Thanks. I was looking through some species articles that I started that are stubs and Start Class that are italicized so maybe I forgot all about it or other members added the template. I actually thought that adding italics could italicize the title. Joe Chill (talk) 01:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The other thing is using a taxobox. I think unless another name (such as a common name) is listed in the taxobox, it takes care of it. It's good to use a taxobox when it's relevant anyway. LadyofShalott01:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to add a taxobox for Philanthaxia pseudoaenea, but I'm not sure about how to go about it when I don't know who actually discovered it. I looked at two news articles about the big discovery of four beetle species, but they don't mention who discovered them or if there was only one discoverer. Is it ok to add a taxobox without that information? Joe Chill (talk) 01:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that you need to explicitly italicize the binomen in manual taxoboxes. If you use an {{Automatic taxobox}} (or {{Speciesbox}} for species articles), the titles and relevant fields are automatically italicized for species and genera. I suggest you look into that. Though be warned, it can be thoroughly confusing for a beginner, if it's too much, stick with manual taxoboxes.
I have also added the authors for P. pseudoaenea - Bílý & Nakládal, 2011. Also note that the person(s) who discover them are not necessarily the authors. The authors are the person(s) who first publish a description and a valid name of them in an academic paper. See Author citation (zoology). -- Obsidi♠nSoul06:23, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What do I need to create a new Church page?
I would like to know if there are any circumstances for creating a Church's page. Does the church need to be on a National Historic Places page or does it need to have a historic person/event with it?Ltlane777 (talk) 02:06, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is pretty easy, you need to have reliable sources. The sources need to be independent of the church and provide significant coverage. If there are newspaper articles about the church that would work. The church does not need to be listed on the NHR and have a historical person/event with it. You might want to look at, WP:Notability, this gives more information about how to determine if something is considered notable enough to have an article. GBfanplease review my editing02:11, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Some administrator should refer to the subject item.
I was unable on a "first try" to add something of importance to an "Stub" and do not want to spend time learning how to submit additions, (at least at this tome).
Whatever I put in Bold in my item is offered withour constraints, ownership, etc, but I do take responsibility for the accuracy of the statement, which can be confirmed by C_SPAN.org/QandA````
See my changes. You did not need an administrator to do those changes. In the future, if you wish to propose an edit to an article, please place the following text:
In an article's talk page, followed immediately by what you would like to add or change to the given article. Please also make sure you are giving a valid link for your sources (i.e. something actually clickable). I have also not included the rest of your proposed text as they are a bit subjective and not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Cheers.-- Obsidi♠nSoul08:39, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to set an upper bound for available sizes an .svg image is rendered as PNG? The concrete example in question is File:University of Chicago Modern Etched Seal 1.svg. While I think the resolution of 500px is fine to illustrate the intricate details in the image, having this image rendered at a resolution of 2000px is not needed in my opinion and is a violation of WP:NFC Policy 3 b. Is it possible to restrict the rendering choices for the file to a maximum of 500px and if so, how can I do this? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 08:44, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's an interesting question. I think I saw it raised
Graeme Bartlett said "There was a previous discussion on .SVG logos where it was decided they could be kept." but he then linked to this discussion which doesn't sound definitive.
Having read a bit more, my guess is no, but that's an inference, on the assumption that if it were possible, someone would have suggested it. That's not a completely satisfactory answer, but the experts at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) are probably best equipped to answer your specific question. As an aside, while one summary of the discussion concluded that they could be used, I read it differently, and thought the consensus was opposed.--SPhilbrickT12:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's not possible to 'code' a size limitation into an SVG, because it is just made up of shapes; hence, if the svg is available to display, anyone could download it and display/use it at any resolution they wanted. We could stop mediawiki from having the 'display at 2000px' option, but that isn't really solving anything. It's the way an SVG works; it doesn't have a 'size' - just shapes, which can be displayed at any res you wish. Chzz ► 13:31, 8 August 2011 (UTC) I'll copy this cmt to the VPT thread, but I'll leave it here too Chzz ► 13:34, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if that's not possible, the only two options I see would be to either recreate the image at a lower resolution or remove it from the article since this is a 3b violation. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Islamic Mobiling
Islamic Mobiling
Is is the mobiling based on islamic low.
Do you have a specific question regarding Wikipedia or a specific article here at Wikipedia? If not, this is probably the wrong place, since This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:12, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Just click on the blue link in the reply preceeding this one. (PS: there are a number of links on the right side of the page that might also be helpful). If you have further questions, feel free to come back here again or ask me on my talk page (just click here to get there). I hope this is helpful. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:30, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
References confirmed and requested to be validated
Please assist to remove the text: This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations where appropriate. (May 2011)
and also this text:
This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (May 2011)
This article is confirmed by 12 references including articles in major press and IMDB website. The above text, which refers to adding reliable resources, is not necessary or required given the text that has been confirmed by the references.
You could remove them if you liked. They're at the top of the edit window. But I wouldn't if I were you. The "early life" and "personal life" sections are completely unreferenced. Dismas|(talk)11:04, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your note. Actually, there is a Wiki reference for Early Life there connected to St Vincent's College where the subject is a confirmed student. There is also confirmation of work and education reference at Australian Theatre for Young People on their official website and alumni list which is also referenced: http://www.atyp.com.au/index.php/about-us/alumni
The IMDB Biography also confirms the early life section: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2964700/bio - i believe that the page does not need to be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kjmelf (talk • contribs) 12:19, 8 August 2011
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.
Anyone can add, or remove, such messages; they're designed to aid other editors, showing what improvements are necessary - and therefore shouldn't be removed unless the issues are resolved.
However, in the case of that specific article, this is now moot, as there is a deletion discussion under-way here, so comments about the referencing should be made in that discussion. Chzz ► 13:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Editing
Dear Sir or Madame,
May this find Well, You - and All with You. This is my first contact. I have read what I think are relevant pages. They provide no help.
I want to edit an article. When I click on "Edit", I don't get to any screen, that allows me to edit anything. Rather, I am directed to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page .
Here, there is no access to anything having to do with editing.
What, if anything, am I doing wrong?
Thanks for your kind help. I appreciate it.
Yours faithfully,
Topspook (I set up an account, which made no difference at all). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.109.152.197 (talk • contribs) 12:50, 8 August 2011
In reference to articles about Interstate highways in the U.S.: In the exit lists, the "destinations" column usually indicates the locations marked on the highway's signs. Some of these destinations are red links because they are small communities or parts of municipalities. Because they have no official politcal designation (borough, city, township or whatever) and their size, they are unlikely to ever have Wikipedia articles. Should they be left as red links anyway, pipe-linked to the actual municipality they are in, or have their links removed. Note that pipe-linking in some (but not all) cases would link to the same community listed in the "location" column, if that makes a difference in determining what to do. Thank you. — Michael J14:47, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly. See the list on Interstate 81 in Pennsylvania, for example. (This one I know for certain because I live in the area, but can be verified by detailed state-published maps, etc. There are others I question, but will look them up.) Exit 201 is located in Scott Township, and its destination is East Benton, which is in Benton Township. Exit 202 is in Benton Township, as is one of its destinations, Fleetville, but Tompkinsville is in Scott Township. (By the way, Tomkinsville is misspelled; I will fix that.) None of these villages — East Benton, Fleetville or Tompkinsville — is notable enough for an article, but the townships which include them already have articles. Thank you. — Michael J15:27, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. First, a caveat: I'm not American, and I do not honestly know, for sure, if there is any chance that an article on e.g. "East Benton" is beyond reasonable possibility of meeting notability requirements. So - assuming that it isn't, for the purposes of helping here, and taking that one as an example;
The relevent portion of the page regarding junction 201, is;
IMHO, YMMV, HTH, and all that. There might, somewhere, be some style-guide that elaborates. And/or others might have alternative views about the potential of the link/s. If you think it'd be a bit too bold to modify lots of them, you could always start a discussion on the articles talk, and give it some days to see if anyone screams. Best, Chzz ► 15:49, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Chzz and Gfoley. I think for the moment I will leave the list as is. (I did not know we had a MOS:RJL!) There are no inaccuracies in the list, and I'm not about to redirect every little village to its apporpriate township. Also, while I said that articles for those villages are unlikely, they are actual places, and I suppose someone could someday come up with enough information for an article. And according to my inerpretation of WP:RED, they should be left as such. Thanks again! — Michael J21:30, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Talk page problems
Help! I'm receiving several new talk page messages (all about marking articles for deletion), and they appear in the edit text box but not on the page. What's wrong? --Nathan2055talk15:39, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Someone had put in the string <ref>, but without enclosing it in nowiki tags, hence everything subsequently was being treated as being part of a reference. I think I've sorted it, including adding the various signatures that didn't get accepted. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You can usually find the position of such a problem by searching the edit box for the last visible text on the rendered page. In this case [1] it was "in-text citations using". As David Biddulph found, it was followed by a <ref> which was not in nowiki tags. In articles the problem is often that a starting <ref> is missing the ending </ref>. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Me and my university professor had an idea for my final thesis in Italian Linguistics: study lexical development of Italian language on the basis of Italian Wikipedia. So I was going to download one of the latest and one of the oldest dumps and compare them. The problem is the oldest dump of Italian Wiki I find is from 2010. Is there any way to get older versions now? Of at least 2005-2006? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.54.172.110 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 8 August 2011
The files with "current" in the filename only have the most recent version of the pages, but those with "history" contains the complete page edit history. You will probably want itwiki-latest-pages-meta-history.xml<.whatever-format> Using that, you could analyse page content from any date you wanted.
There is some further information on meta:Data dumps. As this is rather technical, and not related to the English Wikipedia, you are more likely to get appropriate help in the IRC channel #mediawikiconnect. Best of luck, Chzz ► 16:20, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
backprocess of transmission of e-mail
what is the backprocess of transmission of e-mail from sender to reciever
Have you tried the Computing section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps.
There is no user account Dantons, and, if there were, posting your password on a public page would be an extremely bad idea. LadyofShalott18:23, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Check your email. Make sure your user-name and password is entered exactly as you registered - including caps, spaces, dots, and so forth.
If you can't log in, create a new account; as long as you don't use more than one account, that's fine.
Hi. I'm trying to replicate a symbol that is used in the shipping industry. It is a maltese cross with a filled-in circle over it, as shown here and on page 5 of this document.
I can make the maltese cross ✥ with ✥
and I can add the combining diacritical mark to other characters "å", like this:å
but when I try to combine them with ✥̊ i see a box with a circle over it: ✥̊
Because you are adding the diacritical mark to the maltese cross. I don't see the box, so the problem must be with your browser's rendering of the unicode. I see a maltese cross with a little circle above it.--Jayron3220:07, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I tried a few browsers on 2 operating systems: Google chrome on windows was the only on I tried that it didn't render on. Thanks for the help! HausTalk20:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above doesn't work for me, on Firefox 5.0; the dot appears at the top-right like the little circle that comes after some Japanese characters, such as . It looks like this. I tried a few diacritic things, but can't get anything to work; even if it did, it might not be consistent.
I think it'd be far better to use a small inline symbol - just like I did above, for that Japanese character. I could've used the unicode symbol ぽ but, that might not work for all users.
You might want to ask for an SVG to be made, over at the Wikipedia:Graphic Lab. It's probably best to copy it from this DNV PDF, because at least we can zoom in on that one.
BTW, 10021 (✥) is not called a Maltese cross, it's a "four club-spoked asterisk". 10016 (✠) is called a "Maltese cross" in unicode tables - despite, as far as I can see, looking nothing like one. DNV call it that, so meh. Chzz ► 21:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help. I think the right thing to do is to make a svg for the moment, but call the thing from a template. That way, x years from now, when the glyphs consistently display correctly, it can be changed in one place. I'm no artist, but " bla bla bla bla bla bla" seems close enough for rock and roll. HausTalk22:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe because the former is used a reference in articles that will now need to be updated to the latter, to avoid a dead link? – ukexpat (talk) 20:14, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am quite sure that was the point, but wouldn't it be better to post this on the talk pages of articles and/or Wikiprojects where it will find the people who are most likely to make good use of it? Or better yet, just update the references oneself. Posting the above fact here is probably the second least likely way to fix the problem (the least likely being "do nothing")There are billions of references in Wikipedia articles, and some non-trivial number of them go dead every day. It isn't that people shouldn't be notified of dead links, but this particular forum isn't exactly the best place to do that. --Jayron3220:21, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On the index page for American Librarians, Paul S. Dunkin is listed in P, and not listed in D.
Trivial, but you're the first easy place to get some attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.173.102.208 (talk • contribs) 23:39, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I want to rate this one article, however, it already has a rating (not by me). How do I give it one? I read the articles retaining to rating, yet I cant find instructions. mystery(talk) 02:17, August 8th, 2011 (UTC)
Are you talking about the rating box at the bottom of the article or the rating that is on the talk page for whatever WikiProject has rated it? And it always helps if you tell us what the article is instead of being vague. Dismas|(talk)02:26, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Im talking about the infamous sport of Parkour. I meant the "Rated X-Class, X-Importance" thing on the talk page. I do, however, thank you about reinforming be about the bottom of the article. Does that contribute to the one on the talk page?mystery(talk) 03:04, August 8th, 2011 (UTC)
No, they are completely separate. As for the talk page ratings...
If you're referring to the article being a good article at one point, you can follow the link in the notice to have it reassessed.
If you're referring to the France WikiProject rating, you can re-assess the article yourself if you feel it's justified. Their assessment guidelines are here.
If you're referring to the Sports WikiProject and their assessment, it's the same as with France and their guidelines are here.
The "Rate this page" feature at the bottom of articles is for all readers and unrelated to the WikiProject rating on the talk page. You should usually sign up as member of a WikiProject before rating articles for it. Look for rating information at the WikiProject such as Wikipedia:WikiProject France/Assessment and Template:WikiProject Sports. Click the "Edit" tab at top of the article talk page and set the rating with code like {{WikiProject Sports|class=b|importance=Mid}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I meant cast a vote (I dont just want to go ahead and change it based on my opinion, is there another way how?) on the Sports WikiProject "(Rated B-class, Mid-importance)". mystery(talk) 03:32, August 8th, 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia has around 3.7 million articles and a WikiProject rating only displayed on a talk page isn't considered important enough to spend time on a vote. Featured and good articles have icons on the article page, and there is a nomination procedure for them. Other ratings are mainly just meant as a tool for the WikiProject members. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports/Assessment#FAQ. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:11, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) No one votes on those talk page assessments. They are determined when an editor, in good faith, reads the article and applies the standards layed out at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ. The ratings are not determined by vote. Please read Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ and look at what each grade means, if you disagree with the ratings of a current article, you may change it yourself, if you can explain on the talk page why you are changing it. But it has nothing to do with voting. --Jayron3204:13, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Will it blend, AWB?
I have been repetitively performing this task, converting:
Why are you taking out section hatnotes templates (see Wikipedia:Hatnote). Because that's what it looks like you are trying to do, from above? These templates are useful in many cases, and shouldn't be removed willy-nilly. --Jayron3204:15, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How do one make a complaint about an editor, that is clearly vandalizing the topic by not allowing changes to the article. Imagine that the article state 2+2=5. Obviously this would call for a change, but the editor will not allow this. After much discussion, it has not been possible to have 2+2 be 4 instead of 5. What can be done, if an editor is the vandal, corrupting the data of an article?
In the case of a user changing "2+2=4" to "2+2=5", that would be considered vandalism. Thus, the user could be warned and if they persisted, reported on WP:AIV.
However, most disputes are not so clear-cut, such as, the associations of chinese characters [2]. Note the section in the VANDAL link, regarding What is not vandalism. In that type of case, it is necessary to try and form a consensus through discussion on the talk page. If an agreement cannot be made, there are dispute resolution processes. If any editor does not abide by consensus, or keeps insisting on their preferred version without awaiting agreement, then we're back to warn/block.
If the problem is an incompetent editor, then it is not at all wrong to comment on that persons professional ability.... Provided you're in a professional environment, where people welcome criticism in order to be able to correct the errors.
I presented evidence of one of my claims, and my comment with evidence was removed. That means that the editor is not fit to be seated in that position. It should not be wrong for the users to be able to "vote out" a bad editor and get a replacement. The editors are supposed to be there as a service to the users, not as a pain in the butt.
You seem to misunderstand how things work on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Wing Chun (like all article) does not have one editor; it has over 50, including you. Since none of the editors has any more authority than any other, content is determined by a consensus of editors. If you want to make a change, you need to persuade the other editors to accept it. It does not help you persuade if you throw around false charges of vandalism. Instead argue for your changes persuasively but civilly. —teb728tc23:12, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I keep getting a message that my article has missing end reference tags, & I need ((reflist)) at the end.
I proof read my article carefully and each reference is inside the Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). format. Also, I typed ((reflist)) at the end of my article, but I still get a message that it needs to be typed there. What am I doing wrong? I do not understand. I went to the new users page but it didn't help. I tried live chat, but no text would enter when I tried to type. HELP. ---- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janetfix (talk • contribs) 08:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would add that in its current form, the article is way too promotional and unencyclopedic in tone. It even has a curriculum vitae section -- that is not appropriate for a biographical article. Please take a look at WP:SPAM, WP:RESUME and WP:MOSBIO for further guidance, and the message on your talk page. – ukexpat (talk) 13:57, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ASSISTANCE IN COPYING A TABLE TO AVOID PRINTING OFF MORE THAN IS NECESSARY.
IF ONE WANTS A CERTAIN PART OF A DOCUMENT AND WANTS TO AVOID HAVING TO PRINT OUT MORE PAGES THAN REQUIRED IS THERE A WAY OF DOING THIS? OR IS THIS NOT ALLOWED BY WIKIPEDIA?78.105.25.190 (talk) 11:58, 9 August 2011 (UTC) THE REASON FOR PRINTING IS THAT I FIND IT EFFECTS MY EYESIGHT READING THE SCREEN.[reply]
PLEASE ADVISE
THANKS
Please do not type in ALL CAPITALS, because it sounds like you are shouting. - you should be able to make the text bigger by pressing Ctrl++, or clicking "View, Zoom" or "View", "Text-size", or similar.
(I've written this message in a larger font, to try and help)
For printing: On the left of each page, you should see a link to Print/export. Within that, you can choose Printable version, to display a printer-friendly page.
Then, from within your web-browser, you should be able to choose "File", "Print Preview" to see the page layout, to see how many pages would be printed, and you can choose which pages to print.
The exact method depends on your web-browser and operating system, but when you select Print, you should be able to choose "all" or "pages x to y".
If you need further help with anything, please tell us which web-browser you are using (e.g. Internet Explorer, or Firefox, or Safari), and we may be able to give more specific guidance. Chzz ► 12:14, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why was a subject removed?
We put together a Wiki on a legendary wrestling coach at our high school (Waterloo West High School, Waterloo, IA). His name is Robert (Bob) Siddens. This was probably done a year or so ago. Now, there is no sign of this information on Wikipedia. We'd like to know why it was removed.
a) It looks like the text was copied from that website mentioned, which is a copyright violation, b) It had no references - we cannot accept information without reliable sources, c) it did not maintain a neutral point of view.
Hi to the Admins, football player Gabriel Obertan has moved to Newcastle United and we now have the sources for it, so can someone please open it again (remove the lock) so we can edit it as its no longer disputed so it is safe to edit it. thank you. – HonorTheKing (talk)12:48, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Toshi Yamaguchi, clearly it has been mis-categorized (by the bot); I'm not certain how to fix it but no, please don't close it.
I asked one person online, and also asked the bot owner on User talk:Harej#RFCbot miscat. So, one of those - or someone else - will probably sort it out, in the near future. So, hold on, ちょっと待ってください。
I need to change the Charles Wedemeyer page to Charles A. Wedemeyer
I put {{DISPLAYTITLE:Charles A. Wedemeyer}} at the top of the text, but it did not work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.206.61.135 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Our Manual of Style is to use the name that is most widely used. I've created a redirect from Charles A. Wedemeyer - if you have any sources that his middle initial is used more-often than not, then we can move the article. You may want to post those sources (and discuss the move) on the related talk page. Avicennasis @ 16:09, 9 Av 5771 / 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Is there a way I could find the page view statistics of categories of different ratings? For example, if a start class article or a stub is getting 1000 views a day it would be a good candidate for improvement.RyanVeseyReview me!18:59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I've been working on the List of bog bodies article for around 6 months. There are certain pages that redirect to my article because they were too short, for example Elling Woman redirects to the page, but the section about her is far down on the long list. Is there a way for the redirect to go to the part of the list about the Ellling Woman and several others?
--GouramiWatcher(Gulp)19:01, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I stumbled across a non-notable country music single stub and upon investigating found that these two users appear to be prolific creators of the above (well not just country music but mainly).
What does one do? Can more experienced editors give some feedback, talk to the users? I just had a quick look, but I'd say there are a ton of this type of non-notable single article being created, we are not talking Thriller (song) or Hey Jude here, are we? CaptainScreeboParley!19:43, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Um, what? I just checked "Am I the Only One" and "My First Taste of Texas", and both of them look like good articles about notable songs. They're both actual singles, and they both charted highly on the Billboard charts. "Am I the Only One" is developing into a pretty decent article. The answer to your question "What to do?" is: Leave these people alone and let them get back to their good work. --Jayron3219:54, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well sorry for asking, but I don't think we've read the same guidelines then, or have the same conception of notability. Wikipedia:SINGLE and Wikipedia:NSONGS both state:
"Most songs do not merit an article", "Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, [...] are probably notable", "Notability aside, a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article"
Sorry, but The song is an uptempo about a man who wants to party, but finds that his friends have other interests. In the chorus, the narrator asks, "Am I the only one who wants to have fun tonight?" does not appear to me to be either a) noteworthy or b) the makings of a really good article.
First thing that popped into my head, try searching for Making Plans for Nigel, biggest 80s new wave hit for XTC, it redirects to the album article, although it was an absolute smash and one of the defining records of that period (imho of course). I am only trying to flag up what I see as a blatant disregard for the guidelines, notable songs should be songs that are a reference, charted highly, had an impact, have been covered by many bands/people and so on, but if you take a look at Gloria_Estefan_singles_discography, there is no way that 95% of the singles that have their own article qualify under the notability/verifiable material criteria. CaptainScreeboParley!21:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If one of the articles bother you, start a merger discussion on the article talk page. But editors trying to expand Wikipedia with more verifiable content aren't doing anything wrong. Feel free to improve Wikipedia as well, but given the tone of your opening post here, it looks as though you are just trying to "take down" other good faith editors. Please don't do that. Again, if you are just interested in merging the existing content in these articles into the articles about the albums, start a discussion per Wikipedia:MERGE#Proposing_a_merger. But there's no need to undo the good work of others (see WP:PRESERVE) and there's definately no need to demonize or otherwise call for sanctions against editors doing good work. --Jayron3223:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're misunderstanding WP:NSONG - Although it begins "Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article, it goes on to say that Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts [..] are probably notable and, a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article. Most songs don't get into charts; all four of those did. Chzz ► 14:10, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Jayron, I just came here to ask for advice about what I genuinely thought was the creation of trivial song articles, I don't think there is any trying to "take down" other good faith editors, now that yourself and Chzz have clarified the guidelines, I am much the wiser. I don't really see where I am trying to demonize anybody or call for sanctions, if I came here it's because I wasn't sure and didn't wanrt to just wade in with my 20-league boots on and say to the people concerned "stop this songcruft at once!" Anyway, thanks for your replies. CaptainScreeboParley!14:35, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The question is in the headline. The R. j. Reynolds family seems to have obliterated any record of J. Edward Johnson and the son she and Johnson had prior to her death. Katharine and Edward Johnson went to New York after they married with the idea that he would learn banking. When the son was born Katharine suffered a setback in her health which led to her death. Since that event the memory and existance of Mr. Johnson and his son has vanished. My curiosity is killing me. What became of them.
This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Humanities reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps.Avicennasis @ 19:51, 9 Av 5771 / 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone have an idea what this error means? It rears its ugly head in Aaron Avshalomov. The two instances it links to are both just simply "<ref name=ACA/>"; I can't see anything wrong with that. I also checked surrounding references for any mising slashes, but I didn't see any. — Sebastian20:24, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If a checkuser has the IP of a blocked account, even though the account that is blocked is registered, can checkuser find other named accounts (assuming the same IP) that may be being used to get around a block? Bielle (talk) 21:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My name is Julie Hudock I am the daughter of Mike Hudock Jr. and I wanted to let you know that you have his date of birth wrong. His correct date is September 29, 1934. My family and I would appreciate a correction in this matter.
I have about seven edits in a row I want to remove; I know exactly the day, time and place I need to be if I can just make these edits.Please give tell me how this is done so I can restore the page. I have tried making the edits manually and nothing happens. This is critically important to a grade for a class and would appreciate a response as soon as possible — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhr12 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Go to the article's history page and find the version you like, then edit it and save the page. Voilà, you've just reverted to an earlier version. Hope that helps, — Bility (talk) 21:52, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tool that ranks top contributors to a specific article
Quick question: what is the tool that ranks the top contributors to a given article? I remember seeing it somewhere a while ago. Zagalejo^^^22:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When I updated the picture and rationale for File:Don Flack.jpg, the picture turned out fine, but the rationale didn't change from the previous one. Since the source is different (it's all in the Comment section under File History), it needs to be changed. How do I do that?Jaguar766 (talk) 01:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Best solution would probably be WP:ANI. I don't have any information about the facts of the case, but if you could in any way be in the wrong be careful. You don't want to have a case of WP:BOOMERANG. Also remember to notify all involved parties.RyanVeseyReview me!02:02, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So here is the deal
I was editing at Territorial Revival architecture and realized that there was no Territorial architecture article. It's silly (opinion) having an article about a revival style without having one about the original. So I set about collecting resources to do one. However, I discovered that clicking on a Territorial architecture link gets you a redirect to Territorial Revival architecture. I am not sure how to remove a redirect (maybe find the link and delete it?) so thought that I would ask here, because, as we all know, that is no such thing as a stupid question. Just stupid question askers. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 02:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am not much of a User Space creator, but will head off to the link that you have provided and start writing. Thanks for your prompt and useful response. Carptrash (talk) 02:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if this is the easiest way but I generally click on "Special pages" in the toolbox under the Wikipedia logo, find/click on "Logs", and then put in the name of the article. Dismas|(talk)04:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) On any given (created) page, Click history, then "View logs for this page". Avicennasis @ 04:13, 10 Av 5771 / 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I have created the category and it appears blue at the bottom of your page. You have not been added to the category yet, which is natural. If you still aren't added to the category tomorrow leave me a note on my talk page and I will see what I can do.RyanVeseyReview me!05:06, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Senior and great writer , author, scholar and renowed journalist of Sindhi, Urdu and English newspapers. His name has been published in top 2000 writers of the century.
About
T
Personal Information
Shaikh Aziz (D.J -England and USSR)
Writer of several books in Sindhi , Urdu and English.
Current Published books.
Amali Sahafat(Practical Journalism) A text Book for M.A Journalism.
The History of Sindhi Music(English)
The Tribute ( A book of Obituary of legends published in Daily Dawn)
TaqSeem Khan Taqseen Tain(Sindhi) The hidden political history of Pakistan.
Mahlati Dastanain (Urdu) A book of Love stories.
Documentaries:
MALH (Sindhi Wrestling) , traditional sport of Sindh , Pakistan Television Corporation (1987)
Shah Inayat Sheed, Channel 4 Televsion Netwrok, London aEngland (1988)
Chowkundi Tombs, Department of Culture,Govt. of SIndh(1989)
Bhambhor, Department of Culture, Govt of SIndh (1989)
Sindh, An Introduction Department of Culture , Govt Of Sindh(1989) (for international Seminar Lahore 1989)
Hyderabad - The Lost heritage (2008)
Membership and Affiliations:
-Adviser , Printing Press , University of Sindh 1973-1957
-Member to the organizing Committee of Sindh through Centuries.
-Member Board of Directors, Sindh provincial Msueum .Hyderabad.1976-80
-Consultative participation in preparation of Curricula of Music for Intermediate, Federal Govt. (1980)
-Member Board of Selection for Shah Latif Awards Govt. of Sindh (1989).
-Member Board fo Studies, faculty of Studies Sindh University.
-Member of Shamsulmah Mirza Kalig Baig Chair Sindh University.
Fellowship and Vsits Abroad:
Britain , on fellowship of Thomson College of Journalism, England for graduation -1968
USSR as member of Goodwill delegation on the invitation of APN 1974.
Please enter your account password. Your password and registered e-mail address will be checked against the accounts on other wikis to confirm that they match. No changes will be made until you have confirmed that things are in order.
What I get is . . .
The home wiki for this account (listed below) has a different password to the one you entered. Please enter the password for the home wiki.
The password and e-mail address set at this wiki will be used for your unified account.
pt.wikipedia.org (home wiki)
Problem is that I'm not Portuguese and this is not my account.
The user name Auriel is registered there but it is not me and doesn't have an email registered to the account.
I'm registered with the same id and password on several Wiki projects and just thought it would be a good idea to consolidate them into one id and password if possible.
I know for sure that I'm currently registered as Auriel on . . .
http://toolserver.org/~vvv/sulutil.php?user=Auriel shows the pt account has 204 edits and none of your accounts have more than 41. The right to unification normally goes to the account with the most edits. See meta:Help:Unified login#Someone is using my name on another wiki, how can I get that account? The pt account has not edited since May 2009 and will probably remain at 204 edits. If you pass the pt edit count at one wiki and the pt account has not requested unification by that time then you should automatically get the unification right. If you want unification without passing 204 edits and without changing your account name then it's tricky. I'm not sure of all the rules and possibilities but I doubt you can get the pt account renamed without the owner agreeing, and that's a problem if the owner cannot even be contacted. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:43, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Editing statistics
Hi there, sorry if this request is in the wrong place - please tell me where to post instead if it is.
I'm desperate to find statistics on the proportion of edits made to different namespaces in wikipedia. Mainly, my question is what proportion of total wikipedia edits go strictly to articles, as opposed to talk pages, the user namespace, the wikipedia namespace and all the other namespaces? A breakdown by section would be ideal. And obviously the more up to date the better.
Please don't point me to a general statistics page, I've spent ages looking everywhere and I can't find anywhere that has the answer. Please reply if you know somewhere with this specific information or something approximate, or if you know a better place to post the question. Thedarkfourth (talk) 06:35, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an idea you could try: go to Special:RecentChanges and use the "namespace" filter to view the most recent 500 changes in each namespace, and use the timestamps to see the relative editing rates. When I tried this just now, 500 edits in the article namespace had spanned just 9 minutes, in Talk, 115 minutes, in User 57 minutes, and so on. Any use? -- John of Reading (talk) 07:15, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I found a 2009 doctoral thesis which analysed this. It's here, the bar-graph on page 113. Annoyingly, it doesn't show the actual figures, I don't think - but it looks like about 40% articles, 15% talks, 25% user talk. Chzz ► 12:32, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Copy/Paste Prevention
Hello,
I think that there is a big issue with Wikipedia: students can easily copy information directly from the articles for homework. I see this very often, and find it very dishonest for other students who do their research themselves and really get involved in the homework. I know that it is impossible to completely prevent people from copying information, but it is possible to prevent right clicking for example (using javascript), and probably highlighting too. Maybe this could dissuade some of the students. Ideally, this could be applied to all the articles on Wikipedia, or at least on the ones that are copied most often.
Disallowing copying also makes it harder from editors to improve the articles. On the upside, since Wikipedia is so visible in Google, anytime a professor or teacher searches for part of an article that was copied from Wikipedia, it will show up in the results, so any cheaters will be caught if the teacher makes an effort to unmask them. - 194.60.106.38 (talk) 08:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As a teacher, I can tell you its easier than that. I would estimate that 75% or more of the students who chose to cheat by copying text from Wikipedia didn't event bother to make any effort to hide that they were doing so; to the point where the work they turned in even had blue words in it. Cheaters are interested in getting credit for work at the lest effort possible; at some point it becomes easier to just do the assignment correctly... --Jayron3214:59, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If everybody knew how to look things up on Wikipedia, we almost wouldn't need the Help desk, because the answers to most questions here already exist somewhere on Wikipedia. Thus at least some people (those who have questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia) could benefit from getting better at looking things up here. If students are going to consult Wikipedia anyway, perhaps some of their assignments could be specifically to do that. Looking something up on Wikipedia is trivially easy if you know the exact title of it. Lookups become difficult when someone has a need but does not know the specific terminology Wikipedia uses to describe it, or when someone fails to articulate their real goal while focusing on what is merely the path they have chosen to pursue their goal. If a better path exists, no one may realize that is what the questioner really wants. Thus an educator might assign students the type of ill-posed or misleading questions that are common on the Help desk, which often defy easy lookup even when the answers exist on Wikipedia. Given the spread of free question-answering resources on the Web, maybe students should not train so much to look up answers, but how to ask questions the smart way. In any case, the whole point of Wikipedia is to make a large subset of human knowledge easier to look up. The effect on traditional education may be similar to the effect of the calculator, which has made it less necessary for people to maintain their own arithmetic skills such as long division. --Teratornis (talk) 20:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've absolutely no idea what the above means.
We won't disable R-click, because it's useful to copy paste.
If people use our content for good, or bad, that's not important; it's free. Copy it.
What are the guidelines regarding current lawsuits?
Hi
I was wondering if there were any rules or guidelines about incorporating information regarding current, ongoing lawsuits into articles. I recently added information to the Judas page about the lawsuit that has recently been launched against Lady Gaga for copyright infringement. The information came from here, here and here. However the information was removed by an editor who said that "Untill and unless lawsuits are proven, we dont add them as they would be CRYSTAL". This to me does not make sense as I made no allusion or suggestion to the outcome of the lawsuit, I simply stated that the lawsuit had been made. The fact there is a lawsuit out there is irrefutable, there is absolutely no WP:CRYSTAL elements whatsoever. Can anyone advise on the correct procedure in this case? Do I have the 'right' to include this lawsuit information in the article? Many thanks! Paul75 (talk) 08:32, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The next step is to start a discussion on the article talk page. I'm with you on Crystal, not buying it, although I would be more sympathetic to a WP:NOT#NEWS argument, especially in a GA.--SPhilbrickT12:01, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In the U.S., particularly, any idiot can start a lawsuit on the flimsiest of grounds, or on no grounds whatsoever. Unless the suit has made a really significant splash in the news, it's extremely unlikely to be notable, and mention of it is likely to fall afoul of WP:UNDUE as well. --Orange Mike | Talk12:41, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that it is a lawsuit isn't relevant. The consideration is, whether this information is worth including, or giving undue prominence to something that, in the context of the biography, is a trivial event. Personally, I tend to think it is too trivial to mention; I'm sure all big stars have lawsuits brought against them all the time. I appreciate that it's mentioned on a couple of news-websites, but it's hardly a big headline; plus, the news articles aren't actually saying anything at all about Gaga, other than she's named in the suit.
Yes, I know it is not something that can be done easy like page moving/renaming, but I am hoping that an administrator or another experienced user can do it. --Peoplefromarizona (talk) 10:50, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this does not qualify for speedy renaming. You will have to make a proposal at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. A 72-character category name with zero Google hits except a Wikipedia template is likely to meet opposition. However, the category page should at least say it's about Austria-Hungary. I have added it.[6]PrimeHunter (talk) 13:10, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But look for a shorter name. "Purveyors to the Imperial and Royal Court" is already the longest name in the category, and making it 31 characters longer is not a good idea. Category names of that length are very rare. A suggestion like "Purveyors to the Court of Austria-Hungary" (41 characters) may have better chances. Austria-Hungary ended in 1918 and didn't speak English so I don't think we need a very long "official sounding" name which has actually never been used as far as I can tell. "Imperial" and "Empire" in the same name also sounds like something out of the Department of Redundancy Department. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:43, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We have an 'edit filter' which warns only users with few edits when they try to add an email address.
But, it was a warning; it said this;
Your edit has triggered an automated warning because it looks like you're trying to add an email address to this page. Doing that, especially with a personal email address, is usually a bad idea as it can attract large amounts of spam. Though there are a few legitimate reasons to include an email address, in most cases Wikipedia will remove email addresses that are added to articles or discussion pages.
If you want to communicate with a particular user via email, Wikipedia has a built-in email function you can use. If you would like to request general assistance, the fastest way is usually to post a question at the Help Desk. Wikipedia also provides a guide to asking for help — including via email — if you feel that is necessary.
If you still wish to continue with your edit, you may hit "Save page" again below, and it will be submitted as is. However, we would encourage you to consider carefully before posting a live email address on this site.
So, Vdzhuvinov could have ignored the warning and hit 'save' again, and it would have worked.
It worked for you, Bility, because you've made lots of edits.
Next time, Vdzhuvinov - if you know it is a reasonable use of an email address - ignore the warning and click 'save' a second time.
Sorry for the inconvenience, but, it stops a lot of people from inadvertently adding an email address, and thus getting loads of spam. It's filter 247, for anyone interested. Chzz ► 19:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Luke Evans page lockdown due to debate on notability of sexual preference
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
There has been a consensus reached long ago by Wikipedia that if a person of note/public figure has established they are GLBTQ in such a fashion as to be reliably sourced or cited, it is encyclopedic and valid for inclusion in their article. The reasons for this have been debated back and forth so many times, it has become exhausting. There needs to be an absolute and stated policy on this issue put into Wikipedia somewhere so that it can be referenced and these arguments can be avoided from now on.
GLBTQ people are a minority, and unlike minorities based on race or gender, they are not a minority that can be identified by sight. Because of this, it is a simple fact that all people are by and large presumed to be heterosexual unless otherwise stated. One of the straw man arguments you often hear is 'We don't state in every heterosexual's article that they are straight." That's because we don't have to, because - again - it is presumed unless otherwise stated.
The contributions of GLBTQ individuals to the arts, history, politics etc... are valid, and establishing their sexual identity is encyclopedic because the contributions of GLBTQ people should be documented. Even in California they have passed a law so that schools music include curriculum about the contributions of GLBTQ individuals. If we don't state that a person is gay within their biographical information, we disassociate them from the documenting of the accomplishments of gay people.
The fact that the Luke Evans page has been locked down and all information to his sexual preference removed is insulting and borders on offensive. The citation from his interview in The Advocate magazine is more that sufficient. The ludicrousness of this is so outrageous that it has attracted attention in the gay press. The time is now for an official policy on sexual preference in biographies to be set: is it or isn't it worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia? CouplandForever (talk) 16:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, this is the wrong place to post your request. The Help Desk is for questions about using Wikipedia. You may want to post your request at the village pump. TNXMan16:30, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The Mussolini-Montessori conflict described meeting the "citation needed" plea.
In the article on Maria Montessori, the "citation needed" here can well be explained by what follows the section: "Montessori was exiled by Mussolini mostly because[citation needed] she refused to compromise her principles and make the children into soldiers. She moved to Spain
At the AMI Montessori Centennial Celebration in Philadelphia PA, Dr. Phyllis Applebaum and I, Dr. Denyse DuBrucq, picked a table in the back for lunch after Mrs. Sitterly, heading the then Atlanta Training Center for Montessori Directresses, had finished her address. She came and sat with us and a few others. Phyllis was completing her dissertation on the life of Maria Montessori and had questioned her as to what happened in 1937-8 in Italy. To our surprise, Mrs. Sitterly broke out in tears. Upon getting her composure, she told us this recollection of the events: Mussolini had called Maria Montessori to his office for a meeting. Since she was an outstanding educator in Italy, he demanded she teach his political philosophy to the children. She, on principle, refused and he first sigged his lion on her and then had her arrested. Dr. and Mrs. Sitterly were visiting and working with her in Italy at the time. They were British citizens. To avoid Maria Montessori's imprisonment, Dr. Sitterly volunteered to serve her sentence. He remained in prison in Italy while Mrs. Sitterly accompanied Maria Montessori to Spain.
At this time, I am not sure of the spelling of the Sitterly last name. Times can be tough even for educators. Phyllis Appelbaum is on the education faculty at New York State University on Long Island. She may be retired by now, but getting ahold of her will verify this report of the experience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.174.225 (talk) 18:57, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion belongs on the article's talk page. But in any case, information must be verifiable through published references. It may well be that Dr Appelbaum can verify the information, but she is unlikely to be willing to do so for every Wikipedia editor who wishes to verify it, and in any case at some time it will become impossible to do so. --ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Article Feedback Tool - can't disable it
I have Don't show the Article feedback widget on pages ticked in my preferences, yet the **** thing still keeps appearing on pretty well every page. HELP!! What's worse, I'm mainly working on stubs, which in my view shouldn't be rated anyway. Jan1naD(talk • contrib)19:45, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, when I first set the preference, but that was a week or two ago. I've just done it again and it works. Do I have to do this every time I restart Windows? I use Firefox 3.6 with XP SP3. Jan1naD(talk • contrib)20:13, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I'm the author of a number of books about films and filmmakers, and I've been looking at some of the entries for some of the films I've written about. My books are usually cited in the bibliographies (for which I am always grateful), but I'm somewhat dissatisfied by the level of discourse in the "reviews" or "critical reception" categories. Since I know these films very, very well, I'm wondering what the wikidefinition of "review" is. Must a "review" be published in a newspaper or magazine (for instance) as the response to a film that is being shown somewhere at the time, or is the definition broad enough to include the opinions of - well - ME! as I state them in critically successful biographies?
Thanks,
Ed Sikov — Preceding unsigned comment added by EdSikov (talk • contribs) 19:53, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A review is like any other source, it has to meet the guidelines at WP:RS. So they can be reviews in the mainstream press, established websites such as Rotten Tomatoes, or indeed books that meet RS guidelines. I would, however, caution you against adding references to your own books (if that's the genesis of your question) as that could be considered spamming. A better idea would be to use the talk page of relevant articles to discuss. – ukexpat (talk) 19:58, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that Wikipedia has its own jargon. What you call an "entry" is probably what Wikipedia calls an "article". What you call a "category" might be what Wikipedia calls a "section". The word "category" has a specific technical meaning on Wikipedia - a navigation feature for grouping related articles together. It would help if you linked to the specific page where you saw the word "review" (if there is such a page) so we know what context you are bringing into the question with it. That is, you could link to one of the pages containing the discourse you find dissatisfying. Confusingly, there is a Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Review page which seems to use the word to mean something different than a critical review of a film. Instead that page seems to refer to review by Wikipedia editors of an article about a film (i.e. the quality of our article rather than of the film). The articles we think are of the highest quality we call featured articles; you could peruse the featured film articles and see if they satisfy you better. In principle, any article which is not yet featured needs to be improved, so we would expect dissatisfaction with non-featured articles. On the Help desk the first people to respond tend to be generalists, who may not understand domain-specific nuances - the film experts might not see your question here. I suggest reading the Wikipedia:WikiProject Film pages to learn about the guidelines specific to film-related articles, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film might be a good place to get the attention of people who have more detailed knowledge. --Teratornis (talk) 20:43, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. This is the help desk for the English-language Wikipedia. You will have to ask at the Portuguese-Language one regarding the article deletion there. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:27, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea if this is the correct place, as I seldom need to address technical issues.
I use the Google Chrome browser, and since about 15 minutes ago, most articles and pages are coming up as "mobile version". Even hitting the "permanently disable" button doesn't change this. Its happening at commons and at meta too (haven't check other projects. The weird part is happens in some places (like the main page) but not others (like here). Firefox works fine as does IE. The issue seems to be Chrome only, at least for me.--Cerejota (talk) 20:55, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It happened to me too - in Firefox. Clicking the "permanently disable mobile site" link at the bottom of the page fixed it. – ukexpat (talk) 21:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The word "hell" is replaced with "@#!*%" in nearly every religion article I read today. Is this Wikipedia policy? Also, if I click on "@#!*%" it takes me to the article on the "@" symbol. I've never seen another word replaced like this in Wikipedia. Please advise. Thanks!
Where is this going on? That's not permitted by Wikipedia policy; I'll get to reverting it. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:VSM21:29, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
regarding the "@#!*%" replacement...nevermind
apparently the Net Nanny software on my wife's computer automatically replaces this word to "protect" the kids from such vile language. Sorry to waste your time!
Most of the time, I have no problem with sound files. However, when they are grouped together in charts like this one, the charts rapidly become crowded with once-played files. I have started to wonder: why is there no way to close sound files after use? Or is this just an issue with my computer? Interchangeable|talk to me|what I've changed22:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The simple answer is when you're done listening, click "More..." then at the bottom click "no player" to make the big grey bar retract.
The more complicated answer is that Wikipedia really does need to completely redo their native support, since its lacking in a few areas. Problem is that doing something like that takes a ton of resources, resources that the WMF is unwilling, or more likely unable, to expend at this time. Unless it breaks, the media suite is at the low end of a very long list of priorities for the technical staff.
If someone could find the Bugzilla report asking for this specific issue to be fixed, I would say that you could go to Bugzilla and "vote" for it to become a priority, but I'm not sure how much of an impact that actually has. Sven ManguardWha?22:51, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WORLDS STRICTIST PARENTS
I watched an hour show this afternoon titled WORLDS STRICTIST PARENTS and I want to get a copy of it to show my friends who have kids like that.
Thanks.
Frankie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.12.130 (talk) 23:49, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.7 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck.Template:Z25 —teb728tc00:02, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
August 11
Links can not be displayed in IE8
IE8 cannot display the links of a web page which are displayed in IE7.If we put the compatibility view of IE8 those can be displayed.
Can you please provide the difference between IE7 and IE8 in code perspective?
Done
This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:12, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
PA 438 – East Benton
. It looks like this. I tried a few diacritic things, but can't get anything to work; even if it did, it might not be consistent.
bla bla bla 
bla bla bla" seems close enough for rock and roll. HausTalk 22:38, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Unprotected It's best to ask at WP:RFPP rather than the help desk, as that's where the page un/protection admins tend to hang out, but this was a clear case. BencherliteTalk 13:01, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Resolved
This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Humanities reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps.Avicennasis @ 19:51, 9 Av 5771 / 9 August 2011 (UTC)
In progress Ryan Vesey Review me! 14:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Resolved