Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2010 February 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Help desk
< February 7 << Jan | February | Mar >> February 9 >
Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
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.


February 8[edit]

Help with formatting[edit]

Resolved

Please assist I'm having a problem formatting two references (#28—{{Citation|title=Sikhism, A Complete Introduction... and 35—{{Citation|title=Sikhs and Sikhism...) on Vegetarianism in Sikhism. I don't know what I'm doing wrong. Can someone please assist me? —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 01:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I have done it..still a few need templates ..i will let you edit ..then come back to them...Tks for taking the time to improve the article !!!..Buzzzsherman 01:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

my watchlist only partially updating[edit]

I edited "Fuel economy in automobiles" twice today. This edit does not appear in my watchlist: (cur) (prev) 2010-02-08T11:59:21 Adamtester (talk | contribs) (37,744 bytes) (L/100km -> km/L conversion method was just plain wrong) (undo) Any ideas why not? Ta —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamtester (talkcontribs) 02:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Two reasons I can think of: (1) only the most recent edit to an article appears in your watchlist, and (2) your edits don't appear in your watchlist. Both of these, of course, are only by default, so if you've fiddled with your settings they may not apply to you. Have you tried purging, as well? Xenon54 / talk / 02:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Under the Watchlist tab at Special:Preferences is an option "Expand watchlist to show all changes, not just the most recent". It sounds like you don't have it enabled. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
You also might want to check to make sure that you didn't accidentally remove the page from your watchlist. Nyttend (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Adding copyright tags[edit]

Dear editors:

I have created and edited the page "2009 flu pandemic in Taiwan" Pictures and graphs uploaded were all from public domains in Taiwan. However, I have a problem adding copyright tags to these pictures and kept receiving warning from Wiki that they will be removed. The instructions are more about the rationale of using pictures rather than a step-by-step protocol of adding copyright tags to them.Tsungpei (talk) 03:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC) Tsungpei

The primary problem seems to be that you have not listed on the description page, the source of where you downloaded the images from. This source is required, so that other editors can VERIFY, that you actually retrieved the files form an official government source. You have only stated that these items are in the public domain in taiwan. But you should also specify author (which government organization) and the url you downloaded the file from. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 09:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Which AfD deletion category for a non-fiction book?[edit]

Resolved: Article deleted per Afd. – ukexpat (talk) 19:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The nearest choices are "Media and music" and "Fiction and the arts". Have you seen a non-fiction book at AfD, and if so, do you remember how it was sorted? Yappy2bhere (talk) 03:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

There's Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Side By Side The Revolutionary Mother-Daughter Program for Conflict-Free Communication, which was sorted into "Media and music". I think that category is more appropriate than "Fiction and the arts". --Mysdaao talk 04:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

the same  ????[edit]

I would like to know if ' smile train ' is different from ' operation smile ' of which I am a regular contributor . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.33.191 (talk) 05:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Do you refer to this Operation Smile? Note that this Help desk is for questions about using Wikipedia. For general knowledge questions, ask on the Reference desk. --Teratornis (talk) 06:51, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
See also Smile Train which mentions Operation Smile. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Remove "show" in Navbox[edit]

Resolved:  – ukexpat (talk) 19:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for crossposting the same question. Since it is an issue for this featured list candidacy it is somewhat urgent. How do I get rid of the "[show]" in Template:Navbox with collapsible groups? (also see here) bamse (talk) 08:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Just don't make that last element of Template:Cultural_Properties_of_Japan a navbox child. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 08:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Or you can add the |state = off parameter to each of the groups in the navbox, as described at Template:Navbox with collapsible groups (if I've understood the question correctly). Gonzonoir (talk) 08:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the replies. @TheDJ: If I remove the navbox child, I get the wrong background color (light blue instead of green, see User:Bamse/template#Cultural_Properties). How do I fix this? @Gonzonoir: If I put "state=off" everywhere, I'd remove all of the "[show]", but I only want to get rid of the last "[show]", next to "Buried Cultural Properties". bamse (talk) 10:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, you are right. I don't see a way around that. Per Gonzonoir, I have now disabled the show/hide of the specific child, but unfortunately that messes with the center alignment of the header. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 11:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Solved by using the "plain" setting instead of the "off" setting. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 11:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
That fixes the offset and background colour problems, but doesn't actually display the contents of that child element - bamse, is that what you were after? Gonzonoir (talk) 11:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks to both of you. It is basically what I was after. (I was thinking of having "Cultural Properties of Japan" expanded as default (such that there are nine lines in total), but the way it is now is very nice as well.) bamse (talk) 13:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Showing A Table But Only Some Rows And Collapsing The Rest[edit]

Is there anyway to have a table such as in 1903_Tour_de_France#General_classification, but showing "ranks 1-10", and then collapsing the rest? I am trying to bring the two tables together, then collapsing the lower rows. How do I define how many rows to collapse?

see me.174.3.98.236 (talk) 08:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

There isn't a way to collapse only some rows in one table, but two tables put can be put closer together to create a similar appearance. By adding "margin:0px" to the style for both tables, there is no whitespace between them, so it displays the first ten rows and then the next ten rows are collapsed. I've made these changes to 1903 Tour de France#General classification. It's not exactly the same as if it were all one table, but it's as close as it can get. --Mysdaao talk 14:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Help with a dodgy category[edit]

Please assist I generated a list of every article that is under Category:Zoroastrianism and found the following:

Needless to say, none of these have to do with Zoroastrianism except in the most tenuous way. Can someone figure out how (e.g.) Category:Monaco apparently became a subcategory of Category:Zoroastrianism? Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 10:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Addendum I have a list of the subcategories to Category:Zoroastrianism here. I would do this myself, but as you might be able to tell, I am getting dreary and tired. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 10:09, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Are you absolutely sure your list generation worked properly? I can't see most of the subcategories in your list from the Category:Zoroastrianism page, and I can't find a category navigation route that gets me up from 1929 Monaco Grand Prix to Category: Zoroastrianism. Gonzonoir (talk) 10:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Category:Monaco, Category:Massalian colonies, Category:Ancient Massalia, Category:Phocaean colonies, Category:Phocaea, Category:Ionian League, Category:Ionia, Category:Achaemenid satrapies in Anatolia, Category:Achaemenid satrapies, Category:Achaemenid Empire, Category:Zoroastrian dynasties and rulers, Category:Zoroastrianism. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Wow Thanks. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 22:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

how do I "Review" an article?[edit]

I have consulted an article and above the New Article I have a message saying it has not been reviewed. Is this something done by contributors or Wikipedia personnel?Oscaroliver (talk) 10:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

It would help if you told us which article you're thinking of. Dismas|(talk) 11:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
For general information, you would get a message like this automatically on new articles created through the Article Wizard. These messages are added automatically, not manually, and can be removed when someone other than the article's creator has reviewed the article and addressed any issues they see in it. To clarify a point in your question: all Wikipedia contributors are volunteers; the articles aren't maintained by official personnel. I will paste some links on your talk page to help you start to find your way around. Gonzonoir (talk) 11:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

editing city pages (adding second image, map with pin, etc)[edit]

hello, I'm trying to work on a page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_Meadows ) to update it, I've already been able to move the city seal from the bottom up to the top, but I'm trying to add a second image below it , which is stuck at the bottom of the page as well, and I'd like to add the map and map pin to the right side box with the second image, much like the one in this page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schaumburg,_Illinois ) maybe someone here has more experience in this than I do... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Compudude86 (talkcontribs) 13:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The two pages are using different infobox templates, which I suspect is the cause of the confusion. Rolling Meadows has Template:Chicagoland municipality, while Schaumburg,_Illinois uses Template:Infobox settlement. The former doesn't support all the parameters of the latter, including the pushpin map. If you want to get those effects, I think you'll need to add the Infobox settlement template to the Rolling Meadows article, and populate the following parameters:
| image_skyline           = <!-- place the name of the image from the bottom of the article, including the .jpg suffix, here -->
| pushpin_map             = Illinois
| pushpin_label_position  = <!-- the position of the pushpin label: left, right, top, bottom, none -->
| pushpin_map_alt         = <!-- alt text for the map goes here -->
| pushpin_map_caption     = Location within the state of Illinois
| latd  = <!-- latitude degrees value -->  |latm  = <!-- latitude minutes value --> |lats  = <!-- latitude seconds value --> |latNS  = <!-- latitude North/South: do the same for longitude values below -->
| longd =  |longm =  |longs =  |longEW = 
| coordinates_type        = region:US_type:city
| coordinates_display     = inline,title

Just replace the commented-out text (the stuff inside <!-- these -->) with the real values and it should get the result you want. Gonzonoir (talk) 15:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Personnel of a Company[edit]

So I have searched and tried and experimented for over a week now and my pages keep getting deleted. I am doing a write-up on a company and I wanted to do little "biographies" about the owner, general manager, etc, and then link that person to the Official website where there is more information on them. But everytime I do this, someone comes along and deletes my page. Wikipedia is not clear on how to make this legit, so I was wondering if you can help me out? I would be extremely grateful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjreuter (talkcontribs) 14:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC) Mjreuter (talk) 14:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)Melody

Articles about people on Wikipedia have to meet notability guidelines described at Wikipedia:Notability (people). What it says is that people are considered notable if there has been independent coverage of the person in multiple reliable sources. An article is less likely to be deleted if it has sources that establishes the subject's notability. I suggest you create a userspace draft, which is a page you can work on and ask for feedback on whether the subject is notable, without the risk of it being deleted. --Mysdaao talk 15:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

But if I attached the link to the official website to the person Im doing the biography on, wouldnt that be enough? Here's what I was doing: I have the main page, about the company's history, etc, and I have the employees in there. And then from there I was going to do a small write-up on each employee, and when I clicked on that persons name, it brought me to a blank page where you can write, and so I would give some personal info about that person, like where they went to school, etc and then I just put the official website's link under the smaller write up. So if that link isnt enough to make it notable, what else should I be doing, because I have read through the Notability section many times and it doesn't help me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjreuter (talkcontribs) 15:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC) --Mjreuter (talk) 15:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Notability requires that the subject must have received substantial coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources - for example, that the person in question has had lots of books, newspaper articles, journal papers, and so on written about them. A link to the official website wouldn't be enough: that would work for the verifiability requirement, which confirms that the person exists, but notability is a tougher standard. It requires that the person not only verifiably exists, but has received lots of coverage from independent sources – the official website would be a primary source, not an independent source. Is that any clearer? Gonzonoir (talk) 15:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

So, basically the most I can do is just name them in the main article and then do an official website link from there, I can't actually do individual write-ups on them? And if thats the case, does it even pay to put an "employees" section on the page? Or should I just do a writeup on the history and what we do and are about? --Mjreuter (talk) 15:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I'd say you're better off leaving out the "employees" part, as you suggest. (I suspect people are going to jump on you for the "does it pay" phrasing - Wikipedia isn't supposed to be about getting anybody paid, but I know it's just a turn of phrase.) You'll also need to make sure that you are showing that the company itself meets the notability criteria - it too must have been the subject of books, newspaper coverage, etc. in order to stay in Wikipedia.
If all this sounds like it doesn't fit your remit, maybe Wikipedia isn't the place for your content? We do have a list of other outlets that would let you host information without having to meet the notability standards Wikipedia sets for its encyclopedia articles. Gonzonoir (talk) 15:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
All your deleted articles were unsourced. A company website or other publications by a company are not independent from the people working at the company and cannot be used to establish notability of those people per Wikipedia:Notability (people). If there are no significant independent reliable sources about the people then they don't belong in Wikipedia and there is no legit way to write articles about them. See also Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay this helps a lot. Im super new to Wikipedia, obviously :) But I have another question, for the company itself you said it needs more than just the official website linked on the page. So if there was a write up about our company in a local newspaper or a magazine, I could use that too? --Mjreuter (talk) 15:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes you could, but see WP:CORP and WP:RS for more on notability and sources. As mentioned above, you also appear to have a conflict of interest so please also see WP:COI. – ukexpat (talk) 15:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm trying to find a user's IP address...can I do that?[edit]

I'm trying to find out the IP address of KellyPR124 who you can see has previously edited this page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Amess&action=history

Is this possible?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.80.171 (talk) 15:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Only someone with checkuser permissions can find out the IP address of a registered user. Why do you want to find it out? Gonzonoir (talk) 15:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
While some have that ability, a registered user's IP address is only going to be revealed in very specific circumstances described in the privacy policy. There is no need to reveal KellyPR124's IP address. The user's edits have been vandalism, but all the vandalism has been undone, and if it continued, the user would be blocked from editing. --Mysdaao talk 15:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
If you believe that KellyPR124 is using multiple accounts in a way that violates Wikipedia policy (not every use of multiple accounts would do that, but maintaining multiple accounts solely to vandalize certainly DOES, see Wikipedia:Sock puppetry) then you could file a request at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations and a checkuser will look into the problem. You would likely need some diffs of concrete evidence that establishes the connection between the KellyPR124 account and other accounts or IP address, checkusers typically do not open an investigation on pure speculation. Also, if you need some more help with the technical aspects of filing an SPI report (it can be a bit daunting for the inexperienced) let me or another experienced editor know, and I can help you work through it. --Jayron32 21:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Adding a reference to Top Gear (magazine) article[edit]

Resolved:  – ukexpat (talk) 18:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to add a reference about Top Gear magazine's 200th issue. I managed to locate a suitable page to back up the statement I've written. I previewed my post and it said I needed to add the reference to the reference list at the bottom of the page. How do I do this? Thanks. Chevymontecarlo (talk) 17:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I tried to edit the list, but I can't add any details to it because it just shows up as a 'reflist' Chevymontecarlo (talk) 17:21, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

So you added a <ref>...</ref> pair after the statement you added. If it is not already in the article, the {{reflist}} template needs to be added like this:
   ==References==
   {{reflist}}
See almost any other article to see how this works in practice. Astronaut (talk) 18:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
You have to add the reference in line with the text. At the place in the article where you want to add it, place the reference within ref tags, eg <ref>Reference text here</ref>, and it will show up in the list of refs generated by {{Reflist}}. If you are feeling more brave, use one the citation templates as explained at WP:CITE. – ukexpat (talk) 18:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Chevymontecarlo (talk) 18:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Table in talk page[edit]

Resolved:  – ukexpat (talk) 19:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

How can I force a table to appear in the exact same order it appears in the Wiki source, so that contributions in a talk page will be associated with the correct editor? See Talk:Conversion between Julian and Gregorian calendars.

The table wasn't formatted correctly. It was missing the last |}. That is why it wasn't appearing in the right place. I have corrected this at Talk:Conversion between Julian and Gregorian calendars#February 29, 1700. --Mysdaao talk 17:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Resolved, thank you. Jc3s5h (talk) 18:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome! --Mysdaao talk 20:09, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Tab key function on edit screen[edit]

Resolved:  – ukexpat (talk) 04:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I use Firefox 3.0.11 to edit. Until this morning I was able to tab directly from the edit pane to the edit summary box without stopping at the intermediate links, such as the link to Wikipedia:Verifiability. (Internet Explorer wouldn't let me do that - perhaps the main reason I am using Firefox.) This morning... no more. Now I actually have to scroll down and look for and find the edit summary box before I can complete the edit. Meanwhile, nothing has changed when I edit on the Commons: the tab there works the same as it always did. (For what it's worth, this change on Wikipedia coincided with another change where the text in the edit pane grew much larger and more widely spaced so that I can only see a smaller portion of what I'm working on. I don't like that change either, but on its own it wouldn't be worth whinging about.) What happened? What can I do to get back the old functionality? —Ipoellet (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You can try to disable Experimental features under Editing at Special:Preferences. You may also be interested in Wikipedia:Keyboard shortcuts. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Disabling the experimental features did the trick - thanks. I also appreciate the tip about the shortcuts. — Ipoellet (talk) 03:44, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Adding IPA[edit]

Is there a Wiki-project which has a mission to add IPA where it is needed, or is adding {{Need-IPA}} sufficient? Astronaut (talk) 17:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

One of the daughter WikiProjects of Wikipedia:WikiProject Linguistics probably concerns itself with that. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 20:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Storage Heater[edit]

looking for info on storage heater divi system----------<blanked>

Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our roughly three million articles, and thought that we were directly 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 a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand 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. TNXMan 19:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I have also removed your email address to prevent the spambots that crawl the web from picking it up. TNXMan 19:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Purchase[edit]

how can i purchase a documentary seen on ancient almanac?19:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edward clayton (talkcontribs)

Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our roughly three million articles, and thought that we were directly 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 a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand 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. TNXMan 19:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Maybe contact the History Channel? – ukexpat (talk) 19:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Creating accounts for other people[edit]

If you go to WP:Request an account, you can, well, request an account. When you do, where does your request go to? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You can register to be an account creator. The details are at WP:Request an account/Guide on how to become one. The requests are routed to them to confirm everything and set up the account. TNXMan 20:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
(e/c) The [tool used for the request an account process is hosted on the toolserver. The toolserver is run by Wikimedia Deutschland, Germany's local chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation. Once a request is submitted, there are established users, called "clerks", who have access to the administrative parts of the tool and manually action requests when they are not otherwise engaged. Xenon54 / talk / 20:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Is this the page were the requests go? Also, when I tried to log in to it, it said my password was incorrect. Is this because I do not have permission to view it? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Did you register a username/password (which is separate from your Wikipedia login)? There's a link below the entry fields where you log in to the tool's page. TNXMan 19:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Posting Business on Wikipedia[edit]

I am authorized to post my business on Wikipedia but keep having my page removed. is there someone on Wikipedia that gives specific instructions on how to create a page for your company?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Melbrand (talkcontribs)

Couple of points, you should not create an article about your own business, see WP:COI. For notability guidelines for companies etc see WP:CORP. Also please note that Wikipedia is neither a free webhost nor a medium to advertise your business. – ukexpat (talk) 20:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
So, if you think it will pass our guidelines on notability, you can ask for an article to be created by going to WP:REQUEST. If it is created, our guidelines basically say that except for trivial edits, you should use the article's talk page to make suggestions about the article rather than edit it directly. Please note that I've just deleted it, partially because it was copyright violation (yes, it's your company, but without permission being given officially to Wikipedia, which effectively voids your copyright, you can't do that), and obvious advertising with language like "our company). Please don't recreate it. And don't take this personally, everyone would love to use Wikipedia to advertise. Dougweller (talk) 20:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

theroy of evolution.[edit]

I was searching for theroy of evolution, but was redirected to "evolution". Once on this page, it is nothing clearly indicating it as theroy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.186.80.1 (talk) 20:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

There are many parts of the article that explain observations, measurements, and tests of evolution. Therefore, it is a theory. Please understand that "theory" when used in "theory of evolution" does not mean "a whacky idea that some dude had a long time ago". It means "a set of testable observations". The observations have been (and continue to be) tested all the time. -- kainaw 20:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Further, please see evolution as theory and fact. -- kainaw 20:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
While not the best place to address this question, but since there was this confusion, perhaps moving the redirect to evolution as theory and fact would be a better. Tiggerjay (talk) 05:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Just to be safe, maybe we need a redirect for theroy of evolution. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:05, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
The IP was right about being redirected when searching "theroy of evolution". It finds Theroy of Evolution! PrimeHunter (talk) 12:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Perfect! I wonder how many other misspellings are redirects. I know there are quite a few. KInd of like an anecdotal spell checker. I wondered how many started with "Teh", and there a number of them beyond just the obvious, "Teh internets". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Fix templates[edit]

Resolved:  – ukexpat (talk) 04:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I've just created two templates {{Family tree of Trần royal family}} and {{Family tree of Lý royal family}} but when I placed those templates next to each other, there was always a space between them, I tried but could not find the way to kill this space, someone can help me out? Example of error:

Thank you! Grenouille vert (talk) 22:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I have fixed it by removing newlines before <noinclude> in the templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks! Grenouille vert (talk) 22:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

What's the tag to indicate a section of an article is under construction?[edit]

Resolved

A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

{{underconstruction}} --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Duh! Thanks. :) A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 23:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyright violation?[edit]

I recently made an edit to the poliovirus page that consisted of adding a section on poliovirus disease.My source was emedicine.net, and as I have had problems with copyright infringement in the past, I became concerned that this edit might not be enough in my own words, and thus consist of a copyright violation of emedicine.net. Please look and see weather or not you think it is a copyvio. The page is here. Immunize (talk) 23:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)