Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hydnjo (talk | contribs) at 03:47, 16 December 2005 (Add Dec 16 above →‎Kate's Edit Counter). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search
    ↑ To top of page
    Shortcuts
    Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)
    • For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
    • Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
    • If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
    • Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
    • For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
    • New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).
    Ask a question

    December 8

    Category and foreign article

    Is it possible to link a foreign article into a English category? How? WriterFromAfar755 00:38, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Do you mean to add an article in another language Wikipedia into a category in English Wikipedia? No, this is not possible: Why would you want to do it? English Wikipedia should rather have an article on that topic than add a non-English-language article to the English encyclopaedia's category. jnothman talk 01:58, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    A good solution to the problem–assuming that jnothman's reading of it is correct...?–is to create a new stub article on the English wikipedia, and then to put the English article into the appropriate category. The English article can then be linked using an interlanguage link to the articles in other languages. (For bonus points, add a note to the talk page of our article that there is extensive information in the foreign article waiting for translation.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:08, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    discussion

    Please answer me quickly, im a new user. how do i add to discussion? --Chormang 02:07, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Click on "Discussion" at the top of the screen, right next to "Edit this page", which will take you to the talk page of the article you want to discuss, and once there, click on "Edit this page" and say what you want to say. Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 02:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Discussion happens on the "talk page" of an article, which you reach by clicking "discussion" up the top. You can either add to a discussion that is already taking place, or start a new topic of discussion. To start a new topic on the discussion page, click the "+" button up the top; type the subject and the content, save and you're done. To reply to a current discussion, go to the appropriate section of the page and click the [edit] link. Indent your comment with colons (:) [although some people use asterisks (*)], make an edit summaryy and save. Don't forget to sign! I hope that helps. jnothman talk 02:35, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Fairuse on screenshots

    Do we really need a fairuse rationale for screenshots? - Ta bu shi da yu 02:30, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes. See Wikipedia:Screenshots, maybe. jnothman talk 02:37, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia on PDA

    Joe sent the following question to the Wikimedia Help Mailing List.

    Hello, i am a software developer, and i am involved in a project concerning your wiki software. My partners and i have a few questions on how to use your software. it basically involves putting your wiki software onto a PDA handheld device. i downloaded the source to the software but we dont know what to do with it from there. if you could help me out on how to put and access your wikipedia software on other devices. if you need anymore info please let me know.

    I would be grateful for any assitance you can give him. Capitalistroadster 04:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Joe, I get the impression you don't mean that people should be able to access and edit wikipedia from their PDAs... Just that the Wikipedia articles should be available there, like all the other dictionaries and encyclopedias one can get on a PDA? Because PDAs aren't meant to be web servers, they're unlikely to be able to run a PHP server-side script like MediaWiki, but you could produce a static set of HTML or otherwise pages with MediaWiki (first you have to download the database), or you can use the static dump of Wikipedia already available from http://static.wikipedia.org/ and maybe modify it for the medium of use. But ultimately, this is nearly a 2GB download, so anyone who wants to use it has to have that sort of space free; any web server ready to provide such a package for free would need to allow for such high bandwidth downloads. If I've got your idea all wrong, please clarify. jnothman talk 05:24, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Erik Zachte has already ported to PDA: http://members.chello.nl/epzachte/Wikipedia/ --Commander Keane 15:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Language symbols

    In some articles (but I can't remember which) I noticed a symbol before an external link signalling that it's in French or Spanish etc. Where do I find those? David Sneek 12:02, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    The use of symbols instead of naming the language is highly controversial. See Wikipedia talk:External links#Foreign-language external links. Susvolans ⇔ 13:09, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Mgm - No, it's something I encountered a few times, but forgot to bookmark and only later I realized that they might be useful for some of the pages I keep an eye on.
    Susvolans - thanks for that link. Now I'm not sure if I will use the symbols, but at least I know how to put them in there. ({{es icon}}=Template:Es icon, {{nl icon}}=Template:Nl icon, {{fr icon}}=Template:Fr icon, etc.)
    David Sneek 15:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    User's own talk page bolded in Recent changes

    Why is the link to my own talk page suddenly bolded in Recent changes? — JIP | Talk 12:48, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Have you put it on your watchlist? Susvolans ⇔ 13:11, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Must have. For me only watchlisted stuff is showing bold. - 131.211.210.16 13:56, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I had my user page on my watch list but not my user talk page. But I don't rememeber ever putting anything in my watch list. — JIP | Talk 14:00, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    When you watch a page, you automatically watch the associated talk page, and vice versa - as a result, your watchlist can sometimes show pages that were never created. Shimgray | talk | 14:24, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    (after edit conflict) You cannot watch talk pages independently of article/project/user/etc pages and vice versa. If you have your user page on your watchlist you also have your user talk page on your watchlist; if you add Wikipedia talk:Help desk to your watchlist, you get Wikipedia:Help desk as well. See Mediazilla:1862 for a request to be able to filter your watchlist by namespace. Thryduulf 14:25, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but how did my user page get on my watch list without me putting it there? — JIP | Talk 14:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Quite easy to do it by accident, if you're editing without paying much attention - you accidentally tick the box saying "Watch this page" when going to save or preview. I quite often accidentally tick the minor-edit box... Shimgray | talk | 14:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Custom reference numbering

    I've been doing an extensive makeover on Hopkins School (I've been doing mostly cosmetic work until the school archivist gets back to me so I can improve the short history section). You'll notice there is a reference in the sidebar for the Endowment, auto-numbered 1 (because the side-bar is the first code for the article) and a note over financial aid, auto-numbered 2. The problem is when READING the article the endowment is the second thing you see, not the first. I was wondering if there was something one can add to the ref code to custom number (or do I just have to shift the references around to match the auto-numbering, even if it isn't perfect)? Staxringold 14:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes, there is a way of using multiple references to the same footnote that should be adaptable to what you want to do. See Wikipedia:Footnotes#Example with multiple references to the same footnote for the templates in question. Thryduulf 14:20, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Is There a Link?

    Is there a link to a list of all the classification templates for users?, If you don't know what I mean ....

    en This user is a native speaker of English.
    foxThis user contributes using Firefox.
    gb-0 This user cannot tolerate any form of Gibberish language, and is therefore easily emotionally traumatized by The Sims.




    1337-0 This user has no idea what 1337 is and/or prefers to contribute using proper words.
    175 I scored a 175 on the Are You a Wikipediholic Test.




    xp This user uses Windows XP.
    win This user contributes using Microsoft Windows.
    This user opposes the installation of any kind of advertisements on Wikimedia Foundation operated sites.


    I mean that sort of thing.They are a great idea - well done to whoever thought of it - but I would like to see them all. . To anyone who replies - thank you. DTR 17:03, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I have tried looking myself, but as of yet have found nothing. The best I can find is just a search [1] of templates with the word "user" in the title. It's not ideal. FireFox 18:00, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Templates starting with "user" can be found from Special:Allpages, here. The language ones categorize users in subcategories of Category:User languages. The others almost certainly end up categorizing in some subcategory of Category:Wikipedians. -- Rick Block (talk) 19:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    While the language ones are at Wikipedia:Babel, a fair collection of others are available from Wikipedia:Userboxes. Tis list is nonetheless incomplete. jnothman talk 21:47, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    There are also many that haven't been made into templates and exist soley on user pages. You can make your own using the following:
    {{userbox|icon background color|text background color|userbox icon|text of userbox}}
    --WAvegetarian (talk) (email) (contribs) 03:12, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Pronunciation

    How do you pronounce the words Wikipedia? Thanks,--166.66.60.42 17:40, 8 December 2005 (UTC) Tipper[reply]

    See Wikipedia. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:55, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Diagram on [[PT-141]

    Hi!

    I was trying to fix the Chemical structure structure diagram on the PT-141 article, but I couldn't figure out what was wrong. Can anyone help?

    Thanks, Rasmus (talk) 18:50, 8 December 2005 (UTC).[reply]

    Code has been added to the image server to stop it from trying to thumbnail very large images - doing so was causing an undue burden on it, and posed a ripe avenue for denial-of-service attacks. I suggest you reupload at around 1000 pixels wide, and it'll thumbnail fine. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:54, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Table is displayed at the bottom of the article

    I made a table for fuel oil, but it is always displayed at the bottom of the article, even though there is text beneath it in the source. Thanks, Kjkolb 22:49, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm guessing that is HTML, and I have no idea what was wrong with that. I have replaced it with wiki table syntax, although I changed the style a little - you may want to take a look at Wikipedia:Table to modify it. Or just ask here.--Commander Keane 23:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! -- Kjkolb 01:43, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    December 9

    Use someone's real name or their pseudonym?

    I looked in the WP:MOS but I couldn't find any guidance about this. If a person has one or more pseudonyms/pen names etc, which one should be used? Which one should even be the article name?

    I have a couple of feelings about this. 1. The usage should be consistent throughout the article, otherwise reading it may make it seem schizeophrenic. 2. It would probably make sense for the name used to be the same as the article name. Obviously you'd have RDRs from all the other names.

    Some examples...

    1. I realised this was a problem when editing William Wharton (author).
    2. Lewis Carroll mostly uses Dodgson, but inconsistent. Someone said to me on the Talk page that there are times when it is appropriate to use both (eg in the context of book commentary, use Carroll, elsewhere use Dodgson).
    3. Sean Combs consistently uses Combs.
    4. Elton John doesn't even mention his real name until the first section (although he changed his name by deed poll, so fair enough).
    5. John Wayne real name not mentioned until first section, then used for precisely two pars before switching back to Wayne, with no reason given.

    sigh. a little help? --pfctdayelise 00:02, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    It depends on how and when the pseudonym was or is used, I think. Charles Lutwidge Dodgson is a good example. He published his books as Lewis Carroll, while in all other contexts he was Dodgson. It therefore makes some sense to write that "Dodgson took up the new art form of photography" and "Carroll wrote poetry". But with so many contributors it's hard to get consistency and I notice the article also suggests "that Carroll used the fungus ergot", which should probably be changed to Dodgson... In the John Wayne article the final reference to "Morrison" seems reasonable, because that paragraph juxtaposes the icon Wayne with the real person behind the myth. David Sneek 07:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Changing Color/Font of Signature?

    Hi. I've noticed various users, when signing their names, use purple backgrounds and yellow text, or brown backgrounds and purple text, or some strange combination of the like. Is there a way to edit what happens when you sign with 4 tildes (~), or are they manually editing each instance?--Canaen 02:34, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    You essentially can use HTML formatting in your signature as set on your preferences page. See Wikipedia:Signature#Customizing your signature. jnothman talk 03:00, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    <td bgcolor="#008000"><font color="#ffffff">[[User:Canaen|Canaen]]</font></td>
    I enter this into thje nickname area, and my name ends up jumping down a line, after the timestamp. Any way I can fix this? Canaen 10:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't use <td>. <span> might be better. — JIP | Talk 11:01, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Using <span> gives me this: Canaen 22:01, 9 December 2005 (UTC) The text is white, as I wish, but the background is no longer Green.[reply]
    This issue has been resolved. I thank you all. Canaen 23:27, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Font

    Please, what font does Wikipedia use?-Gillean666 03:44, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Please, ask more specific questions. This depends on where you look and what skin you use; for the default skin it uses your browser's default sans-serif font:
    body {
	font: x-small sans-serif;
       ...
}
    — Sverdrup 14:10, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Award!

    when do i get an award, reward or star.

    Because i have actually being contributing mostly every day, and stopping fools from vandalism,(reversing)

    >x<ino 10:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Usually, when someone notices your work on their own, and gives you one.

    ":Usually, when someone notices your work on their own, and gives you one." What!? I though, when creating article, it isn't yours nor you shouldn't clame it.
    Anyway How do i award myself?.

    like i said, I either want to be an admin or award.

    I am not pushing my luck..but come on:P

    >x<ino 11:11, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    If you want to be an admin, you can nominate yourself on WP:RFA. I don't particularly think anyone is going to give you an award merely for asking for one. As for MacGyverMagic's comment, it's true that no one owns articles, but Wikipedia still keeps track of which editor has contributed what, and people can see what you have added to articles. — JIP | Talk 11:27, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for the link

    And what do you mean, they won't give me one, because i asked!?

    If i don't ask, they won't notice, "it's good to give it a try!" "MacGyverMagic's comment" you mean mine:)

    I know you can see the contribution, you mean the person that first edited an article, is like the owner(not owner but he started it)

    >x<ino 11:43, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry, I misread the indentation and thought MacGyverMagic's signature applied to both comments. Notice I didn't say "for asking for one", I said "merely for asking for one". Asking for awards doesn't hurt, but if all you do is ask "can I have an award, please?" without showing what contributions you have made, it won't probably work. Also, aren't awards supposed to be additional gifts given solely as an expression of goodwill? It's not like they're some sort of wages that people are legally entitled to. — JIP | Talk 12:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    maybe MacGyverMagic maybe a fool:P

    First, i ask for an award, because i deserve it! I don't need to list my contribution, because i already listed them at my UserPage [2]
    Gift!? is it because of the "Leave a Complaint, SITE, CONTRIBUTION/GIFT" is it because of that

    First of all, if i get payed for contributing, i won't bother putting it there, second, voluterring is also a gift, a free gift to give, without asking for money. I wasnt asking for money from wiki >x<ino 12:46, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    WIKI CREATOR

    Like i asked again!...

    Who is the fool:P that owns/created/form this wikipedia!?

    >x<ino 12:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Please look it up in your encyclopedia! Read Wikipedia. — Sverdrup 14:06, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Prevent anons from creating talk pages for nonexistent articles

    Today I've seen a couple of talk pages created for nonexistent templates, created by anon users, which have turned out as vandalism. I seem to remember that although anons can't create articles any more, they can create talk pages. I suggest that anons should be prohibited from creating talk pages for articles, categories, templates or project pages that don't exist yet, to prevent this sort of vandalism. — JIP | Talk 12:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I've copied this to wikien-l, to see if anyone can forsee problems. I'd advise bringing it up on appropriate Village Pump pages, though - you'll get more useful feedback there. Shimgray | talk | 17:26, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm already on record as opposing the prevention of anons creating pages, but I really oppose not letting them create Talk pages. How are they supposed to discuss changes they made to the articles they're allowed to edit? Zoe (216.234.130.130 19:14, 13 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

    about my ipod mini

    i've has , and my ipod for about a 2 weeks and now it's saying o.k to disconnect. what does that mean?

    Convert images from svg

    Please could someone convert Image:Soccerball.svg from svg to png, jpg or psd so I can't edit it using Adobe Photoshop? Thank you. CG 17:31, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Mediawiki already did that before it sent it to your browser: just hit save-as. But why would you want to edit it with photoshop, as opposed to a free SVG editor like Inkscape? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:48, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    In general, you should not convert vector graphics to raster formats for editing. This image is public domain, but, if it had been GFDL, you would be violating the spirit of the GFDL by making the image more "opaque" than the original. --David Woolley 10:36, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Re-naming a category

    Hi, It has become apparent that a couple of categories I have created have been improperly named. Specifically, these are "Category:Pederastic relationships" and "Category:Mythical pederastic relationships". Since the included articles are not about relationships but about persons, I'd like to request that they be re-named "Category:Pederastic lovers" and "Category:Mythical pederastic personages". Thanks in advance Haiduc 18:00, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Renaming a category can be quite a long process depending on how many articles there are. Since these two categories have only a couple of articles, all you have to do is change each article so instead of [[Category:Pederastic relationships]], they would say [[Category:Pederastic lovers]]. To stop the new categories from being a red link, you would create them the same way you created the first set. Thelb4 19:12, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, you would then take the original categories to Categories for Deletion. Thelb4 19:14, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    It might be better form to nominate for CfD before depopulating it, and indicate in your nomination what should be done with the articles (ie moved to your preferred category). I have a feeling this is better Wikiquette, but I can't find the guideline anywhere on CfD, so I dunno. pfctdayelise 22:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    On WP:CFD, under "How to use this page", it's the second bullet of part II, step 5. -- Rick Block (talk) 17:30, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Userboxes along side of page

    Can anyone help turn the series of userboxes on my page into a long line along the right side, alongside the remainder of the page's text, a la User:Cmdrjameson? Thanks! - Wezzo 20:59, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Category:Role-playing games weirdness

    The Category:Role-playing games page has several problems that I can't figure out. First, some entries (such as Engel and RhyDin) seem to be listed under "*" and not under their first letter. Second, the page seems to end at "R", when I know at least Worlds of Wonder should be listed. Thanks to anyone who can explain or help. --GRuban 22:06, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I came across this same problem at commons. It's very annoying. It happens when categories become huge. The reason RhyDin (which needs some serious wikification, btw) is listed under "*" is because on its page it has [[Category:Role-playing games|*]]. To me, this is kinda cheating, to force it to the front of the listing. This kind of syntax is useful for pages like List of movies featuring roleplaying. You would want this to list under M for movies, not L for list. So on its page, it should have [[Category:Role-playing games|Movies featuring roleplaying, list of]] (or just "movies", which AFAICT would do a good enough job). This feature is especially useful when you want to have people list under their last names rather than their first, which is what happens by default.
    What I tried to do to fix it, was to go to each page and change it to [[Category:Foo| ]] so it was sorted by space. But then it collapsed again a couple of days later.
    Basically, it's a bug. I don't know enough about bugzilla to point you to a link for it, but I'm sure there are plenty.
    de:User:Kolossos has created a tool to show you a category tree on commons. You could ask him nicely to implement a similar tool for en. :) pfctdayelise 22:59, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    also, to see further listings, click on "next 200". There is World of Darkness, but I don't see Worlds of Wonder.pfctdayelise 23:03, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I've fixed the category links on RhyDin and Engel (game) to remove the blatant advertising. — JIP | Talk 17:15, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you all, folks. I didn't see the "next 200" link, but findings it, yes, Worlds of Wonder is there. Thanks for fixing those two hacks, JIP. I think this means we need to split this category page somehow, since it's too large if people are resorting to hacks to make names findable. Will mull over. GRuban 21:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Babel

    What is a "babel"?--Anti-Anonymex2Come to my page! I've gone caliente loco! 23:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Babel means "confusion" in Hebrew. It is in the name of the Tower of Babel, which is where G-d confounded the language of mankind. In Wikipedia, Wikipedia:Babel refers to a set of templates which display the level of proficiency a user has in various langages. Izehar (talk) 23:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia is not censored for minors. It's safe to say God here. — JIP | Talk 07:23, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but it is actually contrary to the religious beliefs of some people to speak or write the name of God: hence G-d. Palmiro | Talk 16:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    This is something I've never understood. "God" is an English word. It's not something God chose a name for himself. If we're so afraid of incurring God's wrath by speaking his name in vain, why don't we start writing "d-ity", "c-eator", "m-ker", "L-rd", "o-nipotent b-ing", "i-telligent d-signer" and so on as well? — JIP | Talk 17:08, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't ask me why, I'm an atheist! As far as I know, it has to do with the idea in Judaism that the original name of God is sacred; some Jews carry this over into other languages as well by writing D-o, G-d etc., considering those words to represent the name of God (unlike descriptive terms such as deity) while others, I think, consider that only the original Hebrew name must not be uttered. I'm sure someone else (possibly Izehar) could give you a more accurate and complete account of it. Palmiro | Talk 18:00, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    December 10

    Installing Bots

    Is there I can install a bot on my own wiki? I have no knowledge of programming (other than PHP, HTML and such) - would it be possible to install some kind of simple bot to delete things and check things or whatever? Thank you kindly for any help you could offer!

    WP:BOT might help you. Broken S 03:43, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I was hoping for some simple instructions for the complete newbie )-: but that helped a little; just cant like find onw I can download and install then tear apart to learn to build my own... -- 24.237.6.216 19:15, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Siblings on Wikipedia

    Is there a known amount of Wikipedians with siblings who are also Wikipedians? --Ali K 01:34, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Men vs Women

    Does anyone know the ratio of men to women users of Wikipedia--Ali K 01:35, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    • This is not really the right place for factual questions, even if they regard WP. Wikipedia:Reference Desk Would be more appropriate. That said, however, I sincerely doubt this statistic exists, because of the tons of anonymous users and the fact that registration doesn't require anything more than a user name and email address. -Lanoitarus 03:36, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • The intro says: Here you can ask questions about Wikipedia and get help editing articles.. I don't see why asking factual questions about Wikipedia shouldn't be placed here. The intro clearly allows it. - Mgm|(talk) 12:24, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Are Articles Listing (or Describing and Linking to) Important National Dates Appropriate For Wikipedia?

    Is it an appropriate subject for a Wikipedia article, or for a category, to write about dates of national importance? Not all such dates are included in (for one example) List of holidays by country. Or in any other list or category I've seen here. Yet, it seems to me just as important a way of understanding a nation, to describe the dates (and the reasons why those dates matter) which resonate in the memory and culture of a country -- as it is to describe the geology or the population or the GDP of a country.

    Please comment, I'd welcome direction on this. Cheers, Madmagic 03:52, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    • Yes, dates of national importance can be quickly covered in a one-line description in the date article like July 31 (Independance Day in the US IIRC) or December 5 (Sinterklaas in the Netherlands). If you want to describe the holiday or event itself in more detail, a separate article named after the event (instead of the date) is probably appropriate. Do you have anything specific in mind? - Mgm|(talk) 12:30, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Mgm, thank you for the response. Re-reading my question this morning I can see I wasn't clear. :) I'll try giving an example of what I mean.
    Imaginary article (or category) title: Important Dates In British History. Article/category includes a January-December list of dates, with links to the articles on the Gunpowder Plot, the signing of the Magna Carta, Norman Invasion of 1066, etc. Cheers, Madmagic 15:12, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I can't edit long articles/sections anymore!

    Sometime within the last 24 hours, I've lost the ability to submit changes to moderately long articles and sections of articles. User:Melchoir#Test_1 seems to be about the limit; if I add a few more characters and click "Save page", it times out; after a few minutes a Wikipedia Error message shows up. The same happens if I click "Show preview". If I then remove the offending characters, going back under the limit, I can submit and preview with almost no lag at all. This happens whether or not I'm logged in, in both Safari and Firefox, and I've tried two static IPs in the same building.

    On the other hand, I'm able to post extremely long sections of text to forumer.com, as in here, and I can post to Wikipedia as normal if I go through a remote proxy, such as at Anonymouse.org.

    What's going on? Melchoir 05:01, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I just checked, and I have the same problem on the other languages, as well as Wikisource... Melchoir 07:22, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I have this problem in the office, e.g. I can't resubmit this page after an edit conflict. My guess is that it is due to the web proxy that is used, in this case a Microsoft one. Note that many ISPs don't let you not use one. In most cases it is better to use sectiion edits --David Woolley 10:17, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    how to create special pages

    i am starting my own wiki (http://wikiclassifieds.org) and would like some directions on how to create custom special pages. thanks. -- Zondor 05:25, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Time in Time Stamps - How to edit?

    I've noticed the time in timestamps is all UTC. Is it possible to change mine to read my own time zone, or is there something I don't know about Wikipedia which means they all have to be "UTC or bust"? Gohst 15:22, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Click on the "my preferences" up on the top right hand corner, then go to "date and time". Click "fill in from browser". pfctdayelise 15:25, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How do I attribute anonymous edits with my IP to my username?

    How do I attribute anonymous edits with my IP to my username? I remember reading somewhere that you could do this however I can't seem to find instructions. I'm not sure if this is no longer possible or what. :/ I've been editing for a while anonymously so it would be great if I can indeed add all my anonymous edits to my username without actually having to publically reveal my IP (e.g. making a big message on my user page saying "xx.xx.xxx.xx was me editing anonymously, here are my contributions".. I really would prefer not to have to do that -_-

    Thanks for anyone that can help!

    Wikipedia is cool :D

    --Red-skinned femme-fatale black-latex-clad b-tch from Hell 16:45, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    1) If you are the sole user of that IP, you don't need to make a mess and list those edits on your userpage, you can refer people to the contribution history for that IP. 2) If you are not the only user of that IP, changing the attribution for those edits wouldn't have been possible anyway. Are you unhappy with revealing your IP, or with listing all your anon contributions on your userpage? - Mgm|(talk) 19:19, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Possible Licence Mixup

    Führerbunker

    This is not a copyright violation, but I would like to know whether the licence on a picture is ok as it is: The picture included (and others linked from Führerbunker) includes a text which forbids commercial use, as does the text on the picture's page. Is this an acceptable licence for Wikipedia? Complicating matters, the picture's page also states that the picture is licenced und a Creative Common by-sa licence, which does not exclude commercial work. So is all this just fine or should something be done?

    I looked for any answer in the FAQ and elsewhere, but couldn't find anything useful. Any pointers are welcome! --Yooden

    • Hi! I am the one who did the image and thus the responsible one:). I have fixed this issue on all three images (removing the "non-commercial" text on the description pages and inside the images. I just wanted to ask you guys: Is there any way for me to specify the licence as free for all uses except commercial? I would be very thankful for a reply on my talk page. My regards, Dennis Nilsson. --Dna-Dennis talk - contribs 00:27, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Same problem...

    Ironically, the above section describing my problem has already grown too long for me to edit it. So, no, just editing sections doesn't work for me! Melchoir 18:31, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


    CatAZ template

    Hi, is it possible to sort articles based on the first few letters instead of just the first letter? Example: If I have Mosque Acheh, Mosque Kampong, can I sort using "Mosque A", "Mosque B", etc instead of just "A", "B", etc.? Unlike in English where the word "mosque" is written at the back of the name, eg. "Acheh Mosque", it is reversed to read "Masjid Acheh" in the Malay language.

    I have tried using the above template with one letter (with Gflores assistance) and it works. It didn't work when I tried to extend it thus:

    [{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAMEE}}|from=Masjid A}} A].

    I understand that one way is actually to use: [[Category:Mosque|Acheh, Mosque]] at the bottom of an article, but then again, when there are many users involved, some may not be able to follow. — PM Poon 18:56, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    The category listing includes subheaders for the first letter of the article name, or the first letter of the sort key. If you want the listing to be divided by the first letter of the mosque name, as far as I know the only option is to add the sort key as you suggest. If you don't add a sort key, they'll all appear under "M", sorted alphabetically. The "index" shown by the template does not affect the appearance of the category listing, but was created to match it. If you don't add the sort key, and there are hundreds of entries in the category, the template approach could produce an index allowing a user to traverse to the indicated point in the category listing (still under "M" in the category listing). I believe this would "work", but it sounds like it might not do what you're looking for. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:58, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi Rick Block, actually it is alright if all the articles in the category page begins with "Masjid" (meaning "mosque"). I am trying to use the template, CatAZ, to navigate the category page. Apparently it cannot work with more than one letter. Do you know how to modify the template so that it can work? Thanks. — PM Poon 19:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Citation

    An article I just wrote, Q TV, has been flagged as in need of citations. However, the article only contains basic information obvious from watching the channel such as Channel number, content, etc (ie: not sourced information). What should I do for the citation? smurrayinchester(User), (Ho Ho Ho!) 22:24, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I believe that the policy is that {{unreferenced}} shouldn't be applied where there is also a stub template. However, I thiink that watching the channel could well be interpreted as original research, and to the extent that that is not the case, the television channel transmissions themselves are what should be quoted as the source. The problem with this is that they are ephemeral and not easily available to all readers of Wikipedia, so a more permanent and available source would be highly desirable and surely exists. The information is not obvious to someone with the technical knowledge (very little) needed to understand the article, unless they also subscribe. I believe that one suggested test of a valid source is that the information should still be verifiable from it in 10 years time.
    The info-box does include a reference, which should be given a full citation in the References section, as well as the numbered link in the info-box. --David Woolley 00:34, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Where do I go to discuss the ban of anonymous users creating articles?

    Where do I go to discuss the ban of anonymous users creating articles? --anon

    • As is often the case on Wikipedia, discussion is happening in a multitude of different places, in a comparatively unorganized fashion.
    The central locations that I am aware of include:
    You may also wish to look at:
    -- Creidieki 00:25, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Which is the best place? --anon

    If what you want to do is challenge rather than just discuss, you might as well share your reasons here. There's a good chance that this exact point was discussed and a conclusion already reached, which someone can share. If you disagree, though, you'd need to go to one of the other places for a discussion. Notinasnaid 11:25, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    December 11

    Splitting pages, edit history and GFDL compliance

    When a page is split into several subarticles, the new articles don't show the edit history of that section. Since cut-and-past moves are a Bad Thing (tm) by the GFDL requirements, what is the correct way to do splits (that are always cut-and-paste)? In the splits I did, I just linked the source article in the edit comment box of the new articles, and the target article in the source article's edit box. Is this enough for the GFDL requirement? I'm asking because I don't really see a very big difference between this technique and doing a cut-and-paste move that is done with a decent edit summary—both things make it harder but not impossible to find the original authors. (And if the original page is deleted, the history is lost).

    A related question is what to do if I find a cut-and-paste split without a decent edit summary that tells me where the content came from. I came across this situation yesterday: Kurukshetra was split up into Kurukshetra war and Kurukshetra District without an acknowledgment in these articles, and turned into a redirect to Kurukshetra:disambiguation, which I have since moved to the standard title Kurukshetra (disambiguation). I left notes about the edit histories at Talk:Kurukshetra war and Talk:Kurukshetra District. Is this enough to satisfy the GFDL or should there be an edit history comment? And is there a policy about splitting somewhere that I didn't find? Kusma (討論) 00:43, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    • I'm sorry; I asked this question on a few mailing lists, and I haven't been able to add the answer to the documentation yet. "Standard" practice is currently what you describe, putting a note in the History section. One poster on the secret closed "juriwiki" legal mailing list recommended putting "material originally copied from Foo" in the References section of the new article, with a link to the specific page revision you copied the material from. -- Creidieki 00:54, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Dab cat problem

    The template {{disambig-cleanup}} automatically adds pages it's on to Category:Disambiguation pages in need of cleanup. If you take a look at the category, you will see that User:Docu/mentation/2LC/from category, Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup and Wikipedia:Template messages/All are all added, but they shouldn't be.

    Is there a way to stop these pages from being added to the category? Any solution ideas would be welcome.--Commander Keane 02:56, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I just made a null edit on the user page, which seems to have fixed that problem (unless you did something else that did so). I guess you fixed a 2-letter disambig transcluded from that user page, and the cat didn't update because of the transclusion? The Wikipedia pages are in *all* the categories of their templates; I don't know if there's a solution for that (it would need a "transclude without categories" command or something). Kusma (討論) 03:52, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    No link to user page

    I'm wondering why in my postings here and in similar places there is no link to my user page. That's been the case for a week or so. I notice other users who seem to have the same problem. Halcatalyst 03:53, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

    It could be a problem with your preferences. For example, if you've set your nickname to "Halcatalyst" and have enabled the "Raw signature" setting, then your username won't be linked. --David Iberri (talk) 05:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Yup, it was the "Raw signature" setting. Merci bien! Halcatalyst 02:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Q) How to know my edit count?

    Using a template? I don't know about it. help me!! Jimy 11:37, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Use Kate's tool which you can find here. Dismas|(talk) 11:45, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    sorry, I don't know to install .js...:( Jimy 13:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't need to install js, but there is currently no way to show your edit count with a template. You can view it, though, by going to Kate's tool, typing in your username and clicking "go". jnothman talk 13:10, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Just a note: if and when Kate's Tool is down, you may wish to try the two alternate edit-counting tools listed at the bottom of WP:KT. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 16:50, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks much!! WonYong 23:46, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Spell checker

    Is there a way to spell check edits? Thanks.

    Please see Wikipedia:Tools/Editing_Tools#Spell_Checkers. A manual mechanism is to keep two windows open, one with a word processor and yank text between the two windows. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:31, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How to create new bio page?

    Can someone please advise me on how to create a new biography page (like this, for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russel_Grant ) There appears to be lots of information here about how to edit and add to existing pages, but I can't find any instructions on how to add *new* pages. Any help would be very much appreciated. K. Saunders

    garhwali films

    In Garhwal section there is no link of any reference about uttranchali film — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.57.192.1 (talk • contribs)

    If you know of a verifiable and credible source for this information, simply add it to the article, and cite the source in the References section (which is unfotunately missing at the moment). Otherwise (i.e. you don't have the information, or you only have it on hearsay) add a request to the corresponding talk page. --David Woolley 21:03, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Sts. Chrysanthus and Daria

    I added a page on Sts Chrysanthus and Daria, as it was listed as one that was missing, and yet when i put it in the search function, it doesn't appear. What have i done wrong?--964267sr 21:11, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    If you type "Sts. Chrysanthus and Daria" into the search, it will come up. Your page is at the title Sts. Chrysanthus and Daria.

    WAvegetarian (talk) (email) (contribs) 21:21, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks. It was a spacing thing. I was having a typing lapse.--964267sr 23:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedians with LexisNexus access

    A while ago I remember our having a page that listed Wikipedians who had access to the Lexis Nexus system, and who could consequently look up US legal cases. Does that still exist? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Talk:LexisNexis seems to imply there never was one and that there may be problems in having one. With a non-extensive search, I found that Alterego has access, but it is likely that most university students do. I have discovered that indeed I do too. jnothman talk 01:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. The reason I ask is a query over at Talk:Tera Patrick#More on ethnicity, which I was hoping was within the search capabilities of LN's query engine. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Well I'm not really familiar enough with the system to look anything up without more guidance... jnothman talk 01:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Now is the best time to learn :-) Your university library website should have a brief guide; if not, google around and somewhere will. It's surprisingly simple, in my experience. Shimgray | talk | 15:33, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Publisher of Wikipedia?

    Who is the publisher of wikipedia? Also, what is the copyright year?

    You probably want to read WP:CITE. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 23:39, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    The article on Wikipedia will probably tell you a little more about the project in general. jnothman talk 00:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, they probably dont want WP:CITE (that links to Wikipedia:Cite sources). For info on how to cite Wikipedia itself as a reference, see WP:CW. -Kwekubo 01:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    December 12

    calvin and hobbes syndication

    I have question and I'm not sure where to direct it. From what I understand, Calvin and Hobbes and Peanuts are no longer original comic strips. Watterson retired and Schultz has passed on. Yet, the los angeles times carries both strips and the date in the panel is the current date. I was hoping that the wikipeda article on Calvin and Hobbes would clarify whether other artists are now doing the strip or whether these are re-runs. Where should i direct this question?

    The Reference desk or the talk pages for the articles on Calvin and Hobbes and Peanuts would be the best places for this question. Dismas|(talk) 01:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    They are re-runs. Peanuts with the word 'classics', Calvin and Hobbes still under the original name. - Mailer Diablo 03:22, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Why do these footnotes autonumber starting with 2 instead of 1?

    I wikified the footnotes in the Rick Warren article using the {{ref}} and {{note}} templates. For some reason, the footnotes are auto numbered beginning with 2 instead of 1. I have tried changing the first {{note}} to include |1, but that didn't change anything. Why are they starting with 2 and how can I change the page to start with 1? Here are the changes I made. ApolloCreed 01:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    [1] is referenced in the image caption, which precedes the article's start. I am not sure if the reference there is necessary, though, as such information can be determined by clicking on the picture. jnothman talk 02:07, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    why wikipedia cannot be visited in China

    I worked in Dongguan, Guangdong Province during the week and return to Hong Kong in weekends. About two months ago, I noticed that wiki cannot be opend in China but all returns to normal when I come back to Hong Kong. Can someone tell me how to log on the wiki in China please?

    Hong Kong Kenneth

    I'm afraid you just can't edit from there. Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 02:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Do not want to lose test user pages I am writing

    I'm sorry, I'm very confused.

    If I make a page like ".../User:Nepomuk/Fruit"

    That will be saved if I save it.

    Now, in that page, should I make my links like User:Nepomuk/Fruits/Oranges to make a page that *doesn't* show up in the normal wikipedia (yet)?

    Or (hopefully) can I just write oranges as my link and this test page will be created in my user space only?

    Sorry, there seems to be so much user help info I'm a little lost...

    Thanks, Nepomuk

    The links in your user subspace should be like User:Nepomuk/Fruits/Oranges. That said, they will show up in Wikipedia (but not in the article namespace, which is what I imagine what you meant by "normal". A link like oranges will link to our article about oranges, respectively.
    A little dirty trick is that once you are in your subspace (let's say, User:Nepomuk/Fruits), you can type [[/Oranges]] and that will link to the sub-subpage you wanted to link to (in this case, User:Nepomuk/Fruits/Oranges). I hope that helps, and if not, you can always ask again here! :) Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 04:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, thanks Titoxd
    So I create User:Nepomuk/Oranges on my main user page originally, click that link and go to that page and put in something like "abc", save it, then go back to the original page and edit the link to be /Oranges ? That's what I did and it seems to be working :)
    I'm a little confused about all that. You don't need to make your link User:Nepomuk/Oranges at all. Just /Oranges and Wikipedia'll add the User:Nepomuk itself. You don't even need the page to exist, so you don't need to click and write abc and save. Currently the links on your homepage are all full (absolute) paths, including the User:Nepomuk bit. They don't need to be and can just be /Card Sleight of Hand, /Trick Cards, etc. jnothman talk 05:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi, I clicked on the link "Gambler's Palm" on my page, and on the page that came up typed in a brief description of the Gambler's palm. In my web browser the URL is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_Palm, that is, it seems anyone can now look at it. When I search on Gambler's palm, the page I just entered comes up. My question is, is there an easy way to have the link Gambler's Palm on the general page I am creating on sleight of hand, and be able to edit the Gambler's Palm page, but to *not* have this page available (yet) to wikipedia users (except me). IE, I want to be able to make a rough draft of my sleight of hand pages in some sort of sandbox environment and not have general users be able to see it.

    There is no way of creating content which is stored on Wikipedia's servers but not available to anyone else - that would be open to abuse, and not exactly conducive to collaborative editting. Pages which are sub-pages of your user page (i.e. of the form User:XXX/YYY) are however broadly considered "yours" - other users won't generally try to edit them unless you ask them to; people also won't come across them while browsing the rest of the encyclopedia, so they will be fairly hidden, even though not invisible.
    In general, though, I would recommend just "being bold" and putting your draft in place as soon as possible [e.g. if you finish for the day, but are coming back tomorrow] - that way, other people can help you improve it as you write it, which is the whole idea of a wiki. If you're worried people will complain about the standard of your articles a) experienced editors know that most pages start off that way; and b) you can always place a comment on each article's Talk page explaining that you're actively improving it. - IMSoP 23:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    When I create a numbered list, all the numbers show up as 1s

    When I create a numbered list, all the numbers show up as 1s. The page is below:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lynne

    and I created all the list items in the standard format, that is

    1. a
    1. b
    1. c

    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Last avenue (talk • contribs)

    Well, no, that's not the standard format. Try not leaving a space between each line. Ie:
    1. a
    2. b
    3. c
    will be produced by
    #a
#b
#c
    But:
    1. a
    1. b
    1. c
    will be produced by
    #a

#b

#c
    jnothman talk 04:41, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    help

    LOL, can't find my way back to the page where someone has hopefully posted an answer to my question -- so I'm posting a fake question to bring me back to that page...

    As a newbie I have to say this is the most complicated help section on any website I have been to.

    Yes, once I learn more about Wikipedia I will help streamline this help process! (ie., I'm not just a complainer...:))

    --Nepomuk

    Here I am -- I find my own message :)

    Yes, it does seem a little complicated, doesn't it? In the end it's just because it works by using the wikipedia editing system. And often if you want to ask a question, you don't know how. But that's why we also have an email-based version (see Wikipedia:Contact us). The advantage here is that lots of people can help answer your question, rather than just getting replies from a few people who happen to be checking the HelpDesk mail. I already tried to simplify the long header up the top, but obviously things have been put there for a reason. Still, suggestions (or action) on how to improve it would be great. jnothman talk 05:12, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    The link that you clicked to add your question is at the top of the page. The questions get added to the bottom of the same page. So you could have found your question by scrolling all the way to the bottom and your original question would have been found near the bottom. Dismas|(talk) 05:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Cookies allowed but user keeps getting kicked off

    User Barry has sent the following e-mail to the Wikipedia Help Desk. I am unable to help him so I am posting my question here. Capitalistroadster 05:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    "My browser is set to allow cookies, and I even added wikipedia.org to my "Always Allow" list. Still, everytime I log in, even when I check the "Remember Me" box, I stay logged in until after I run a search or click a link, at which point it logs me out. When I click the "My Preferences" link, for example, I get an error message saying "Not Logged In" and "You need to be logged in to do that." What's the problem?"

    If you could help Barry, it would be greatly appreciated. Capitalistroadster 05:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I have several questions about getting a username.

    I have several questions about getting a username:

    1) If a hacker hacked into my account, would they see any vital things in my computer?

    2)Would Wikipedia send me letters or viruses?

    3)Are there any dangers about getting a username at all? (Besides hackers)

    4)Has anyone ever gotten solicited over Wikipedia discussion rooms?

    Also, as an added question, why do you need cookies to have a username? And what exactly are cookies? (I already looked at the cookie link at the "create account" place, so I don't want to read it, again)

    Also, if I get a pseudynom username, how long can I keep it? --anon

    • You shouldn't worry about registering a username. It's fast, easy, and secure. Wikipedia won't send you any spam or anything like that. An email address is optional, but even if you do provide an email address, it will be kept confidentially. There are no dangers in getting a username, no soliciting or hacking. You won't be hacked using Wikipedia, trust me. Cookies are used to remember who you are, so you don't have to keep manually signing in all the time. You can keep your username for as long as you want. If you have any more questions, just post here again. :) Gflores Talk 05:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


    All usernames are pseudonym usernames. You can call yourself anything you want.
    The essential answers to your questions are no. Wikipedia doesn't require you to provide any details about yourself at all. The only piece of information that could identify you unwillingly is your IP address, and that is made available to a very small number of top-level Wikipedia administrators and developers. If a hacker hacks into your account (and it's not likely), just about the only private information they can see is your watchlist (the pages you are interested in watching for changes); but they would be able to post in your name. Still, I don't know of this happening - use a good password. Users have been blocked on the basis of bad behaviour, but I don't think anything has come to solicitation at all. If you write defamatory or racist material, some may argue there should be a process of solicitation, but at this stage there is no such thing in Wikipedia.
    As to cookies: they are small pieces of information web sites put on your computer to help make using their site easier, or just to know that the same computer is there talking to the web site. They are also used, though, by market research / advertising companies to track users of various web sites; they've also been the source of web browser security vulnerabilities, although this threat has generally been removed in all web browsers today. Wikipedia doesn't track your access; it uses cookies to allow you to sign in and stay signed in by creating a code when you sign in and putting it on your computer. It then can later ask your computer for the code, and on that basis identify that it is indeed the same person that logged in. I hope that helps. jnothman talk 05:58, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    And a note about including an email address when you register: one reason to do this is so that you can request a new password if you forget yours. If you don't register an email address and you forget your password, you basically lose access to your login. Also note that if someone sends an email to you from wikipedia and you respond in email, they will see your email address (because of the email you sent). Similarly, if you send someone an email from within wikipedia (there'a an "email this user" link on user pages) the email address you've provided will be visible to the person you send the email to. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Okay, thank you! --anon

    links: blue or red?

    this isn't all that important. but i've been curious to know why some links are in blue while others are in red? is it random or does it actually mean anything? thanks.

    Links in blue means an article exists. Links in red means there isn't an article for that topic. You can create articles by registering a username. If I haven't been clear, let me know. :) Gflores Talk 06:37, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Problem with computer messages

    An editor has left this on my page. Someone with the expertsise may please reply to him directly. User_talk:Gurubrahma#Help_required_-_Edit_this_page_-_Error --Gurubrahma 07:00, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I tried to reply on avnp*'s talk page. jnothman talk 07:24, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Am I encouraged to correct spelling mistakes on talk pages?

    There seems to be an awful lot of spelling errors on most talk pages, making me think that perhaps people aren't encouraged to correct them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flea110 (talk • contribs)

    That's correct, most people don't bother correcting spelling on talk pages (some do, however). More effort is made into correcting spelling errors on that article itself. See Wikipedia:Typo for more information. Gflores Talk 07:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Just so that I'm clear on this, is it ok for me to correct other peoples spelling on talk pages?
    Yes, it's friendly and helpful. ‣ᓛᖁ♀ᑐ 07:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm, not everyone might see it that way. Keep in mind not everyone speaks English as a first language. And hey, let's hope what they've got to say is more important than minor typo errors. pfctdayelise 15:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • However, do remember that people can use a variety of types of English ranging from American to British to Canadian to Australian and more. Don't "correct" words which are correct in another type of English. - Mgm|(talk) 08:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • The risks and costs of correcting others' spelling errors are many:
        1. You may be seen as being pedantic or condescending,
        2. You may be unfamiliar with foreign style or usage (US versus UK versus Canadian versus Australian, etc.),
        3. Each time a page is edited on Wikipedia–even to change a single letter–an entire new copy of the page is stored in our databases. Fixing typos on talk pages may not be the best use of our resources.
        4. You may be wrong. :D Your spelling might be in error, or you may inadvertently change the sense or meaning of a phrase.
        5. Many editors are touchy about others making changes–well-intended or not–to their signed talk page comments.
      • In other words, it's probably best to leave well enough alone. If someone's remarks are so badly garbled as to be unclear as to their meaning, you can always ask for a clarification. If you want to correct spelling errors, limit yourself to articles; there are lots of them there. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I agree with TenofAllTrades. It may offend people. Also, since the talk pages are only for the editors, and not for those who look up things in the encyclopaedia, it's a bit of a waste of server space IMHO, since every version is stored in the page history. With an article, we do have to correct little typos, since they undermine the credibility of the encyclopaedia. With talk pages, I'd say leave well enough alone. AnnH (talk) 16:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Australian Flag icon

    Hi, i thought i would be crafty and make my own Australian userbox. The image i want to use is Icons-flag-au. I can successfully make the userbox as i want but the flag picture comes up blurry. I have tried with other flags and it looks normal, i think it has to do with the quality of the picture. Is there anyway i can get a good Australian Flag picture? Thanks for any help, --Ali K 07:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    This one? [3] Gflores Talk 08:01, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, Thanks!--Ali K 09:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    What is bluetooth ?from where can i get the material ?

    Try reading Bluetooth. jnothman talk 10:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Template editing

    I want to add the article Stapedius to the template "Muscles of the head" (shown on this page: Tensor tympani.) How do I do that, or who do I contact? Thanks. Kerowyn 10:36, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Edit Template:Muscles of head. Basically, when something is enclosed in {{ and }}, it means it is a template, and can be found at Template:NAME if {{NAME}} is used. jnothman talk 10:41, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, and then add {{Muscles of head}} to the Stapedius article. jnothman talk 10:42, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Looking for pictures

    I am looking for icons/pictures that can be used in userboxes. I am looking for a laptop/notebook and a picture representing Perth, Western Australia. Any ideas?--Ali K 13:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How protect article from editing? Can I limit access to my Wikipedia?

    Your wikipedia? I'm sorry, this help desk is about this website (English Wikipedia). Perhaps you should try asking the guys at MediaWiki. — Sverdrup 15:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    • You have to be an admin to protect pages. If you are running your own local installation of Wikipedia, just poke around in the database to give yourself admin rights. If you mean this Wikipedia here, you have to register to an account and apply for adminship at WP:RFA. — JIP | Talk 20:12, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Although applying for adminship here in order to protect particular pages would be frowned upon. ;) Mark1 20:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Can't edit the encyclopedia

    I can get the editing form but it won’t save or even preview. I have tried using Safari and Internet Explorer; the result is the same. --User:Michael Glass This was sent to the mailing list. He says he has encountered IP blocks and that isn't the problem. His account isn't blocked either. I'm not sure what to tell him. I will forward any responses to him via email as he can't edit even talk pages. He has requested that we not send email using the "Email this user" function as that email address is "used as a spam-trap." WAvegetarian (talk) (email) (contribs) 15:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    It could be possible that his choice of page to edit is protected...? Then clicking edit/view source SHOULDN'T let you save. jnothman talk 22:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I've been having exactly the same problem from my home computer for the past week. Can't save edits, can't preview them either. No probs editing from work computer. Assumed it was just something with my home system. JackofOz 22:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Can't view entire watchlist

    Something changed a few months ago (I think there was a major update around then) and now I can't see my entire watchlist. When I click on "all" in the watchlist page the returned page only shows that last month's worth of changes. I have tried editing the URL but numbers of days greater than 30 don't seem to make any difference.

    Is there some way for me to see the entire list as I used to? Cjrother 18:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I suspect that viewing changes older than 30 days has been disabled on watchlists as a way to ease the load on the Wikimedia servers. Short of coming back at least once per month to check your watchlisted articles, I'm afraid there isn't really anything I can suggest. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:28, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I had suspected that myself. Any idea where else I can ask about this or find out what has happened? I don't really see that this would be that big a load on the servers (not that that is really my area) but if this is the case then perhaps some sort of paging scheme, like when you do a search, would work. In any case they should get rid of the all button if they don't want people to do that. Cjrother 19:18, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Marking questionable material

    If I find information who's factuality I think is questionable, how can I mark it for review?

    Add the {{Disputed}} tag to the page, and explain (in as much detail as you possibly can) what you feel is wrong and how you suggest a fix can be made. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:42, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    For the full list of cleanup tags see Wikipedia:Cleanup resources. RJFJR 21:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    You may also want to use {{fact}} where appropriate, which appears like this [citation needed] and indicates that it may not be a verifiable fact and either needs to be sourced or removed. jnothman talk 22:13, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Have the blink and marquee tags been disabled in Wikipedia? I wouldn't blame whoever banned them (they are very annoying), but I was considering putting a simple "This is an <blink> example </blink> of blink. Note: Your browser may not display this properly" to the blink tag, but the tags simply appear in the text instead of becoming hidden. I have FireFox and creating a test HTML with blink worked fine. smurrayinchester(User), (Ho Ho Ho!) 20:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes, the blink tag has been disabled in Wiki markup. I'm afraid there's no way around it. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    You could use a gif animation capture a case where this tag is used or simulate it. - Mgm|(talk) 22:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not that it's been disabled, it's that only a few things have been enabled. Blink is generally not useful, and moreso on a Wiki. Marquee is not standard (although most visual browsers implement it) and also not useful on a Wiki. See Help:HTML in wikitext. But to exemplify <blink>, yes, use an animated GIF. jnothman talk 22:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    how to find users/talk page threads

    (1) I've heard from two other users with very nice notes. One was on the talk page of the article I edited. When I came back, it was gone. I remember her name but don't know how to find her.

    (2) When I looked at the other user's talk page, it seems there is only half a conversation going on. It seems like someone asked a question or made a comment, and the talk page has only the response. Where do you find the other part of the conversation?

    Thank you.

    1. If you remember her name, go to the search box and type in User:Username. 2. The other part of the conversation is usually on the other user's talk page, for example if User:Foo and User:Bar are having a conversation, Foo will ask a question on Bar's talk page and Bar will respond on Foo's talk page. Hope that helps. Hermione1980 21:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Copyrighted Images

    If an image has been taken before 1923 but never published, is it public domain? Or do I have to post it as "Fair Use"? --Nick Catalano (Talk) 22:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Fair use isn't an escape or excemption from copyright, as many uploaders seem to think: it's a particular justification (from quite a small set) for that particular use of that picture. If you put "fair use" without the justification, then the picture will get deleted. Don't know about the date thing, sorry. Notinasnaid 22:28, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    How do you have it if it was never published? The only way I can think of is f you possess the original. If you physically stole it, then perhaps it would be copyright violation to pst it here as well. If you inherited it, then any copyright it has probably belongs to you. If it was a personal gift of some sort, and the creator does not have a copy of it, then I'm guessing that you still have the rights to it. If copies were distributed among a small group prior to 1923, then the date that happened might count as the copyright date. --Chris 22:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    The answer depends on where you reside, where the picture was taken, whether the copyright belonged to the photographer or to a corporation and when the photographer died. You can only use "fair use" where it is fair use; that tends to be only where it is essential to the purose to use the specific material and the copyright owner loses little as a result. I suspect that the only fair use of an image of that age would be in an article about the photographer's techniques or the technical processes used at the time --David Woolley 23:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    The pictures are stored in the Loyola University Chicago archives and would be digitized for $5 apiece plus $10 for a CD (a small contribution to Wikipedia for some historical pictures.) BUT the University says that since the pictures were never officially published then even if they give me a digitized picture that I paid for, while I may own that digital representation of the picture I will have to ask for their permission to publish it (which they would consider doing for Wikipedia, but if say Answers.com or some other service wanted to use it I would have to request permission as well. --Nick Catalano (Talk) 05:13, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia wouldn't accept the pictures under those conditions. I'm not a lawyer, but I think that you are dangerously close here to forming a contract with the University that would include terms limiting your use of the pictures, even if the copyright weren't valid. Unless you are prepared to fight a test case, you had probably better assume that the work really is unpublished and therefore covered by the copyright rules for such works, not the 1923 rule. --David Woolley 10:40, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How do I make a Wikipdia image point to a Commons image?

    There are a bunch of images that were originally on Wikipedia, but were copied (manually, it appears) to the Commons, and the originals on Wikipedia are marked with Template:nowCommonsThis. I made an improvement to all of them on the Commons, but since they originally resided on Wikipedia, the images I edited were simply copies, and the Wikipedia versions were not updated. I want them to update the way any image that is first posted to the Commons (and then automatically appears on Wikipedia) does. I have a feeling that maybe if I put all of them on WP:IFD and they are deleted from Wikipedia, then they will just point to their Commons counterparts. Is this so? Is there some other way I should achieve this? Is this even possible? Thanks. --Chris 22:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleting is probably the most correct way to do it (or just find an admin friend to do it for you much quicker). We don't really need duplicates everywhere. jnothman talk 23:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    An admin can't do this any quicker, because having a duplicte on comons is explicitly NOT a reson for a speedy delete. The best method is to lsit these on WP:IFD if thy are in fact duipes, there is likley to be no opposition and little comment. DES (talk) 23:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't have any admin friends, so I must go the WP:IFD way. (Unless you're an admin and you want to do it.) Do you think it's necessary that I put notices on each and post notices for each on the uploader's talk page? After all, they're not all really being deleted, there's no need to debate it like there would be with actual deletions. --Chris 23:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Although they cannot be speedy deleted because there are numerous license issues that have been discussed on Wikipedia talk:Moving images to the Commons, we can delete images listed on IFD if they are now at the Commons. However, as listed on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/Instructions for administrators, the images must meet the following requirements:
    1. All relevant revisions of the image have been moved to the Commons, not just the most recent one.
    2. The Commons version is as good as or better than the local one.
    3. The Commons version is under a free license, and properly tagged and attributed.
    Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Chris, I sometimes notify the uploader as a courtesy that it has been moved, especially if it is a different file name on Commons. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:24, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    It's the same name, but since most of them are from just two uploaders, this shouldn't be a problem.
    As far as those three guidelines, the second and thrid are already done, but the first is not.
    For most of the images I'm talking about, there are two revisions on both the Commons and on Wikipedia. There is a first version on Wikipedia that is not on the Commons. Then there is a second version on Wikipedia, which does NOT appear to be based at all on the first. The first revision on the Commons is the same as the second on Wikipedia. (I was not the one who originally copied them to the Commons.) The second on the Commons is mine, based largely on the first. That is the one I want to appear on Wikipedia.
    So here's the problem: Should I upload the 1st Wikipedia revision to the Commons as the 3rd Commons revision, and then revert back to the 2nd revision (which would make a 4th revision)? I'm wondering if it's necessary to preserve the 1st Wikipedia revision if all of the others are not derived from it.
    Thank you all for your help. I'm in a tricky and unusual situation here. --Chris 00:12, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    You know what, I think this would be easier if you all actually saw this: Image:Interstate75.png Commons:Image:Interstate75.png (This is an example of the situation that I said applies to most in the group; also note that this is completely seperate from my WP:IFD for Image:Interstate4.PNG.) --Chris 00:18, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    hi

    Please, I want to know wich is the diameter of earth between the poles. Thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.154.122.22 (talk • contribs) 23:41, December 12, 2005 (UTC)

    Try the article on the Earth. In the future, lpease take factual questions to the Wikipedia:Reference desk.

    WAvegetarian (talk) (email) (contribs) 00:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    December 13

    Adding categories to templates so all pages with the template will be in the category

    Well, the title says it all. I've tryed to use templates that do this, copy the markup code, but it still doesn't work. Can someone guide me through this; I can't find documentation anywhere. Thanks. --HereToHelp (talk) 01:13, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Uhh...is it also possible to add associated (read:talk) pages to the category even if the template isn't on the exact page?

    The articles (or talk pages) will appear in the category the next time they're edited. You can go and just "edit" them and save them with no changes, that will make them appear in the category. (I just added Talk:Mac OS using this procedure). Kusma (討論) 01:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Well you add things to a category by going [[category:My Category]], so you can simply stick one of these in the template. Nonetheless, because it requires a lot of work on the database side, this does not automatically update the categories associated with a page using that template. To do that, you may need to edit the articles (just insert a space or something) to refresh the cache. But creating a template with an associated category before putting that template in articles is the ideal way to do it. Your second question I don't quite understand: do you want to add talk pages to a category? Usually it's not appropriate to add talk pages to a category with articles, but if you are sure, simply include [[category:My Category]] as appropriate on the talk page. jnothman talk 01:40, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    No, perhaps I should rephrase that: the templates go on the talk page; is there any way for the article to be in the category without adding it manualy? --HereToHelp (talk) 01:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Oh... Not really... But there are ways (read: Javascript) to make adding templates to something you already have a list of much faster. To semi-automate this, essentially what I would do is:
    1. Get a list in HTML of all talk pages using that template, by going to its Whatlinkshere page and saving.
    2. Change all the links of form http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Article to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Article&action=edit&addcat=MyCat using a regular expression search/replace.
    3. Write a javascript which, given that the loaded page address is of the form http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Article&action=edit&addcat=MyCat, checks whether the article source already contains [[Category:MyCat]], and if it doesn't, adds the category to the source and saves the article (see my automod script for similar functions).
    4. Save this javascript in your monobook.js to run on page load.
    5. Open your page with links to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Article&action=edit&addcat=MyCat and open all links from it (easy using, for instance, the Opera links panel).
    If you get this, well done. If you can do it, very well done. I'm sorry it's so technically involved. jnothman talk 01:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Know what? No thanks. But the main thing is the adding spaces technique—that solved the issue. Thanks.--HereToHelp (talk) 02:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Can i be taught

    Hi my name is Mike. I am new to Wikipedia and i would like to learn how to create good articles and also how to edit pages. There are many other things about Wikipedia that i would like to learn so if there is anyone who is a Wikipedia Administrator who would like to dedicate some of their time to teaching me what there is to know about wikipedia i would really appriciate that. My account name is Studentmrb

    Thank you MikeB 01:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Well either you can teach yourself by going through the Wikipedia:Tutorial, WP:WELCOME and associated pages. Otherwise, if you want more mentoring, add your name to Wikipedia:Clueless newbies, or ask help from one of the welcoming committee. Good luck and welcome aboard! jnothman talk 01:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, welcome...you have no idea what your getting into. Good luck! --HereToHelp (talk) 01:53, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    question about POV and original research

    Hello, I wrote almost all of Endgame#Books_on_endgames. At the end of the data for each book I put a comment. Some of them are "good", "great", "not as good as others", "difficult reading", "elementry", "classic", etc. These are all my evaluations of the book. Is this too POV/original research? If it is too much POV, is there a way I can keep those comments without violating NPOV? (I'm trying to give some guidance to the reader.) Bubba73 (talk), 03:12, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I think it's too POV, but it can easily fixed. What about each book made you think it was "great" or "good" or "useless"? What differentiates it from other books in the same field? Mention these type of things instead, and let the reader draw their own conclusion. Difficult reading/elementary/classic you could keep. A statement like "the most popular book of this genre in the 1990s" (that is, sold the most copies) is ok, also "received excellent critical reviews"/"well-received critically""received poor reviews". Statements like not as useful or instructive as the others in this section. are too POV. Useful for who? Just say the things that made you draw the conclusions, but don't say the conclusions themselves. Does that make sense?
    And of course, you should probably WP:CITE sources (eg link to review - maybe on Amazon?, sales figures, etc). Good job so far, BTW! pfctdayelise 03:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, it's a good bibliography but even in something like your Mostly elementary - a good place to start but not comprehensive enough., this could be made less POV by removing "enough" or even better just writing descriptively, rather than subjectively, as pfctdayelise says: Elementary background to endgames (this is implied by the title of the book anyway). jnothman talk 04:05, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Or perhaps Covers some elementry material but isn't comprehensive. I get the idea. Thanks to both of you. Bubba73 (talk), 04:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I plan to clean out my POV from the article and I will probably expand it on my personal website, and link to that. Bubba73 (talk), 20:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    #wikipedia

    I have Trillian and I can't connect connect to the #wikipedia irc channel. Please help! --Member 04:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    That doesn't really say much about your problem. It could be any number of things. So let's see: can you connect with another IRC program? (See List of IRC clients) Do you use a proxy server that is not properly configured in Trillian? Which freenode server are you using? irc.freenode.net should work fine... Sorry, you haven't given enough info to work it out yet. Or have you not used Trillian for IRC before and don't know how to join a channel? jnothman talk 05:06, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding file information to an image

    Hi there:

    Just uploaded my first picture:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mauthausen-barracks.jpg

    And I've added a slight summary. I was wondering how to add picture information such as camera used, iso etc. in a table format. I'm very new but very interested in this, I'm sure there is a page somewhere, all I need is a prod in the right direction! Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt c j486 (talk • contribs) 05:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Well, if the file contains EXIF information embedded in it, then the information should be added by the software automatically. Otherwise, you have to go to the image description page (the link you just gave us), click on "edit this page", and then create a table, whether in HTML or in Wiki-syntax. Thanks for adding it, though, and welcome to Wikipedia! Feel free to ask here if you have any more questions. Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 05:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for the response, you're very quick here! I've been lurking for over a year and decided to contribute some images. It turns out that file I uploaded doesn't have EXIF b/c I edited it with photoshop (I'm not sure why PS would remove that info?) anyways all the other photos I upload will be originals.

    Perhaps I can just type in the camera info, I doubt anyone will read it/care about it anyways. Thanks for the kind words and see you around! Matt c j486 05:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


    Claiming an anonymous edit

    Hi there,

    I made a (very minor) edit to a page last week, and enjoyed it so much I've now come back and created an account. Is there any way to claim my edit as a contribution? I'm rather proud that I've now gotten involved with Wikipedia (finally!) and would like my contributions to start from the beginning...


    Many thanks, CrystalSinger 06:09, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi CrystalSinger, glad you've joined Wikipedia! :) As far as I know, you cannot claim your edit. However, you may create a link to your contribution on your user page for future reference. Gflores Talk 06:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    You used to be able to, but the service has been suspended indefinitely. See Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit. pfctdayelise 11:27, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Flash content

    Mika, a reader, has asked the Wikimedia Help Desk:

    "Is it possible to add Flash content to an article? to add a .swf media file like Media:File.swf?"

    I am not aware of how to do that so if you could provide advice, it would be greatly appreciated. Capitalistroadster 06:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Fortunately using Flash would be a violation of the GFDL as it would not be possible to provide a transparent form for the content.
    As well as the openness requirements, Wikipedia needs to be printable and to be usable on as many platforms as possible (it is currently usable on text only browsers). Flash requires a reasonably high spec machine, running one of a rather limited set of GUI environments --David Woolley 07:50, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    In my personal opinion, Flash should be kept well away from Wikipedia, and from most other web pages, for that matter. I've seen too many web sites whose entire functionality depends on Flash. — JIP | Talk 08:50, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    uploading photos wont work

    HELP, I CANT UPLOAD PHOTOS! I TYPE IN ALL THE INFO and select the right file location but when I click submit button it goes page cannot be displayed! I've uploaded b4. Hamedog 06:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC) Why is it like this? Hamedog 07:06, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks, yeah I finally got it to work. There was a problem with the image coming through our home server.

    Monobook style sheet

    Hello. I'm using the Monobook skin. It looks like yesterday its stylesheet was changed, and now hyperlinks are not underlined unless the mouse cursor is over them. Please tell me if there's a place where changes like this are discussed. (I really hate that look, the hyperlinks are not contrast with other text.) Conscious 08:31, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I've tried refreshing all the stylesheets and still do not see this change. Is it with all the links in the articles? You should probably check your preferences setting: go to Preferences, look under Misc, and check the drop-down list is set to "always". Anyway, you can make your own changes to the stylesheet if you don't like it, by editing your monobook.css. jnothman talk 10:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! That drop-down box was set to "always", but clicking the "Save" button helped. Must be a kind of bug, as I didn't change the preferences yesterday. Conscious 12:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    NPOV and judicial verdicts

    are verdicts and findings of courts treated any differently than statements from "non-official" sources. in particular, if a judge's findings are contrary to a media report, what is wiki policy - report both? or report only the court's "version"? this relates to a dispute in Jayendra Saraswathi. Doldrums 10:19, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    • That depends. The media reporting it would have to be a reliable source like a national newspaper or news television program. - Mgm|(talk) 11:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Things the media said and things the judge said are both interesting, and probably both merit reporting. This article seems well adrift from a neutral point of view. If an article has a neutral point of view, then in my opinion, you should not be able to tell anything about the views of the writer. That certainly doesn't apply to a quote like The Police also tried to foist another attempt to murder case on him, but the Madras High Court nipped it in the bud . This language is way too excited, and the opinions of the writer are evident. Notinasnaid 15:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    thanks. does anyone remember a policy/guideline or a similar prior dispute and how it was resolved. the subject matter is a pretty controversial one and i'm trying to npov the article but another editor takes the position that the media reports (mainstream sources - BBC, Frontline newsmagazine and Rediff news portal) should be removed because s/he alleges that thier reports are incorrect/biased. see Talk:Jayendra Saraswathi. Doldrums 07:28, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Text flow around tables

    I've been prettifying Category:Bridge articles and created a series of templates, which can be found in Category:Bridge templates. They work nicely, except that I can't find out the nice way to get the text flow around the tables right all the time.

    See for example the most important {{BridgeHand}}. I set up the align="left" as the default alignment, but as result, when editing long texts with several template tables, one has to insert a lot of newlines or <br>'s to get the text flow correctly. See e.g. Simultaneous double squeeze or Simple squeeze. I'm not even sure if the text will turn out correctly on all browsers, screen resolutions and font sizes.

    So, the problem is that one would like to "terminate" explanation on the diagram and go on to the next paragraph or diagram, which should be located below the diagram, without inserting newlines. I'm looking for a suggestion, how to do it properly, either in template or in text.

    As a side question, is it possible to get rid of the borders and white background in corner-squares of the table in {{BridgeHand}}?

    TIA, Duja 11:12, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Align="left" means that it floats to the left and thus behaves as you dislike. I offer two solutions:
    1. Change to align="center": IMO this looks nice, the caption can be below or above just in the body text.
    2. Use <br clear="all"> after the caption, which will leave the image floated left of the caption, and marks that the next text should appear below all floated objects.
    jnothman talk 11:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks; solution 2) looks more attractive. The point is, it's usually better when it's aligned left, as it takes less space and the explanation text ("caption") is closer to the diagram. The problem emerges when the explanation text is short and one wants to skip to the next paragraph. I've already created "usage notes" on templates' talk pages so I'll explain it there.
    How do I parametrize align= tag? I don't need it immediately, but just in case (I'd like to use something like {{BridgeHand|align="right"|AKQ|...}}} to align it right explicitly and have it default aligned (left) when {{BridgeHand|AKQ|...}}} is used. Duja 13:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    As to your side question: You have the table marked to be of class "wikitable", which has the borders and decorative colour not necessarily wanted in your table. As long as you want to keep this coloured background, you have two options:
    1. Retain the table as a wikitable, but remove the border around the entire table and particularly the white squares. In particular, add "border:none" to the styles of the table and of the corner cells. This will still leave the corners white on a non-white background.
    2. Remove the class="wikitable" attribute and style all cells yourself. In particular, remove the white background for corner cells and they will be transparent by default. Then add borders to other cells (colour #aaaaaa) and the background colour #f9f9f9. Also include "border-collapse: co that illapse;" in the table's style. This means, though, that for the few users not using monobook, it will use the fixed colours you set, rather than those of the wikitable in their preferred stylesheet.
    OK, I'll try the solution 2). Are you sure you spelled "border-collapse: co that illapse;" right? Should it be "collapse"? Duja 13:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I did mean that. Must have pasted something in the middle by accident. It seems you haven't fixed up the CSS yet. Do you need a hand? jnothman talk 22:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    If you don't get how to do the CSS, tell me what you want and I'll have a go (I'll even let you look at the diff in the page history!).
    jnothman talk 11:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Which CSS? I do know what CSS are, and to make basic ones, but I don't see how it's related with my issues? Duja 13:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    An alternate option for the articles in question is to use a table. In the case of Simultaneous double squeeze, for example, the layout of the hands makes up the first column of the table and their captions occupy the second column. Using the <br clear="all"> trick is kind of kludgy. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    The <br clear="all"> isn't altogether a trick. That's its purpose: to clear floats.
    As to parametrising alignment, do you just mean having align="{{{align|left}}}"? This means that when you include the template you need to have {{BridgeHand|.....|align=right}}, but otherwise it will default to left, etc. You could also use a similar method for adding a caption beneath, for cases when you want text to flow around a captioned table. jnothman talk 22:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Compatible with GFDL?

    Hi,

    On Tanga, someone recently added a large section that was obviously copy-pasted from a website. When queried about whether this was copyvio or not, the contributor indicated that the source website contains the statement that, "Permission to reproduce articles from this publication is granted for the express interest of public information dissemination and promotion of Tanga’s heritage, provided the source is acknowledged". I presume this is compatible with the GFDL? — Matt Crypto 12:05, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    • I don't see why not, but it would probably need extensive editing to be considered encyclopedic material.

    User page erroneously going on watch list

    It seems that almost every time I edit my own talk page, my user page goes on my watch list against my wish. This has happened three times now. Is this some kind of bug in MediaWiki? Should I file a bug report? — JIP | Talk 13:18, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Have you got the "watch pages I edit by default" switched on in preferences? Have you been ticking the "Watch this page" box when you edit? Remember that watching and unwatching pages goes in pairs, so watching your talk will watch your user page too. - IMSoP 13:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I don't have "watch pages I edit by default" switched on. No other page I edit ever goes automatically to my watch list, only my user page. I don't think I've been clicking "watch this page". Clicking it accidentally three times seems rather unlikely. — JIP | Talk 14:01, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Out of curiosity, is there a reason why you wouldn't want to watch your own User and Talk pages? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:29, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    No real reason, it's just a matter of principle that I don't the software to do what I don't ask it to do. — JIP | Talk 15:38, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough. Maybe it's Wikipedia's equivalent of a yard-maintenance ordinance. If you want to have a lawn on the wiki, you have to keep an eye on it: pull weeds, mow occasionally. :D TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Templates again

    Ok, I'm in the middle of the creating Templates learning curve, and the documentation is failing me. I have successfully created 2 page templates, and used them, and now I want to know:

    • How can I include a parameter so that it will NOT be included if it's left blank? (Instead of the default {{{parameter}}} display )?
    • How can I include a parameter that is one of a short list of choices (e.g. red or white background)

    The only examples I can see that do these things are, like the Template:Language, far too complex for me to find my simple answers.

    Thanks for your patience,

    --Steve Rapaport 14:11, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    1. If you write {{{parameter|Default value}}}, it will display "Default value" if the parameter is not defined (different to being left blank), so if you put {{{parameter|}}} it'll display nothing.
    2. Not sure exactly what you mean, but if you used {{Switch}} in your template you could do something like
    {{Switch|{{{parameter}}}
        |Case: red = red
        |Case: white = white
        |Default = white
}}
    then the only values of your parameter that would work would be red and white, anything else would produce white (as default). - Lee (talk) 14:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for answers! Followup questions:


    1. Those default values use the pipe character, but my template is (like most), organized as a table. So when I tried it, the mediawiki parser mixed up the table pipes and the template pipes and gave nonsense. Any ideas how I can fix this?
    2. Switch seems to be a wikipedia template, added recently. If I want to use it on wikicities, which doesn't include the Wikipedia template space, can I just copy its source over? Some of it? Source is
     {{{case: {{{1|}}}|{{{default|}}}}}}
<noinclude>[[Category:If Templates|Switch]][[vi:Tiêu bản:Switch]][[ca:Template:Depenent]][[ru:Шаблон:Switch]]</noinclude>
    It seems that Wikicities uses MediaWiki 1.4.10 [4] whereas Wikipedia uses 1.6devel (Special:Version). I know for a fact the switch template doesn't work in older versions because I had to download the most up to date version from CVS to get it to work on my local wiki. I don't think the default value stuff works in older versions either. Sorry. - Lee (talk) 19:30, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks very much for the clear answer anyway, Lee! At least I won't waste more time trying until the software's updated! Kudos to you! --Steve Rapaport 19:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Capasity of Twisted Pair & Coaxial cable

    My Question is.... 1.How much data can be tranferred at a same time in a Twisted pair cable & Coaxial cable or what is the total capasity of those cable?

    Please read the instructions on the top of this page. The Help desk is for questions about Wikipedia itself. The right place to ask other computer-related questions is the Science Reference desk. 130.243.135.145 16:02, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How many daily page views?

    How many daily page views does the english language version of wikipedia get on average?

    Cheers

    Jim 194.128.126.2 15:16, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Please see Wikipedia:Statistics. As of October of 2004, the internal statistics [5] say it was 6M or roughly half of the 13M of the wikipedia.org total. http://www.alexa.com/ claims wikipedia.org had about 200M page views per day in October of 2004 and is now at about 1000M page views per day [6]. Assuming the same scaling, the internal statistics for en should be about 30M per day. Note that if Alexa's statistics are correct and roughly half of the wikipedia.org views are en (Alexa says 63%), the number would be more like 500M per day. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:12, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I would like to use Wikipedia software to create a wiki-style site. However, I want the content of the site not to be in the public domain. So, for example, I would use the wikipedia sofware to create an encyclopedia dedicated to a randomly chosen example of e.g. business cards. The wikipedia software would obviously belong to Wikipedia, but would the content I create, e.g. long scholarly entries on business cards, be in the public domain under the various wikipedia licences?

    Cheers

    Jim 194.128.126.2 15:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    There's a distinction between MediaWiki - the wiki software used to operate Wikipedia - and Wikipedia itself, the site run through MediaWiki. MediaWiki is itself free software, but the content can (I believe) be licensed as you choose, and doesn't have to have anything to do with Wikipedia. (A large, large number of wikis are run using MediaWiki, with a variety of licenses) Shimgray | talk | 15:30, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    You will probably want to visit MediaWiki.org to download or read up the software, which is written using PHP and MySQL. jnothman talk 23:03, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How old some one is?

    (No question)

    If you mean, should someone's age be included in a Wikipedia article? The answer is, I think, no – because it will soon be out of date. However, including their date of birth, so anyone can work it out, is standard practice. Notinasnaid 15:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How old is Gabrielle Christian and Mandy M of the tv show South of nowhere?

    Please see the instructions at the very top of this page. Notinasnaid 15:50, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Meaning to say, this sort of question is more appropriate at the Reference Desk. jnothman talk 23:04, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikimedia Commons

    Do I need a separate login to upload images to Wikimedia Commons? If so, why?

    What's the advantage of Commons over uploading images to Wikipedia?

    Thanks. JJ 16:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes you do. Each wikimedia project has separate logins -- wiktionary, wikisource, and the wikipedias for different languages all have seperate login databases. The advantage of commons is that images in it can be used without re-uploadign in all of those projects. One aspect that may or may not be a disadvantage is that commons is striter about licensing -- fair use images are not allowed there. DES (talk) 18:02, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Nearly any image that is not being used under the fair use rationale should be uploaded to commons, not en. (Possible exceptions include language-specific images, eg with English writing all over them, but there are plenty of maps on commons, so I doubt even this.) See commons:Commons:First steps for a quick guide to commons. It's very similar to here, except that on commons it's very important that images are put into categories and/or on gallery pages. If you want a hand feel free to ask me any questions, either here or on commons. Cheers, pfctdayelise 00:54, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Pornography is posted under Anal sex

    user:KJVTRUTH removing my request for censorship, by resolution of KJV Psalm 1

    "Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful." (Psalm 1:1) -- Dystopos 21:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia is not censored for the protection of minors. The images in that article are appropriate to illustrate the subject, and are in general accord with wikipedia policy. I should add that ther is nothing in any way illegal about publishing or posting to the internet the images involved, nor IMO should there be.DES (talk) 19:08, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    You might want to try looking at the previous discussions on this topic, such as Wikipedia:Image censorship - unsurprisingly, you are not the first to suggest such a move but there has not been a consensus that this would be the right thing to do. You are, of course, free to not use or contribute to Wikipedia if you do not agree with its policies; you are also free to discuss those policies with other users, but I'm afraid you will not find consensus easy to reach on this contentious an issue. - IMSoP 21:05, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    "Given the LAWS of this country"? What country? No, wait, let me guess. You speak of "this country" as though you think everyone else is also from that country, so it must be Merka. What do I win? — JIP | Talk 21:38, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    KJVTRUTH, I'm sure you would find such images in paper encyclopedias as well. Maybe not so often in the KJV. Pornography is quite a different thing. If users were looking for pornographic images, they wouldn't need to look as far as Wikipedia. jnothman talk 23:13, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Why? Do you want to buy some? — JIP | Talk 20:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Personally, I believe however that a template should be made and be placed on the top mentioning that there are images unsuitable for people under the age of 18, or at least pre-teens. Template:DaGizza/Sg 22:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Such templates have been proposed on several occasions, and have always been promptly deleted, or have failed to be approved if proposed before creation. I oppose the use of any such templte anywhere on wikipedia unless we have an agreed and uniformly applied policy on when and where to use such warnings. see Wikipedia:No disclaimer templates. DES (talk) 22:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How to delete User pages

    What is the best way to delete User pages that I no longer need or use?

    From Wikipedia:User page#How do I delete my user and user talk pages? - Just add to the page: {{Deletebecause|the reason you need the page deleted}}. - Lee (talk) 20:09, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    ciating

    How do I cited Wikipedia webpage

    click the cite this article link on the toolbox (left side of the screen). Broken S 21:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Or see Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:56, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How to extend the edition toolbar?

    In the Hebrew Wikipedia, for example, the toolbar contains more functions. How can I add more functions to the English toolbar? JasonG 21:30, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I have a feeling that's on the server side, since it allows for things that we can't usually put in pages. Nonetheless, you could build a javascript (a user script, more precisely) for your own uses, or share it with others. jnothman talk 23:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Using an image as a link to an article

    Hello again. This time, I ask if it is possible to use an image (specifically, Image:Striped apple logo.png, which is rendered as

    File:Striped apple logo.png

    ) to link to a page besides the image (i. e., WikiProject Macintosh). My plan is to use in in my signature to easily link to the Project, so I can get there easily and also to advertise for it. If it involves Javascript, advanced HTML, or anything complicated, it's not worth it. Thanks. --HereToHelp (talk) 21:50, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't think that's possible (it requires some special fiddling) and anyways I think it's a violation of Apple's copyright on the image (you can't claim fairuse for that use). Broken S 21:53, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    It is possible. See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Template:Click. WAvegetarian (talk) (email) (contribs) 22:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    It is Wikipedia policy to link to Image pages when clicking on the images themselves. That is where the edit history and copyright information are stored. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:58, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Forget free use. Everyone knows what the sybol is and that it's not mine. Once again, you've been very helpful. Unfortunatly, you can't use templates in signatures, so there goes that idea.
    Either way, that click template seems to be a little faulty, and generally very dodgy. jnothman talk 23:24, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Direct link to User talk: page in signature

    I like the version of a signature with both a link to the User: page and a link to the User talk: page. There was a method to add a link to my User talk: page to the signature.
    On the 'User profiles' tab of the preferences page, there is room to add a nickname to the user name. Instead of adding a nickname, I had added
    ]]|[[User talk:Cleon_Teunissen|Talk
    That did the trick, my signature would have both a link to my User: page and to my User Talk page.
    However, there seems to be a glitch in some character conversion. You have to check out the source, I tried an escape with the nowiki /nowiki tags, but to no avail.
    Since the characters are not properly there, the string is not parsed as a link.
    Is there another way to include a link to my User talk: page in my signature?
    --Cleon Teunissen | [[User talk:Cleon_Teunissen|Talk]] 22:30, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Check out Wikipedia:Fix your signature. WAvegetarian (talk) (email) (contribs) 22:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, that was the information I needed.--Cleon Teunissen | Talk 22:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    December 14

    I have seen it used here and there... Example:

    Revert edits by 193.0.252.16 (talk) to last version by someone

    where "193.0.252.16" is a wikilink to the user contributions list, and "talk" is a wikilink to the user's talk page.

    How do I easily create these wikilinks in the Edit summary?

    Thanks.

    Those are created by an admin using the vandalism rollback button, and are only suppsoed to be used for "simple vandalism". there is a script to do soemthign simialr for non-admins, see user scripts. DES (talk) 02:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Script is called god-mode lite available Wikipedia:WikiProject_User_scripts/Scripts. Gflores Talk 02:28, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    In the specific case you were talking about, this is formed in this way: "Reverted edits by [[Special:Contributions/193.0.252.16|193.0.252.16]] ([[User_talk:193.0.252.16|talk]]) to last version by someone" becomes: Reverted edits by 193.0.252.16 (talk) to last version by someone

    Hope that helps. JesseW, the juggling janitor 22:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

    food adultration

    How to identify adultration in milk ?

    Please take your question to the reference desk. This page is for questions about wikipedia, and someone is probably more likely to answer it there.--Ali K 07:56, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Dynamic data content

    Is it possible to have data in one page such as images or contents of a table and have a dynamic link to it in another page. Such that changes in one place are reflected in the other page having the linked content ? Like MS Excel formulas - more or less.... Shyamal 07:37, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Sounds like something that is either impossible or that can be done with templates. But I think you'll have to be more specific to get more detailed and certain replies. jnothman talk 12:33, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Essentially what i am looking for is a system to substitute text from one source page into a destination page using somekind of marker. When text is changed in the source page it should reflect in the destination page. Same for images. I would like for instances to have a page where the source is taxoimage from a taxobox for a species entry is shown without specific reference to the image file. So if the taxoimage changed it would automatically reflect in the destination page. Shyamal 03:44, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure if I quite understand yet, but can't you just put the dynamic content in a template and use that? jnothman talk 03:48, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I havent explored templates, but my understanding based on using taxobox templates is that all the data that goes into the template are defined in the same page. Can there be data that goes into a template that comes from some other page. To give a concrete example I can think of a single page which summarizes the populations of all countries. The population data themselves should be drawn from the populations mentioned in the Infobox Country of the individual country pages. The idea is that like in a database, the data is not duplicated and consistency is maintained. Shyamal 07:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Right. Well then, but you can't grab this data off the middle of another page, but theoretically one could make templates for each country's population, . But that is heavy computationally and a big hassle to manage. One could also make a single template that stores all countries' populations, which would then be accessed by something like {{countrypop|au}}. We could define such a template using the {{switch}} template:
    {{switch
  |{{{1}}}
  |case: au=20,406,800
  |case: ar=38,592,150
  |case: us=297,700,000
}}

    You could use further nested switches to select between calculated years of population: 

    {{switch
  |{{{1}}}
  |case: au=20,406,800
  |case: ar=38,592,150
  |case: us={{switch|year|case: 2005=297,700,000|case: 2000=281,421,906|default=297,700,000}}
}}
    But this is:
    1. A mess to build
    2. Nearly as much of a mess to maintain as the current alternative
    3. Very heavy in server costs if you're populating an entire infobox with things like these.
    jnothman talk 08:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    incorporating latitude and longitude coordinates?

    I've seen some pages (notably pages on cities) include markup which specifies the latitude and longitude. I have a collection of GPS coordinates that I think would enhance some existing articles. Is there a standard format to use for this? Standard markup text? Standard significant figures or number of decimal places? I searched around the help and FAQ and couldn't find anything specific.

    • Well, I prefer to use the coor dm and coor dms templates. To use them, write {{coor dm|12|34|N|12|34|E}} or {{coor dms|12|34|56|N|12|34|56|E}}, where the first set of numbers is the latitude and the second set is the longitude. — JIP | Talk 07:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    To clarify, they turn out like this: 12°34′N 12°34′E / 12.567°N 12.567°E / 12.567; 12.567 and 12°34′56″N 12°34′56″E / 12.58222°N 12.58222°E / 12.58222; 12.58222. See Template talk:Coor dms. jnothman talk 12:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    For the curious, those coordinates turn out to be somewhere in Nigeria. — JIP | Talk 20:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    In re: article on John Henry Faulk

    I am the oldest child (from his first wife) of JHF. I notice some inaccuracies and omissions in the article. How do I set them straight? In the interest of truth, justice, and the American Way, Cynthia Tannehill Faulk Ryland.

    Hi and welcome, Cynthia. Thanks for your interest in improving Wikipedia: although we're not all here interested in the American Way, truth and justice are pretty important.
    The simplest way to "set them straight" would be just to edit the article yourself (click "edit this page" at the top of John Henry Faulk). Preferably, and if you have them apart from your own knowledge, please cite sources. If you feel the need to justify your changes, please do so on the article's talk page. See the tutorial for more about editing Wikipedia, or just ask further here if you need anything specific. jnothman talk 12:39, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    This one is complicated, because, at one stage, a large part of it was a copyright violation that had to be removed. I think you need to click the history tab, and then the compare versions button, and work backwards using the previous version links to really see how the article got how it was.
    Like most articles, sources haven't been provided properly, but some of the additonal reading has probably been used as sources. All of those look reputable, so you should not remove content that is explicitly supported by these sources. If you disgree with sourced material and can provide alternative sources, you should make the conflict explicit. If you can't provide alternative sources, your only real option is to place your version on the talk page. The thing to remember is that Wikipedia truth is that which can be verified from reputable sources, even if those sources are wrong. If the sources are wrong, you need to address those. --David Woolley 12:54, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Slope side

    An article I created, Slope side, has been tagged for cleanup. I'm trying to see what is so awfull. Can anyone shed some insight? Thanks, CanadianGuy 15:36, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    When an article is tagged in this way, it can mean that the content is OK but the presentation isn't Wikipedia standard, or that spelling/grammar needs improving. For instance, have you noticed that Wikipedia articles generally start with the defined term in bold (not italic). I'm not convinced that accomodations, the plural, is correctly used here, though it may be in current US usage. I'd expect accomodation. Notinasnaid 15:50, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I've seen it used on various commercial websites here in Canada, although if they were Quebec websites they could be a "lost in translation" kind of deal. I'll make some changes. Shouldn't the page be listed in Wikipedia:Cleanup? CanadianGuy 15:57, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    A quick google confirms that accomodations is OK, although using it 3 times in the first paragraph probably wasn't.. CanadianGuy 15:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, it should be listed at Wikipedia:Cleanup or at the very least contain info on the talk page from the person who tagged it as to their reasons. Listing it at Wikipedia:Cleanup may attract exactly the type of people to have the article improved to a state the tag is no longer needed. Also, see [Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce]]. - Mgm|(talk) 16:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, my spelling is not up to much. Instead of accomodations (one m), I'd expect accommodation (m twice). Google can't really be used as much of a guide of correct usage, only popular usage: it finds the first form over 12 million times, but the second form 170 million times. A popular error. I'm still not convinced about accommodations, even though it has 120 million hits. Some meanings might take a plural (e.g. the meaning of an adjustment), but http://elc.polyu.edu.hk/ErrorCorrection/nounsEx.htm suggests it is an uncountable noun like equipment or health. My dictionary (UK English) does say that the plural form was used 'formerly or sometimes in America'; still, the singular should please everyone. Sorry to go on, but if you can't be pedantic in an encyclopedia, where can you? Notinasnaid 17:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Missing image

    Hi,

    I created and uploaded the image Image:Tournamentbracket.png over a year ago for the Tournament article, and the image now seems to have been deleted. It's possible that I didn't have a GFDL tag on it, but I don't remember. Is there a way to undelete the image? Tempshill 17:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    From the deletion log: 11:36, 10 December 2005 JesseW deleted "Image:Tournamentbracket.png" (WP:CSD Image #4 - "Images in category "Images with unknown source" or "Images with unknown copyright status"which have been on the site for more than 7 days, regardless of when uploaded.")
    It looks like you failed to include source or copyright info. i agree it would be nicve no notifyu uploadeers in such cases, adn i try to, but policy does not currently require it. Images cannot be undelted in the same way that other content can, see Wikipedia:Lost images for more on this. DES (talk) 17:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    The image is still avaialble at answers.com if you want to grab it and re-uplaod it, with proper source and copyright info. DES (talk) 17:37, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll do that, thanks for the info. Finally a use for the mirrors! Tempshill 18:33, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sorry about the deletion of your image. Sadly, errors like this will unavoidably come up when doing as large a job as clearing out the backlog at {{no source}}. I'm delighted that you were able to find and reupload it, with proper source and license info. The process is working; thanks for your help. JesseW, the juggling janitor 22:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

    Chemical Formula

    What is the easiest to insert a chemical formula into an article? E.g. H20--> 1/2 O2+ H+ so that it is pretty?

    Yakiea 17:27, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    You might ask at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemicals. Seems like there should be something at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals/Style guidelines. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:33, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How can I ask for someone to be blocked?

    The user from the IP : 130.39.139.247 has repeadetly posted racist comments and vandalism on this page, Jew on December 14, and I and other users cleaned it up, who shouls I ask to ban this user. Thanks

    And also how can I ask for a article to be deleted? such as Nightclub shit, which I find has no real reason to exist.

    Please see Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism for help with vandals. You can request articles that are obvious nonsense be deleted by following the procedure described at Wikipedia:Speedy deletions (note that there are specific criteria involved, see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion). Requests to delete articles not meeting the criteria for speedy deletion are handled by the process described at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    December 15

    Esperanza

    I don't know if this question is for the Help desk, but how do I become a memeber of the Wikipedia groups such as Esperanza?

    You simply add your name to the list of members! It might also be good to watch relevant pages. In the case of Esperanza, there are criteria before someone adds their name to the members list, but most groups do not have such charters. jnothman talk 03:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Genealogy reports

    is there a section of wiki that can be used for geneology reports. it seems like a perfect use for this software.--Ergosum 03:52, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so genealogies do not quite belong here (although some are given for monarchial families). Nonetheless, there are other web sites running wiki software, some even running MediaWiki which powers this site, such as those at Wikicities. So other people have thought the same as you and I have at least found: <http://genealogy.wikicities.com>, <http://www.genealogywiki.org/>. Additionally, one Wikipedian has a short say on the idea of a Genealogy Wiki. You can, of course, also set up your own. jnothman talk 04:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    what is the capital of Guam?

    The big bold text at the top of this page declares that it is intended for questions on How to use Wikipedia. Your answer will very quickly be found at Guam, but if it wasn't, this is a factual question that should be asked at the Reference Desk, not here. jnothman talk 12:11, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Ice fishing

    I have just discovered Wikipedia and found "Ice Fiahing". I did not see any reference to "stunning" fish through the ice. I'm sure this is rare, but as a young boy, when the conditions permitted, (no snow on the ice) used an axe to give a heavy blow on the ice above fish in shallow water. The blow would temporairly stun the fish. I would then chop through an retrieve the fish. I must not be the only one in the world who has done this. Would this be appropriate to include in "Ice Fishing"?

    If you can find a reference to cite, sure. If you can't find a reference it sounds like it would be prohibited under Wikipedia:No original research, unless you can make a case that "every ice fisherman knows this" (but if this is true, the chances that there is no reference to find should be pretty close to 0). -- Rick Block (talk) 14:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    But a good place to bring this up would be the article's talk page: if you post your comment there, then people who have helped to write the article will probably pick it up, and they're more likely to know about it than the average Help Desk person. jnothman talk 21:53, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Best Userpage?

    On Wikipedia i am wishing to find what i think is the best userpage. How would i go about telling people about this. I already have a point about it on my userpage but how can i let a lot of people know? --Ali K 15:07, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    The Wikipedia:Department of Fun might be a starting point. Stevage 15:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    How to reply to users on talk pages?

    What's the standard etiquette when someone leaves a message on your talk page:

    1. Reply directly on the talk page, and hope they come back to read it
    2. Move their question to their talk page, and reply beneath it
    3. Leave their question on your talk page, but reply on their talk page

    All of these seem pretty awkward - is there a better way? Ta. Stevage 15:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    The default is probably #3, although some users use #2 to avoid the disconnected conversations that result (and some reply in both places!). Many users indicate on their talk page their preference for #1. I don't know of a better way. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:08, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • I usually do #3, and sometimes I use #2 if I'm responding to a particular old or complicated question. I don't recommend #1 unless the people asking the question explicitly stated they'll keep an eye on your talk page. Basically there's no standard way to do it. But if you want to keep most people happy, I'd recommend using #2. - Mgm|(talk) 17:30, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Most often, I leave a question at someone's talk page, and then have a look at the talk page every now and then, if they don't reply on my own talk page before it. For questions by others, I reply on my own talk page. If they want to copy the discussion to their own talk pages, that's fine. I never copy discussions from other talk pages to mine. — JIP | Talk 18:54, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • When I am asked for help, I usaully respond on my own page and copy the entire thread to the talk page of the person who asked me, or esle i copy their question and simply respond on their page. When someone is advisign me or raising questions about my actions I soemtimes do the same and soemtimes simply respond on my tal;k page. And if the issue is relevant largely to a particualr articel i soemtiems copy the question to that articel's talk page and resond there, with a brief comment on the talk page of the other user that indicates where I responded, includign a link. DES (talk) 19:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • I usually do #3, but if I have written to a newbie, I am more likely to expect them to follow #1, so I check up. I also often contextualise my responses, so that it's not #2 in the sense that it's not verbatim, but it helps to remind what you're responding to. jnothman talk 22:00, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Interesting responses, thanks heaps. I'm having a conversation with someone atm where the model seems to be that each person replies on the other person's page, creating a nested tree of responses - but you never see the qusetions because they're on the *other* person's page. Gee it would be nice if there was a proper messaging system, or at least a hacked "reply" button or something that made this work properly. Like you select the text, press "reply" and it automatically removes it, pastes it at the user's talk page, and edits the page for you. I dream. Stevage 23:12, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Search Relevance

    How does one edit a page show that it shows up in a "search" with the proper relevance. For example I want the article "Jamestown Bridge (Old)" to show up under a search for "Jamestown Bridge". Any suggestions? Thank you

    You sure you don't just want to create a disambiguation page at "Jamestown Bridge" pointing to the [[Jamestown Bridge (Old) and Jamestown-Verrazano Bridge pages? As for the search results - sorry, no idea why itdoesn't turn up higher. Incidentally, you should probably rename the page to "Jamestown Bridge (old)" - that seems to be the convention. Um...I've done a couple of tweaks on the various pages, and it still doesn't show up - it's a bit mysterious. Maybe it takes a while to make it to the search results?
    The searche works off cached data which is not updated every day -- more like every week or two i think, but I don't know the precise schedule. A redirect would take a user directly to the page without messign with the search feature, however. Using google to search wikipedia as done via this link is often better anyway -- google has lots of paid people working on a search engine, and wqe don't, search is not our strongest feature. DES (talk) 17:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    "google has lots of paid people working on a search engine" - including me. :) Stevage 23:08, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Indents

    I want to add this:

    Alone aloft I alight
    to live 

          among louts,

    lovers; all troubled,
    older than my nighted
    soul: life is fire-like—
    it flutters and gutters and is quenched by cold.

    but why does 'among louts' turn into a table? I just want it indented!

    By the way, using : to indent doesn't look right. ZephyrAnycon 17:10, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I want it to look like this: http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/9894/peom4ii.jpg.
    But it ends up looking like this:

    Alone aloft I alight
    to live

    among louts,

    lovers; all troubled,
    older than my nighted
    soul: life is fire-like—
    it flutters and gutters and is quenched by cold.

    See the difference?

    Try the following. DES (talk) 19:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Alone aloft I alight
    to live

    among louts,

    lovers; all troubled,
    older than my nighted
    soul: life is fire-like—
    it flutters and gutters and is quenched by cold.


    Oh dear it really looks like Wikipedia's capability is limited here. It's important in any encyclopedia that you're able to exactly transcribe anything you want to quote. Here I can't indent a line without it looking like a stanza break, which it isn't. ZephyrAnycon 20:15, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Okay, try this one (view the source):
    Alone aloft I alight

    to live
    among louts,
    lovers; all troubled,
    older than my nighted
    soul: life is fire-like—

    it flutters and gutters and is quenched by cold.
    You don't actually need to use the <div> around the whole thing, but the idea is to use a <span> to give a specific margin of indent, and so that there is no gap before and after as there was when using : to indent. jnothman talk 22:06, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Or you could just start each line with a space, then it will all be in the box:
     Alone aloft I alight
 to live
          among louts,
 lovers; all troubled,
 older than my nighted
 soul: life is fire-like—
 it flutters and gutters and is quenched by cold.
     ~Kaimbridge~22:20, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Messy Pages

    Here's my question: How do I scratch the inaccessible part of my back?
    Just joking of course! :-)

    Actually: If I encounter a page that I think is mess from a standpoint of redundancy, relevancy of information and as such *not really an encyclopedic article*, how should I proceed? (I mean apart from mentioning my wish on the talk page and being shredded for it:) The article in question is Ronald Reagan and as you can imagine people there tend to be quite sensitive to changes to their additions. That, IMO, leads to this article being continually added to but hardly ever cleaned up (I'm probably exaggerating here:)

    Maybe someone wants to have a look at the article and give me feedback. Am I completely wrong or do others too think this article needs work cleaning? Your opinions would be highly appreciated! --Boo 17:14, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I was afraid of that:) That article mostly feels like a mess... Anyway:
    - Under Cabinet there's a table of people appointed in Reagan's administration. I think this and similar stuff should be in Reagan_Administration to lighten the article.
    - The last section 'Miscellanous' should be merged into an existing section.
    - Lots of other stuff I don't remember right now.

    To be honest, I hoped that an experienced Wikipedian could tell me wether I rightfully perceive the article as being in need of cleaning, or wether it adheres to the standards closely enough. --Boo 17:48, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    I quite agree that stuff on his administration is not about him and shouldn't be found in this article. Yes, I think the article should be more to the point: Feel free to do it (or enlist it at Wikipedia:Cleanup, citing your reasons and ideas). jnothman talk 22:11, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    My answer: Proceed slowly and cautiously. Start with changes that people can't argue with. If a fact is repeated twice, remove one of them, and explain on the talk page what you're doing. If a fact in the "miscellaneous" section would be better off in another paragraph, move it there, and explain it. Once you gain editors' trust that you're not malicious, you can proceed to bigger changes like restructuring and cutting down wordy passages, but try and give people warning on the talk pages. It's all about not stepping on toes, much more so than you might think. No page ever "adheres to the standards closely enough" - every page can be improved. Stevage 22:53, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Help with {{ref}}

    I'm trying to convert Schizophrenia to using {{ref|...}} for references instead of {{fn|...}}, as it does now. I created a little script to do this, but I'm not happy with the results. Under the "History" heading, you'll find the very first reference ("However, a recent study..."). However, it is assigned number 2, not 1! What's going on here?

    My first theory was that there was an external link (like [http://foo.org]) somewhere earlier in the text, because these use the same numbering sequence (right?), but this seems not to be the case. /Skagedal 17:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    There is considerable controversy over conversion to this format. You might want to look at Wikipedia talk:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/SEWilco before you continue with this project.
    That said, no there is not normally a URL link in the text area -- in fact an article that uses this format must not user inline URLs without link text, because they screw up the numbering system. {{ref}} inserts a link, which goes to the corresponding use of {{note}} -- coresponding according to the note name/lable. The calls to {{note}} are normally all in the Notes section, and they include the actual citation info, which may or may not include a URL. If this dean't help, reread Wikipedia:Footnotes which expalins the method in some detail, and/or find a page that uses the system. I used it on Thomas Shipp, perhaps that page will help. DES (talk) 19:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    And yet, for whatever reason, your footnote number [1] is marked within the picture caption, just before "Role of dopamine". This seems like a MediaWiki bug... Correct me if I'm wrong! jnothman talk 22:16, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleting pointless text from Talk pages?

    Is it acceptable to delete pointless comments from talk pages? I mean pointless in the sense of lines like "I like rice" or "haha I got me a computer" or something similarly stupid and unrelated to the page. --Xyzzyplugh 21:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Usually these are just tests, I think, so yeah, as long as it's not going to offend anyone in a discussion, it would be fine IMO. jnothman talk 22:17, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Amethyst version

    I set my skin or version, whatever it is, to amethyst in my user preferences. There is some problems with this version. 22:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

    I use that skin too, and one thing I notice is that there is no search box! P=)  ~Kaimbridge~22:52, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Column width

    I'm editing the occupational therapy page, and down at the bottom, under occupational therapy associations by state, I was able to list all the states in three columns. Is there a way of changing the column widths so that the columns are closer together? I think it looks a little silly the way it is now spread out so far out. The reason I'm doing columns in the first place is because I don't want the list to go so far down. --aishel 23:03, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    If you take a look at the code of {{col-begin}} there is an optional argument for width. Annoyingly, the previous revision of this template specified that width in the HTML declaration of the table rather than in CSS. This meant that widths could only be specified in pixels or as a percentage of the horizontal space available, neither of which are appropriate. Hence I modified the template to specify the width in CSS, and set it correctly (to 35em: em is a unit based on the width of the letter m in the particular font, and so as long as the font isn't vastly different, this should be screen independent) in the occupational therapy article. I also changed the section heading from "Occupational Therapy Associations by State" to "Occupational Therapy Associations by US State": Wikipedia is an international project. jnothman talk 23:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks jnothman! It looks great!--aishel 00:27, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Editing Help

    Hi I'm writing information about my town Orangeville, Ontario. If you look at it now it's a bit of a mess. Can someone tell me how to put my text into columns?

    Oliver D. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.209.16.15 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia put its articles in columns; sometimes particular lists may be put in columns but in general columns aren't supported well online. They're also more difficult to read than on paper, as you may have to scroll down to read the bottom of the column, then scroll up to read the start of the next. Please see Wikipedia's Manual of Style for all guides on how to make an article look like others in Wikipedia. jnothman talk 23:59, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    It looks fine to me, I mean it would do with some padding out... but what exactly do you think is in a "mess"? My tip would be: find a similar article at the same level (eg a decent article about another town in Ontario), and then copy their format. pfctdayelise 00:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


    The population demographics part. Thanks for the advice though.

    Ah yes, we didn't look too carefully, did we. That's meant to be a table. I'll format it properly. jnothman talk 02:35, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    Two Suggestions

    Hi,

    I am a frequent user of Wikipedia. I think that adding the following two features in Wikipedia will make it more comfortable -

    1. Add a Wikipedia search facility from the Internet Explorer taskbar (similar to Google's, but just the search facility, nothing else). You might be able to add this to one of the existing task bars as well since it's just a box.

    2. Have a separate address to receive improvement suggestions. Using Helpdesk for such purpose is somewhat confusing.

    Thanks, Saranga

    There is a page other than the help desk for suggestions. It's the Village Pump, particularly the proposals page. As for the tool bar, there are tools that allow you to add any search engine to your toolbar. I don't use Internet Explorer, though, so I don't know what in particular. Yes, maybe a Wikipedia user should invent a toolbar for various web browsers, but I don't know who would be willing/able to do that. jnothman talk 00:20, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    December 16

    Kate's Edit Counter

    What happened to Kate's edit counter? I have a link on my user page to my edit count, but it doesn't work anymore. Was the site removed, or can anyone tell me if the page was moved to another URL? --King of Hearts 00:51, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

    It's here. Hermione1980 01:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=31567193"