTJF83 22:51, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You created them in the sandbox where they were overwritten by other users. Your work is still listed at Special:Contributions/Mtsegal. However, the artiles as written would not be suitable for the encyclopaedia because they don't indicate the notability of the subjects, nor are they supported by reliable sources. You might like to read some of our guides before recreating them, such as WP:YFA. I'll also leave some useful links at your talk page. --AndrewHowse (talk) 22:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Andrew, duh! I should have looked to see what the changes to the sandbox were. CTJF83 23:27, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    My Edits Are Not Being Saved

    I have put in for technical help but want to make sure I'm not doing something wrong. I'm a new user. I am working on an article in a sub-page. The initial article was saved. However, over the last two days, when I make edits, preview and hit the save button, all seems well in preview. However, when I try to save and exit, I receive a warning that if I exit the page I will lose all my changes. Saving it doesn't resolve the problem, so in order to exit, I just have to lose all my edits. Saving a page shouldn't be a big deal, but it has become one for me.

    Please advise. I can't even leave a message in "My Talk" without the same problem. Cmckibben (talk) 22:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    What message comes up when you hit save? CTJF83 22:48, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    It says: "Are you sure you want to leave this page? Leaving the page may cause you to lose changes made. Press OK or Cancel to stay on the page."Cmckibben (talk) 22:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    It should only say that if you edit, and don't hit save, and try to close a window. Please open a page, edit, and add something, then hit save and tell me what it says. CTJF83 22:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry, you wanted to know what happens when I hit save. It just seems to be saving and then leaves me where I was. If I try to leave the page, I get the message above.Cmckibben (talk) 22:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Open up Iowa, hit edit and type something at the very top with an edit summary of "test" and we'll see what happens. Perhaps we can diagnose something. CTJF83 23:00, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I went to my regular file that I'm editing. I three words to it and saved it. It took me back to the preview page which showed the change. Then, THIS TIME, when I went back to talk to you, I didn't get the message. But I wanted to go back in and see if it saved the edit. Is it possible that the file can only take very few edits at one time? Am I trying to edit too much?Cmckibben (talk) 23:05, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I doubt that. Your edit to Iowa worked, please link to the file. CTJF83 23:11, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry, I'm a new user and not very adept at working in Wikipedia. What do you mean "link" to the file? Which file? Iowa? Mine? Not sure what you want me to do.Cmckibben (talk) 23:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding a link to your reply thus: [[Article name]]. Jarkeld (talk) 23:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (ec) That's ok...you said "I went to my regular file that I'm editing" I assumed by File you meant image. Not sure why it wasn't working, but your last few edits have been saved. Glitch maybe? CTJF83 23:24, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I got to leave for now, so I'll leave it to Jarkeld or any other users, good luck, I'll check back in several hours. CTJF83 23:24, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I think User:Ctjf83 is referring to a link to the page you are referring to, which in this case you do so by this code [[Iowa]] which renders as Iowa (where I have just reverted your test edit). – ukexpat (talk) 23:23, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    File is [[Andrea Michaels]]. I started on the practice page, and then another editor helped me and moved it to a sub-page User Cmckibben:Andrea Michaels. Cmckibben (talk) 23:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry, it's User:Cmckibben/Andrea Michaels. Can you find it? It's not live. Cmckibben (talk) 23:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Okay, I went back to my contribution page above and tried to edit the paragraph. Same thing happened. I made my edits and then hit the save button. Instead of showing the preview page as it should, I get the message, I described above warning that I will lost my changes if I leave the page. Am I supposed to do something besides hit the save page button? Is it possible the page is corrupted and I need to copy and paste the entire entry into a new page?Cmckibben (talk) 23:40, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    AAAh; I found it. User:Cmckibben/Andrea Michaels. You mean this page. You made successfully two changes on this page yesterday. So where is the problem then? mabdul 23:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Mabdul, I made a couple of small changes yesterday, but I also did 5 hours worth of work where none of it would save. Same thing today. I deleted material, edited up a storm for two hours and nothing would save. When I hit the save, it wouldn't go to the preview page to indicate it was saved. When I tried to leave the page, I kept getting a warning that if I chose to leave the page none of my work would be saved. It says: "Are you sure you want to leave this page? Leaving the page may cause you to lose changes made. Press OK or Cancel to stay on the page." I clearly can see that the edits I am making are not being saved. That's the problem. Any ideas?Cmckibben (talk) 23:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry. Have to go to appointment. If anyone has ideas, please let me know. I'll check back in later.Thanks for helping!Cmckibben (talk) 23:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I suspect something is missing from your description. Do you click the "Save page" button below the edit box? What happens after you click the save button and haven't done anything else yet? If the edit is successfully saved then you should be viewing the saved page with no edit box and a url like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAGENAME. If it's not saved then you should be getting an error message explaining the problem and still be in the edit window with the edit box and a url starting with http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PAGENAME. The message you describe should only be shown if you try to go away from the url in your browser before the page has been successfully saved. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:39, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    PrimeHunter: The problem, I believe, is that the page is not saving when I click the "Save Page" button below the edit box. That's the one I've been clicking. What happens is thatI'm still seeing the edit box, not the saved page with no edit box. I don't get an error message. I'll go back through it all again, but the problem is that I don't get an error message explaining why it isn't saved.Cmckibben (talk) 03:27, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Special:Contributions/Cmckibben shows you have made many successful saves. The "Save page" and "Show preview" buttons are next to eachother. Do you get exactly the same result, including the heading "Preview" near the top, when you click the two buttons and the save button doesn't save? That would hint that the software is registering the preview button. Are you using a mouse with a clearly defined cursor? Does the "Save page" button change color before you click it? PrimeHunter (talk) 03:56, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    One thought: maybe this is cookies related. Possibly, at the top (after clicking save) it says "Your session has expired" - ie, you've been logged out. I wonder if it's that, because you've been editing for a long time before saving? Does the problem seem to happen when you are editing for long periods? If that is the case, the easiest solution might be, to simply save more often. There is no problem with making lots of edits to a page, and it is generally a good idea to save occasionally - because it avoids losing things in a power cut, if the computer crashes, and so on.
    If/when you get the problem - the "are you sure you want to leave this page" - to avoid losing edits;
    • 'cancel' ie do not leave the page
    • Click in the edit box, and "Select all" (highlight the whole thing), and "Copy" it
    • Open 'Notepad' (or some text editor), paste it. Save that.
    At least, this way, you won't actually lose your work, and can paste it back later.  Chzz  ►  09:54, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems to be "fixed". He/She made finally some edits... mabdul 21:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Photo

    How do I upload a photo to the Wiki entry on me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweetlit (talk • contribs) 22:47, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    On the left column bar, under "toolbox" hit "upload file". Note Wikipedia:Uploading images also. CTJF83 22:48, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Erm, no, actually; that user has only made one edit, and therefore cannot upload images to this wiki yet...
    Sweetlit, as long as it is your own picture - if you own the copyright - then you can upload it to Commons.
    If it is from elsewhere, it's a bit more complex; see Wikipedia:Finding images tutorial.  Chzz  ►  00:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Hugely confusing for a first time contributor! I can't find a button to 'EDIT' a page I want to adjust!!!

    I am barraged with non-applicable information. It is very discouraging for a first time user. I am looking/can't find a button to re-edit my page of info. Feel like giving up all together....:( Where to even click to enter this????????? Confused for sure!@ I am not stupid! This is NOT user friendly! WHERE DO I ENTER THIS????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gopoco (talk • contribs) 22:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Well, you managed to edit here, so that's a start. Which page would you like to edit? --AndrewHowse (talk) 22:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (ec) What page are you referring to. Some pages are not editable by certain classes of users. CTJF83 22:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I think you probably wanted to edit the page on "Wood Burning Stove - The Reverse Process"? I'm sorry; that page was deleted.
    The 'barrage of information' on your talk page does say why–"because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader".
    It also says, "If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
    Good advice.  Chzz  ►  00:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You created Wood Burning Stove - The Reverse Process in the main encyclopedia where it immediately became one of our articles, but it was deleted. Only administrators can see the contents of deleted pages. The page had no meaningful content for a Wikipedia article. You can work on a draft at User:Gopoco/Sandbox until it seems ready. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Posting an original but public domain document

    My company is producing a document on the effects of pile driving on fish for the Federal Highway Administration, our client. The document will organize and present the current best available science on this topic. The document is to be publicly available once completed. The client also wishes it to be a living document, meaning update-able by experts. We are producing the document for FHWA and they want it globabally available and to evolve as new information is learned. The document would probably be a few hundered printed pages, but organized by chapters. I was wondering is this compatible with Wikipedia and your policies. Is this something we could do, take the document and enter it on to wikipedia.

    Thank you for your response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.223.21.100 (talk) 23:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Great, yes, no problem; please see Wikipedia:DCM#Granting us permission to copy material already online - email a permission statement (as explained in that link), and away we go. They could host it wherever they liked; we'd only be able to reference it, though, if it passed as a reliable source; that means, if it was published on some website with a "reputation for fact-checking and accuracy", and editorial control. if in doubt about that, ask on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard.  Chzz  ►  00:05, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    If an article is written in Wikipedia, it can be edited by anyone, and not necessarily only by those whom you or your client would consider to be experts. If you want it to be controlled to suit your own needs, you probably don't want it on Wikipedia, but you may wish to use the same MediaWiki software. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    If you mean whether the whole document can be published at Wikipedia then certainly no. The encyclopedia Wikipedia is only one of thousands of wikis using MediaWiki or other wiki software. Maybe your company can set up its own wiki or find an existing wiki which suits your purpose. Also note that almost everything at Wikipedia can be edited by anybody and nothing here is limited to experts. The same applies to a lot of wikis. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:22, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Another possibility might be our sister project Wikisource. But like Wikipedia, I believe that content there is free licensed not public domain, and anyone (not just experts) would be able to edit it. 76.171.96.183 (talk) 00:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    One of the main problems with donating text to Wikipedia, or copying a public domain document wholesale into the encylopedia from elsewhere, is that it likely isn't up to the standards of Wikipedia's citation requirements and also is grossly out of line with the Wikipedia:Manual of style. The prohibition against putting original research into Wikipedia articles does not exist outside of Wikipedia, etc. While on some subjects, some text may be better than no text, you can expect just about any donated text to be edited to the point where it isn't recognizable anymore, for a variety of reasons. This is all not to say that doing so isn't allowed; it clearly is, its just that it isn't as simple as copying some document from outside Wikipedia into the encyclopedia and magically you have a decent article. --Jayron32 05:11, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    From your description the article (or article collection) sounds suitable for Appropedia, which accepts original work in the very broad realm of sustainability which could include environmental impact assessments of this type. That is not to say you could not write one or more articles on Wikipedia, but getting your work on Appropedia would very likely be much simpler. On Wikipedia there are a lot more rules and restrictions which make it hard to write articles that stick. --Teratornis (talk) 06:50, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    February 4

    Naming/page history issue

    Resolved
     – Copy/paste move mess has been fixed. – ukexpat (talk) 15:44, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    At IPAB the talk page is mis-named and the page history for IPAB has been lost in a move, it appears. Can someone point me to instructions on how to fix it? Or fix it themselves? Thanks. Jesanj (talk) 02:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    IPAB is a redirect to Independent Payment Advisory Board; the history is there. I created a parallel redirect for Talk:IPAB. —teb728 t c 08:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    It's worse than I thought: On 8 January someone apparently did a copy move of Independent Payment Advisory Board to Independent Medicare Advisory Board, effectively splitting the history. Apparently the correct title is Independent Payment Advisory Board; at least that is where the recent history is. So it needs admin attention to merge the history. —teb728 t c 09:03, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    {{adminhelp}}

    I now see what happened: The move was a real move, but another editor copied the article back over the redirect and replaced the moved article with a redirect. So it needs admin attention to merge the history from Independent Medicare Advisory Board at Independent Payment Advisory Board. (I just moved the talk page back, solving that part of the problem.) —teb728 t c 09:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for pointing this out. I am dealing with it. It may take a little while. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:57, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

     Done JamesBWatson (talk) 10:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    How to mark a BLP article.

    I'm doing new page patrol and am tagging a BLP article (Rudy Hubbard). I noticed that wikipedia isn't recognising it as a BLP article, i.e. when you edit it you don't get the BLP warning above the edit box, and I'm guessing IP editors aren't blocked from editing it. How is this enabled? I've added a BLP template to the talk page and also added it to category:Living People, but neither of those work, in fact the category looks like it shouldn't be used that way so I'm guessing I'm doing this the wrong way round. Thinking about it, it doesn't really make sense for this to be done by wiki markup within the article as it would be too easy to circumvent, so is there some admin function I need to request or a board I need to post on? Thanks --ThePaintedOne (talk) 11:24, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    It's triggered by Category:Living people, which I have fixed in the Rudy Hubbard article. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, just a typo on my part! Thanks for the assist.--ThePaintedOne (talk) 11:46, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Adolf Hitler

    Using AOL - every time I try to open the page on Adolf Hitler, AOL closes down. Using Windows Explorer - I can open the page, but it does have a hiccup on opening.

    melvyn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.107.99 (talk) 11:50, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Have you tried to use another web browser? mabdul 11:59, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I suspect it may be connected with the fact that the length of the article is 236KB (of Wikicode). —teb728 t c 12:03, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I doubt that since there is no note at Wikipedia:Browser_notes#Internet Explorer or only in the case of a really old IE with an really old Win-version (9X?)/PC with very less RAM. mabdul 15:12, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Action Research in Education

    what is Action Research in Education? How can we do or conduct in Elementary education and secondary education? What are its pros and cons and how can we solvre or implement properly in the schools? Please answer with great deal.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.57.25 (talk) 14:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    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.Template:Z25 - Please note also that Wikipedia won't do your homework for you, but might (of course) be a useful tool for you to use in your research. David Biddulph (talk) 14:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    City of Leeds School entry says it reads like an advert.

    Resolved
     – Tag removed and replaced by relevant tag~!

    The entry is very short and factual, and it has been reduced to the bare bones, I think the 'advertisement' tag should be removed.82.3.199.155 (talk) 14:34, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    your article about cremation and Islam

    I realize that this this is a very LEFTIST blog, but why do you put Islam first in your article? Islam has only been in existance since the 7th century, yet you list it first, above Judaism and Christianity?

    Why is that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.145.3.21 (talk) 16:33, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

      1. Wikipedia is not a blog but an encyclopedia.
      2. It has no political affiliation (this is not to say that none of the millions who have edited it have such affiliations, but these are not reflected in any editorial policy).
      3. Islam is not inherently favoured by or affiliated with political leftism.
      4. The ordering reflects the way the article has been created incrementally over time by numerous editors. There is no editorial agenda in the ordering of the subsections in Cremation#Religious views on cremation. If you would like to propose another order, feel free to do so on the article talk page. Or you can even boldly reorganize it yourself, explaining your rationale in the edit summary (and, if you choose a chronological order, keeping in mind that several of the Asian traditions described in the article are older than the Christian and Jewish ones you mentioned). Gonzonoir (talk) 16:46, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) Well, this is an encyclopedia, not a blog. Are you referring to Cremation#Religious_views_on_cremation? I haven't examined it in-depth, but my guess is that Islam is listed first simply because it has the shortest explanation. Placing it at the bottom or in middle may cause it to get lost in the clutter. TNXMan 16:49, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    What difference does the order make? And why would the age of a religion matter? Age doesn't make a religion any more likely to be true, or false, or better, or worse. Appeal to tradition ("if it's old, it must be true") and Appeal to novelty ("if it's new, it must be true") are both fallacies, which is to say that the age of an idea has nothing to do with whether it is true. --Teratornis (talk) 03:33, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Citing

    How do you reference a webpage? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmoxie (talk • contribs) 16:48, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    The best way to do this is to use the {{cite web}} template. Just fill out the fields you know and place it between a <ref> and a </ref> in the article. TNXMan 16:50, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    For the details, see WP:CITE, WP:FOOT, and {{Cite web}}. --Teratornis (talk) 03:13, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    up and coming new band

    hi. I have read through the posts and links and while there is ALOT of information, I am still unsure about the answer to my question. I work with an up and coming new band. We would like to be included in Wikipedia. Is this what is considered an "article" and do we write it ourselves? thank you, Linaz Martine 17:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)~

    <redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.221.206.66 (talk) 17:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Start by reading WP:BAND and WP:UPANDCOMING. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:48, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you. I "think" this means that we create the article ourselves. I will look through the links you gave me. Next week. After the Packers win the Superbowl. L18:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC)~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.221.206.66 (talk)

    Better to say, I think, that it means nobody should write it until the criteria at WP:BAND are met, or else it'll probably be deleted. And that once those criteria are met, it would be much better if somebody unconnected with the band wrote the article, because it's difficult for somebody who is connected to write neutrally about the subject. --AndrewHowse (talk) 18:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Since you work with the band and talk of them as "we," you should also read WP:COI. —teb728 t c 22:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Getting ride of extra info for sports team info box

    I'm trying to make an info box for my softball team. I'm using the MLB info box and only want a few things to show on the page for the team. However, info that I removed keeps showing up. It appears as shown even after removing info that I do not need:

    Collapse info box
    padding
    Oakland Horseside
    2024 Oakland Horseside season
    Retired numbersWally Thompson - 11
    Colors
    • Navy Blue, Yellow, White
         
    Name
    • Oakland Horseside (1971–present)
    Other nicknames
    • “The Hide”
    Front office
    Principal owner(s)Keith Salminen
    ManagerKeith Salminen

    The Cap logo & Team Logo I plan on adding in, but everything else that doesn't have info in it I want to remove. What do I need to do or what other templete do I need to use? Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rfa149 (talk • contribs)

    Try using {{Infobox baseball team}} instead. --Mysdaao talk 21:08, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Your sports team? Have you read and familiarised yourself with our policy on conflicts of interest? Rehevkor ✉ 21:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    More urgently, read WP:ORG and demonstrate in the article that Oakland Horsehide Softball Club has received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Otherwise the article will be deleted soon, and anything else you do will be lost. —teb728 t c 23:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Please edit the page.

    I dont find a source and cant understand why and how can u uplaod a pic of Hazrat Imaam Hasan on the below mentioned page. That time and even today, no source exists which can actually state that this is the pic of Hazrat Imaam Hasan. So with the kind request please remove the PIC.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imam_Hasan

    As a content issue, the best place to discuss it is on the talk page of the article.--SPhilbrickT 22:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Is already discussed at Talk:Hasan_ibn_Ali#His Picture. mabdul 23:23, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    coded encrypted words

    OK I have looked everywhere for this answer but to no avail. Here is the question. Why are some words on the wikipedia "coded" or encryped? Most of the words that are coded seem to be like a title to a movie or title to a song. The article is intact, but several key words are coded or encrypted. For instance, if I look up the actor Michael Cain.. I will see that he was in the movie SLUTH. BUT.... wikipedia displays the word "Sluth" as "jckbq" (in italics). Now... I can mouse over that garbage and hold, and a bubble will pop up stating that the translation is SLUTH.. but why, oh why does it do this??? Sorry to bug you guys, but it drives me nuts.. my email is.... JUST KIDDING. I read your warning! lol (although I am not entirely sure that if you answer this, where I can find it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.79.69.16 (talk) 23:12, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    You are not using wikipedia directly by typing in the address bar http://en.wikipedia.org/ ; you used a translator (maybe by google) that tries to translate some words in other languages, and the original text are in the bubbles. maybe you use a wikipedia version in another language. mabdul 23:27, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    February 5

    DISPLAYTITLE

    Hi. How can I add extra parts to the title using the {{DISPLAYTITLE}} magic word? I know that using <span style="display:none;"> could hide parts, but what the code to add new parts? 119.235.2.251 (talk) 02:01, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Be more specific about what you want to do, and where you want to do it (page name? is it on Wikipedia, or another wiki?). Wikipedia:Page name#Changing the displayed title describes what you can do on Wikipedia, and it does not sound like much. --Teratornis (talk) 03:25, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    For example, I want to change my userpage title from the default User:Example to something like User:Example ABC. How do I do that? I am quite positive this is possible... 119.235.2.213 (talk) 03:59, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Unfortunately I must inform you that it is not possible with {{DISPLAYTITLE:...}}. This magicword only works to change the formatting of a title, and cannot add or remove text from it, because the title, if copied, must still be searchable back to the page. The <span style="display:none;"> trick is a hack that the developers, when they implemented {{DISPLAYTITLE:...}}, probably did not foresee (or they would have disallowed it). While it is possible with some creative CSS to hide parts of the title, it is not possible to add new parts. You can, however, change your username if you really want it that badly (follow the instructions at WP:CHU carefully). Keep in mind that changing a username is not something that can be done and undone on a whim; choose your new name wisely, should you opt to change, and plan on keeping that name for a long time. Intelligentsium 04:08, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Veiled Chameleon

    I'm curious as to if the c in Veiled Chameleon should be capitalized or not. Albacore (talk) 02:19, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    No, it should not. Common names of animals use sentence case, with a few exceptions. (See WP:FNAME for details.) --Danger (talk) 02:32, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually WP:FNAME gives the example of Southern boobook which is a redirect to Southern Boobook (the latter seems to be canonical). It looks like we have a lot of similarly titled articles, see for example Crested Lark, Crested Tit, Crested Porcupine, Variegated Flycatcher, etc. Also see WP:FNAME#Capitalisation of common names of species which says the various WikiProjects decide whether to capitalize the first letters of second and following words in animal names. --Teratornis (talk) 03:44, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, the current exceptions are birds, primates, lepidopterans and odonates. --Danger (talk) 04:07, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Special:Contributions bug?

    I am confused by Special:Contributions/71.6.14.2. It says the IP address is currently blocked, but the log entry it shows is a 1 week block back in 2006. Is it bug or what? —teb728 t c 06:25, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    EDITORS

    HOW DO I CONTACT THE ENTIRE LIST OF WRITERS OR EDITORS WHO HAVE PRODUCED A SPECIFIC ARTICLE ?

    PAUL BENEDETTI

    74.233.33.147 (talk) 06:29, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=412112586"