The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.
How do I create a link to another page in Wikipedia, like when its blue and underlined and takes you somewhere else. Anna F C00:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You can often see how something is done by clicking edit (or view source for protected pages) on a page that does it. For example, the source for your above signature says [[User:Anna F C|Anna F C]] which creates a piped link called "Anna F C", but linking to User:Anna F C. PrimeHunter01:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can I request Wikipedia to create an article, though I don't want to be the one to write it? Can I do this without registering?
For example, I'd like to see Arthur Sulzberger's article expanded or a new article that addresses his role in fighting Zionism and his apathy towards the Holocaust.
This question relates to the subject of "temperature."
It is my understanding that "Absolute Zero Kelvin" is the lowest temperature that matter could possibly attain. When I read articles about cosmetology and astronomy I see temperatures mentioned of tens and even hundreds of millions of degrees.
My question is this: Has there ever been any theoretical (mathematical, etc.) work done to try and find out (establish) what, if any, is the absolute maximum temperature that is possible for "matter" and/or plasma to attain?
I created a page (Mark Wilkinson Music) my user ID is nman3912. However when i try to search for it using wikipedia search engine it doesnt come up. I think that i may have saved it as a JPG instead of an actualy Page. Im really lost. Help —Preceding unsigned comment added by nman3912 (talk • contribs)
Did you click search instead of go? Try clicking go if you've been using search. No, you didn't save it as JPG or anything like that. Tim Q. Wells06:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, you did a good job! If I remember correctly, the search function doesn't update immediately, but you can access the page by naming it exactly and clicking "Go".
Regarding the content - Wikipedia gets tons of new musicians every day. To have an article, a musician has to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. I think you've done a good job here, but you may want to review the rules here, just to make sure.
I'm planning to do an article on the sternwheeler Moyie this weekend, and as you can see, that title is available. However there is a Moyie Lake, Moyie River, Moyie Springs and an unwritten (but undoubtedly forthcoming) Moyie, British Columbia. In light of these other "Moyie" titled articles and articles to be, is now the time to think about making a disambiguation page? And should the simple title Moyie be saved for the unwritten town article? Because I could use Moyie (sternwheeler) instead.CindyBotalk07:07, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that makes sense. I do try and make the term sternwheeler clear in the articles, and link to paddle steamer right off the bat. Because you're right, it's hardly an everyday word. Thanks again for your help.CindyBotalk08:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Because, as I recall, the Wiki categories distinguish between sternwheelers and sidewheelers, even though the redirect-to article does not.Skookum117:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sir me from Pakistan. i am very good player of football "i dare say" that's way i wanna join your academy. sir please tell me how i join your acadmemy.
thanks
Name----Waseem
E-mail--- <e-mail address removed for privacy reasons>
Mobile no--- <phone number removed for privacy reasons>
You are in the wrong place; this is the help desk for Wikipedia - the free encyclopedia. We are not a football academy. If you wish to ask about joining a football academy you might want to use the Reference Desk. I have also removed your e-mail address and phone number to prevent spam. Raven4x4x09:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I created a page called Princess Marcella Borghese on Thursday, June 28, 2007 at approximately 20:30 EST. I do not have an account, and created the page anonymously.
I wrote an article entitled "Elvis Presleys favorite books" which was deleted because the people in charge said it was "bollocks", not well researched (there were 33 references), irrelevant etc.
One critic even went so far as to say, "Why not have a page on my favorite books?" Strange. I don't think they really understand what a cultural phenomon Elvis was and how much his fans want to know about him. Just for the record I didn't like his movies either.
The article titled 'Doncaster Lakers' needs to be changed because the club is now called 'Doncaster RLFC' how do I change this or can someone do this for me?
I changed the name for you. To change an article name, you need to move the page by clicking the move button. Once an account is more than 4 days old, you can move pages using your account. --Hdt83Chat16:46, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's a bug/glitch/problem with the MediaWiki program for anonymous users. Try purging your cache (Ctrl Shift R from Firefox, Ctrl F5 for Explorer), or quitting your browser and opening it again. Evilclown93(talk)17:39, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You could also create an account, and then have the message page only for messages specifically targeted to you, instead of to anyone using the anonymous address. Corvus cornix18:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can I use photos that appear in the pages of wikepedia on my website for free?
I'm so confused by Wikipedia! I'm trying so hard to figure this out. For starters, why can't I upload images that I own? Why am I being told I'm doing something wrong with photos I have permission to use? What do I need to include in the HTML to make this all better???
Do you contact me via this, or via my e-mail- <email removed for privacy>
A public domain image of a Russian stamp You should check the licensing information on that image's page. If the image is in the public domain or under a free license, it'll be ok to use (just check the terms of the license if you want to make any changes to the image). Some pictures are under copyright, however, so you should check with the holder of the copyright (who should be named on the image page) before you use them. For example, the image below is in the public domain, but this image is held under copyright (which is why I can't show it on this page).
Wikipedia itself holds no copyright on any information or images on this site. All material is licensed under the GFDL, unless otherwise stated as on the image pages.
If a particular item has been tagged with the "citation needed" tag since Februrary, can we delete that uncited item? What is the acceptable length of time to allow something uncited to remain in an article?
Primarily, one should try to find a source. If you can't find it, and no one else has been able to add one since February, I don't think it would be unreasonable to remove the item. It's something that have to be decided on a case by case basis though. Happy editing! Henrik20:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See also Wikipedia:Citing sources#Dealing with citation problems. If it's harmful, it should have been deleted long ago. If it's harmless then there is no fixed time limit. If it sounds dubious, it would probably be OK to delete it now. If it doesn't sound dubious and it's on a page with low edit frequency then I suggest you either search for a source (e.g. with Google) and remove it if you fail, or leave it if you don't want to spend time searching. What is the article? Then we can help better. PrimeHunter21:06, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
hi
I uploaded a photo and added to a wiki article. The only probelm is that i there is a box around the image. How do i fix that--Gustyfalcon21:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is about Jason Derek Brown I assume. It seems it has been fixed. You get that box if you add spaces before text
How do I get the userboxes on my user page to sit nice and not go all over the place? I am one of these people who communicates using the boxes and right now they are all over my user page.--Brianna Goldberg21:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is some info about this at Wp:userboxes#Grouping_userboxes but that might be a bit confusing (at least I thought so when I grouped my userboxes). I used the table method on my userpage, you could use the structure of that as an example if you choose to use a table (by clicking edit on my userpage and viewing the code). Each pair of boxes shows next to each other, and the |- creates a newline. ssepp(talk)21:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any particularly-efficacious way to contend with the flood of SPA's in this straw poll and the not-quite-3RR-violating insistence on change in violation of consensus? Permanent semi-protection of the page seems ridiculously extreme, and would just mean that all those SPA's would be creating throwaway accounts, instead of posting anonymously. Is this just destined to become a slow-burning WP:LEW? While we're at it, can anyone Goggle up any obvious WP:MEAT recruitment, such as blog or forum posts, for example? Jouster (whisper) 21:44, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If they signed the message, there should be a link back to the sender's talk page. If there isn't, you can always check the page history and see who sent it there. Then, once on the sender's talk page you can click the small "+" at the top of the page, which will allow you to create a new thread on the page. (spebi · talk) 22:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You need to go their talk page, either by clicking on their name (which normally leads to their user page) and then clicking discussion, or by entering User talk:(username) into the search box. The click the "+" at the top. ssepp(talk)22:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If it is not uploaded yet, need to upload it through Wikipedia:Upload (make sure to read the instructions well). Then you can include it in an article using the markup explained in Wikipedia:Images. Note that images that are not freely licensed can normally not be used in Wikipedia. ssepp(talk)22:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to upload an image from your computer onto Wikipedia, you must know what license is the image licensed under. You can't just upload any photo that you found off the Internet. I recommend reading the Wikipedia's image use policy before uploading the image. If you do know what license the image is under, you can upload it now by going to Special:Upload. If you upload an image under a false license, you will be blocked indefinitely.
On the other hand, if you want to add a picture that is already on Wikipedia to an article, you need to place [[Image:Image name.png|150px|thumb|right|Caption here]] to the article.
replace Image name.png with the exact filename of the picture
replace 150px with the size in pixels you want the picture to appear
replace thumb with frame, or you can leave it as it is.
replace right with either right, left, center or none; and
Many of the Town articles use the Geobox Settlement template, which contains a Mayor field. However, in many towns (e.g.-those in New York State), the town leader has the title Town Supervisor, not Mayor. Could someone please explain how to use the Geobox so that it says "Supervisor" when needed? Thanks. Truthanado22:45, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When I set up my account some months ago (User:Struway) I clicked the Remember me button, so it would log in automatically. Came back from holiday a couple of days ago, login working fine, suddenly today it wants me to log in explicitly i.e. to enter user name and password. So I enter what I'm pretty sure is my password, but apparently it isn't, and (stupid, I know) I didn't supply an email address so can't request a password to be sent.
I know I can create a new account (though it's a pity, as I was quite happy with the one I had), but was wondering if anyone knew why this might suddenly happen? 86.131.13.22222:51, 30 June 2007 (UTC) (who used to edit as Struway)[reply]
I may have - but other sites supposed to "remember me" still do, and that wouldn't explain my password not being what I know sincerely believe it to be. Thanks for replying, anyway; I've now created a new account, and supplied an email address, so if it happens again at least it'll be recoverable ;-) Struway2 | Talk08:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I posted a question up here most recently, and I'm wondering about something.
Wiki trolls are shredding wikipedia. Not just my soap box, the Otherkin page, but tons of them. People who go crazy on the small technicalities of Wikipedia's rules. Otherkin went from a 4 page article, very well written, neutral, and an excellent reference... even though I didn't completely agree with it... and because it used online references, it was ripped to shreds, now a tiny article that even includes a references to Clinical Lycanthropy, which has nothing to do with the belief, and uses a reference from a website maintained by a skeptical teacher who's admittedly biased, but say that the recently published book about otherkin isn't valid, because she wrote books about things they don't find valid, like animal magick and alchemy. Even though those are published, too.
Sometimes common sense is thrown into the wind in favor of obsessive technicality, ruining the greatest thing about wikipedia: it's the online source of information about obscure topics. Yeah, you can read about the Holocaust, for instance, in any random encyclopedia. But you want to read about Otherkin, or some other obscure, fringe topic, and it's available on wikipedia... at least, up until a few years ago. Tons of pages are getting shredded to bits. Some of it's valid, but they're not using common sense in a number of cases, but an obsession with technicality instead.
I can't really do editing stuff, because I don't understand HTML and related things. But even if the 3 year long battle to the death on the Otherkin article is finally resolved, it doesn't fix the problem that caused it.
How can we fix wikipedia's current, inherent flaw: wiki trolls? How can a movement be made, to change and fix wikipedia back to it's original beauty? There has to be something that can be done. It pains me to see obscure, but accurate articles disappear into oblivion because the information about them only exists online. The internet is such a massive tool for data sharing, a lot of information about some subjects can only be found online. Why should those subjects be entirely discarded? Why is a website dedicated to the study and publishing of it's findings, made by a passionate user, less valid than a random reporter, putting in some comment in the news?
Wikipedia needs a makeover. Maybe this place isn't the best place to ask this, but where is? What can be done? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RubyCona (talk • contribs)
Wikipediais not for everyone, but that is not immediately apparent to a number of new users. Only after gaining some experience on Wikipedia can people see how well it fits with their particular agendas. As you are probably aware, the world is full of many sharp disagreements; in some cases, people are even willing to die or kill over differences in belief. Given that Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that (almost) anyone can edit, that raises questions about how Wikipedia can avoid descending into endless edit warring. (Actually since the edit warring around here is endless, the real question is how to keep a lid on it.) The answers are in Wikipedia's policies of WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, and WP:RS. Those documents do a better job of explaining themselves than I can here, so read them as many times as you need to understand them.
If you have content you want to edit on a wiki, but Wikipedia deletes it, then go find another wiki with different content policies that favor your point of view. There are thousands of public wikis; see: List of wikis for a very incomplete list, and search WikiIndex for a lot more. You might, for example, prefer to edit on WikInfo because it rejects the neutral point of view in favor of the sympathetic point of view, and welcomes original research. You might also think about starting your own wiki if you can't find an existing wiki you like. --Teratornis00:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I should also point out that Wikipedia's survivability is not in question at the moment, with 48,305,881 registered user accounts and 6,914,785 articles, both numbers continuing to burgeon. That is why Wikipedia has the luxury of deleting up to several pages per minute. Wikipedia has no problem getting vast amounts of content which complies with its policies. But for some odd reason, it seems many contributors of noncompliant content are unaware of the existence of other wikis which might welcome their content. Wikipedia is not the "only game in town" (or, more specifically the only wiki), yet it seems to be the only wiki many people have heard of. Wikipedia was, for example, the first wiki I looked seriously at. When a new user creates a new article, there is no obvious mention of the fact that other wikis exist, and the new user should first determine the most appropriate wiki for the article he or she wants to create. I think if that message could be gotten across to new users clearly somehow, it might save everyone a lot of grief. --Teratornis00:22, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To the original poster, your use of "my soap box" indicates that you have not read WP:SOAP. To boil down all the Wikipedia rules into a single sentence: Wikipedia is focused on organizing online (and sometimes print) references, not specifically truth or fact. In other words, there are many things on Wikipedia that are not true, but they are referenced. So, they stay. There are many things on Wikipedia that are completely true, but not referenced. So, they get removed. -- Kainaw(what?)00:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was just about to post the same thing. The fact that you refer to a Wikipedia article as "my soap box" is disturbing. Do you really understand the purpose of Wikipedia? Corvus cornix18:31, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By typing the following code: [[:Image:Image file name.png]] – replace Image file name.png with the actual filename. This same method can be used to display text-only links for Categories, and transclude pages in the article namespace (e.g. {{:Main Page}} transcludes the main page). (spebi · talk) 23:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
