Help desk
< April 14	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 16 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

April 15

Common Wikimedia account

Is there any way to make a user account, that is connected to Wikipedia in other languages or other Wikimedia sites, such as Wikiversity, Wikispecies, Commons, or Media-Wiki? Please get back soon.Mattkenn3 (talk) 01:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Once m:SUL is enabled for all editors, you will only need to create one account which will exist on all WMF wikis. seresin ( ¡? ) 01:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When will that happen?Mattkenn3 (talk to me) 01:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At this point it is unknown when (if ever) it will be enabled for all users Alexfusco⁵ 01:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It will probably take a while. They have been working on that for almost four years, right?Mattkenn3 (please just talk to me now) 01:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, but they are far enough along in testing that they have enabled it for administrator use. I went through the process and it worked fine.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What happens if someone already has your account name on another language wikipedia? --Cameron (t|p|c) 11:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that event that account will not be brought into the fold and you can try usurpation, if the situation permits. If active, there's nothing I know of that you can do.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rev. Benjamin Durell Weeks

Rev. Benjamin Durell Weeks was president of Bacone College from 1918 to 1941. He is mentioned on your Page of the college, listed under CAMPUS, second paragraph. He is buried in the small cemetery at the college.

I need copies of records of him and his work. An obituary on him. Copies of pictures of him and his family and a picture of his tombstone. He is in my ancestral lineage, and I'm trying to complete it but have no information on B. D. Weeks.

I understand that this may take awhile to find these records so I will keep watching for the reply. Is it possible to list your address at the Help Desk so I can make my request via post office mail ? Thank you, Margaret —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.85.210.100 (talk) 01:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to try asking at the reference desk. The Help Desk is here to help you use Wikipedia. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) First, I advise against listing your real address on a high profile page of the internet such as this. Your question would be better placed at Wikipedia's reference desk, at either the miscellaneous or humanities section. This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Note that you might get some mileage out of posting a message at the talk page of the article where it might get exposure to those who are interested in the college and thus may have specialized knowledge about your ancestor.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heraldic artist needed

There are errors on the Marquess's coronet. IE The stuff should be red not purple and the "jewels " (properly strawberry leaves) should be gold coloured. - Kittybrewster ☎ 03:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Graphic Lab should be able to help with that. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 03:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sponsoring institution

i am doing a report and i was wondering who/what is your sponsering istitution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.131.55 (talk) 02:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation —teb728 t c 02:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has an article on Wikipedia that explains this. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 03:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are referencing Wikipedia (which you generally shouldn't be), you may want to see this page on how to properly cite Wikipedia. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 05:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Soho Housing Association speedy deletion

Hello,

I am trying to post an article on Soho Housing Association. My first version did not have any external links, but when I added such links it was still deleted. Can you tell me where I am going wrong? The format I used is quite similar to other Housing Associations posed elsewhere on wikipedia. Could it be due to the pause (2-3 hours) between the two versions?

Thanks so much for your help. Paulebrown (talk) 03:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would have to say that there are two reasons for this. First off, you need to assert notability of the group in question. If you can give a verifiable answer to the question "Why is the Soho Housing Association notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia?" then the article usually can be included. The most recent version that was deleted does not assert why it is notable by giving reliable sources as to why this group should be included. Just being a company/group/Housing Association is not notable enough per our policies to be included. The first version deleted reads as an advertisement for the Association, something that is not allowed on encyclopedia (see WP:ADVERT). Another issue I want to address is it seems that you may have a conflict of interest, per the first user name that created the first deleted version, which you said was yourself. Please be aware that writing an article about a company/group/person that is related to you is frowned upon, because it is very hard for someone with a vested interest in something to write a neutral article. I hope this helps! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 03:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated the article for speedy deletion because it did not assert the notability of the association per WP:N. – ukexpat (talk) 15:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and correctly so ukexpat, however the starter of the article wasn't aware of a requirement of notability, a not uncommon occurance. SunCreator (talk) 15:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed so, I was merely confirming the reason for the speedy nomination. – ukexpat (talk) 19:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Religion demographics

I am unable to locate a source for the breakdown percentages of religion in U.S. states. (ex: New Mexico & North Carolina) New Mexico's article has an odd breakdown of religions since Baptists, Pentecostals, etc. are located under Catholicism. IMO, these religion sections need to be sourced to avoid such confusions. Anyone know where I could find this information so I can add refs? AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 05:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The New Mexico#Religion section has had some recent edits. The Protestant denominations are under a Protestant list item now. But it looks like the LDS list item is messed up. I don't know where to find this kind of data, but did you try Googling? Maybe:

etc. The article cites a reference: New Mexico#cite note-5. You might need to refresh your browser. --Teratornis (talk) 06:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reference was added after I posted this inquiry. Thank you for pointing that out to me. I'll add the source to U.S. state articles. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 07:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem redirecting to an anchor

Why don't some of the shortcuts on WP:NOT to individual sections work? Specifically, the ones that don't start with [[WP:NOT# appear to be broken. I've been trying to fix WP:FORUM to no avail, until I noticed none of the other similar shortcuts on WP:NOT (and other pages like WP:V, WP:OR, etc) seem to be working correctly. Is this a recent bug, from a MediaWiki update or something?

I tried to look this up in the Help pages, but the page where it explains how to make redirects to anchors (in Help:Redirect#A_redirect_to_an_anchor) is missing for some reason. It's a conspiracy! -kotra (talk) 06:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible partial explanation found: in Help:Redirect#A_redirect_to_an_anchor it describes the symptoms exactly, but it says it's already been fixed (back in 2006):

Section redirects are supposed to work from r18220 onwards. See bugzilla:218. If it does not work, you will be redirected to the page but you will not be sent to the section.

I sincerely hope I'm not stuck in 2006. Can anyone clarify? -kotra (talk) 06:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

question duplicated below and again below

Issue resolved. Details here. -kotra (talk) 19:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Username

Is it against WP guidelines for a user to sign as someone else when commenting? (ex:I leave a comment on a talk page, but sign as [[User:AgnosticPreachersKid|John Doe User]])?

It is against guidelines to sign as another user, but I use my real name in my sig when my username is just Dendodge. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 07:33, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) See Wikipedia:SIG#Customizing_your_signature – "In no circumstance should a signature be used to impersonate another user: in particular, a signature should not be identical to the actual username of another existing user, and even more importantly should not link to someone else's userpage. While not an absolute requirement, it is common practice for a signature to resemble to some degree the username it represents." Bencherlite ^Talk 07:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I saw a currently blocked editor do it and was curious. I guess he/she can sign that way since no one has the username. Thanks. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 07:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

Can someone explain what is going on here? I was looking at Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English and noticed there was a shortcut to it, WP:ENGVAR, linked on the right of the page. But when I click on the shortcut link, I am taken to the top of the MoS page, not the national varieties section. Then there is a link at the top of the MoS page saying "Redirected from WP:ENGVAR". I click on that link and am taken to the redirect page, which looks wrong to me since it just points to the MoS rather than the national varieties section. But when I edit the redirect page, the correct redirect (to the national varieties section) is there in the text box. Is there an error here, or is this how it is meant to work? --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow, I've just read the rest of this page and seen that someone else has just asked a very similar question above. I hadn't noticed that at all. Spooky. Looks like it's a bug? --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I noticed the same problem yesterday and mentioned it above. It's not just the WP: namespace either, I just tried it in the User: namespace and it doesn't work either: User:Kotra/redirecting

And in the main article space: Homsar -kotra (talk) 17:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Odd. I just checked some other redirect to anchors that I knew used to work and the do the same thing. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 10:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Issue resolved now (more details here). -kotra (talk) 19:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template and Extension help forums?

I am trying to test whether biological identification keys can be (better) supported in Wikipedia. I am testing template language etc. Two questions:

Is there a forum for "template newbies"?
In several cases I have been confused by the extensions which COULD be installed on MediaWiki and those actually available in Wikipedia. Is there a technical list of available extensions installed in English Wikipedia? I search FAQ archive and help.

Thanks! Vigilius (talk) 10:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the many template pages listed under templates at Wikipedia:Editor's index to Wikipedia.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:08, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did this, but I found no real place for discussion or asking help on developing templates. I do try to read all available documentation on templates, but it is rather an neglected area, burdened with needs of rewrites and refactoring for current version (I try to explain my problems on these pages). So I am looking for a "developer forum" where I may receive help. Of course, this may well not exist. Vigilius (talk) 17:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re #2: Good question. I spent about thirty minutes yesterday trying to figure out <poem> after seeing it used in an article— I thought it was an HTML tag I had missed somewhere in the last ten years. I finally found it at w:Extension:Poem. There is a list of extensions at w:Extension Matrix, but this does not show what is installed on any wiki. After a bit more thinking, I realized that there is usually some sort of version number for any application that shows plugins; after a bit of searching, I found it at Special:Version. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 13:33, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, that is it! Vigilius (talk) 17:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstars and the Sort

If there any rules (and are you allowed) to run a Wikipedia reward system like Barnstars. SimpsonsFan08 ^{talk contribs} 10:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean your own reward system, you can do that. As long as it rewards useful contributions that should be a welcome addition. If you want to give awards for improving a particular article, try WP:Reward board. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 11:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Section shortcuts don't seem to work at the moment

Section shortcuts such as WP:IDHT, WP:DASH, WP:HEAD etc. don't seem to be working at the moment. They only take the user to the top of the relevant page, rather than to the appropriate section. Any ideas? Jayen 466 12:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes, this is the third question on this topic today. See above. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 12:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tx, indeed. (Probably not the last either, unless someone manages to fix it. ;-) ) Jayen 466 12:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crossposted to the Pump(tech). --Bfigura ^(talk) 13:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tx for the crosspost. I knew there was a better place to post this. ;-) Jayen 466 15:08, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's weird. WP:HEAD says

#REDIRECT [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Section headings]] {{R from shortcut}}

But all that displays is Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Someone broke something somewhere. Something to do with someone wanting an article that started with #? 199.125.109.64 (talk) 14:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I already noted this behaviour in respect of WP:ENGVAR, see my post above (headed "Redirect"). --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Odd indeed as all seeems correct, just it doesn't work anymore Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English does work and WP:ENGVAR doesn't yet a look at the redirect for WP:ENGVAR shows a link to the former. Quite strange, guess someone has been tinkering with the wiki redirect mechanism? SunCreator (talk) 14:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Issue appears to be resolved now, due in part to the crossposting at the pump. Thanks, Bfigura. -kotra (talk) 19:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding software in "http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Comparison_of_accounting_software"

How can I add some more accounting software products to the above mentioned link? I miss some products like, Agresso Business World, Coda and CCS, and these international products should be included for a better comparison. 13:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)hurby.sliepen

If the software has a wikipedia article, bring it up on Talk:Comparison of accounting software. If no one objects, you can add it into the table yourself. Software that does not already have an article shouldn't be added. -- Kesh (talk) 15:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination problems

Hi. This new AfD nomination process is, to put it mildly, confusing. I'm trying to follow the steps to nomintate Christopher James Manners for deletion. I believe it to be a hoax, but it's been suggested that I put it up for a vote. I can't seem to find the place to paste the category link and therefore get it to appear in the current AfD discussion. Thanks. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 14:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have succeeded in opening the Afd now. SunCreator (talk) 14:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. :) Got it working. Thanks!! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 14:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how do I

Make a new page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiidawg92 (talk • contribs) 15:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Help:Starting a new page. You might also look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Put in the name of the article on the left side box and press go. However you must then Read this SunCreator (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FORWARDING A WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE VIA E-MAIL

Do you offer this option? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Behiggins (talk • contribs) 15:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment, we don't. If you think it should be introduced, you could propose it at the Village pump for proposals. A ecis^Brievenbus 15:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I've gone ahead and done just that. A ecis^Brievenbus 15:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We do, there's {{Email}}. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 17:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

citations

I am accused of promoting my book when I edited Curt Flood. Although that may be the case, it was incidental to my intention to footnote my editing. If undesirable, wipe them out, but I should think contributions should be footnoted. Guidance please!

Stuart Weiss <email removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.104.124.130 (talk) 17:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your edit to the article Curt Flood‎. I have explained why on the article's talk page, at Talk:Curt Flood‎#Edit reverted. As far as your question is concerned, using books you have written as a reference is discouraged, since you have a conflict of interest. A ecis^Brievenbus 17:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To add to Aecis's response, it's technically acceptable to edit Wikipedia even if there is a possible conflict of interest, but to avoid accusations of promotion, it's strongly encouraged to discuss such contentious edits on the talk page before making the edits. A bunch of advice about this can be found here. -kotra (talk) 19:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

editing protected articles

I would like to edit a sentence about a translation from french to english "foutu(e)" is not used as "fucked" in french. It actually means "made". So how could I edit the article eventhough it is protected. thank you Irlandis (talk) 17:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can add the request to the article's talk page and add the {{editprotect}} template. It shows that someone wants an edit to be made to a protected article. A ecis^Brievenbus 17:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotect}} is only for fully protected pages. The page in question is apparently Fuck which is only semi-protected so you can just make a suggestion on Talk:Fuck or wait until your account is autoconfirmed (4 days old), so you can edit semi-protected pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hidden cats

I read recently that some maintenance-related categories were hidden through another category or something... how does that work and how can I find them? -- 213.152.52.38 (talk) 18:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:CAT and look for Maintenance categories. This explains the usage and leads you to Category:Hidden categories. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 18:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do I get the tagged for deletion box off my page since the vote is to keep it?

I posted a page for the International Museum of Women on April 4 and it was considered for deletion. Since then, it looks like the vote is to keep the page. So, how can I get rid of the box at the top of my page discussing its potential for deletion? I would like to have the matter put to rest and my page clean. Imowed (talk) 19:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until the deletion discussion is closed, first. Usually, an admin has to close the discussion. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Once it is closed by an admin, a bot will remove the AfD tag and add a note to the talk page. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 19:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, be wary of referring to an article as your page. It may just be a slip of the typing-finger, but remember you do not own a page you have written. Good luck with the article. Skittle (talk) 13:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a historical page for a company that no longer exists?

Hello, I was hoping to create a page for a company that was started by my grandparents, run by my parents, and sold over five years ago. My purpose is to create a general information page so that former employees can add/update information on the history of the company when they worked there. Is this appropriate considering it is not meant to create profit or advertise? I would say it could be similar to looking up a company that has since shut down.

If wikipedia is not a good place to create such a page, are there other places on the internet where I could post such information?

Thanks

Trout459 (talk) 19:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As long as the page is neutral in tone (see WP:NPOV) and cited to multiple independent reliable sources (see WP:RS, WP:V), then yes, you can create a page on a company that no longer exists. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In other words, it still has to have been (in its time) a notable company. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  His article Paint And Lacquer Distributors (company) was speedy-deleted 3 hours before he asked this. He's going to need some more assistance from an admin (who can see the deleted article and hence give specific advice). -- Quiddity (talk) 00:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  I looked at his article, and left a note on his talk page. Nearly certainly non-notable; however, from a review of his talk page, we sure do like jumping down the throats of first time editors, don't we? --barneca (talk) 00:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandals who become good editors

I'm in a discussion where someone has asked "Can you come up, best to your knowledge, with one user who engaged in spamming and vandalizing articles who later became a good contributor?" I'm sure there is an essay or guideline or Signpost article that discusses this, but can't find it. Can anyone give me a few links? Or examples of editors who started off as vandals and later became admins? Thanks. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't most vandals and spammers get blocked before they'd have any hope in hell of becoming an admin? Your question kinda answers itself. 79.76.178.6 (talk) 20:17, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No offense, Quiddity, but I think that any editor that fits that profile would want to keep that a secret, probably. GlassCobra 20:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually not. Some editors openly identify as reformed vandals. See for example Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:User Reformed Vandal. And Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Darthgriz98 passed with no opposition in spite of really bad vandalism in the first edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly the kind of thing I was looking for. (And why "assume good faith" is so important here). Thanks, PrimeHunter. -- Quiddity (talk) 05:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Though im not a Admin i orginaly started out as vandal. БοņёŠɓɤĭĠ₳₯є 04:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A dilemma

Plise exuse me for the speling...

I often have the foloing dilema:

I wont to add a linink to some subjact wich dont exist yat in the wiki that I editing, however it's exist in diferet sorses (e.g. diferent wiki, difernt langwich, external sors, difert subject ...)

Ofcose I can add a linink to the existing sors but then nobady will see thet the subgect missing and also when the subject will be aded to the wiki the link stil will point to the external sors, alternativly I can put a linink to the non existing subject but then it will not hlp the rider.

I think I have a salution for this problem: one have to give softwer suport for multypal links i.e. one shold be able to writ severald links and when the user will clik on it the wiki will try to open the first one if it exist and if not it will continu to the folong one. also shach links shoold be colerd by difernt coler so pipol will know that one shold wrait an artical in wiki on it, and ofcos shod be atomaticaly aded to the list of disaird articals, preferbly wit the links to the externas sorses to make the writing esiaer.

So I have 2 qustions: 1. is similar thing exist. 2. what shold I do in the min time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.126.186.160 (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but I'm having trouble understanding your request. Could you run it through a spell check and try again? Soxred93 | talk bot 20:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Put a list of links (if that's what you're talking about - what's a linink?). George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 20:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are discussing the addition of inline interwiki links within an article. I can't think of any reason why such a link in the body of the article would be useful. You can add interwikis that show up in the left bar, but these are for the same article in other languages. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 21:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you want this where the editor can choose X and Y: If page X exists then link to it, otherwise make an external link to Y which has information about topic X and can be used instead of page X, until X is possibly created. This can be done with #ifexist, see m:Help:ParserFunctions##ifexist:. But in Wikipedia, external links on terms inside the main article text should generally not be used. If a term doesn't have an article but maybe should get it later then just make a red link to the term. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank u very much

How can I check when an article was created?

It would be extremely interesting knowing the exact date when an article was created on Wikipedia! So interesting that it could turn into a time-consuming lazy-thing-to-do on your spare-time! But can I check the date of creation of some arbitrary article?

Thanks!

213.113.64.182 (talk) 22:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just click the "history" tab, and then click the "Earliest" link if there is one. The first edit will be at the bottom. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How to find when text was added to an article

Is there an easier way to find when a particular phrase was added to an article? I currently look through the history and the only way I know of is to continue clicking "older edit" until I find what I am looking for. Searching the FAQ Archives, I came across the freeware called WhodunitQuery, but I was hoping Wikipedia had its own tool to do this already built in. Any ideas? Thomprod (talk) 22:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothning built in. I sometimes do a manual (approximate) binary search. For example, if there are 100 edits in the history then first click on number 50 and see if the text is there. If it's there then try the older edit 25 next time, otherwise try the newer edit 75 to narrow it down. And so on, approximately halving the interval of edits each time. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, PrimeHunter. That will speed the process up. Is there somewhere on Wikipedia to suggest future improvements? Thomprod (talk) 12:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiblame is a tool made for just this purpose, though the method Primehunter describes really works quite well and doesn't take very long if the article history is not huge. You can suggest improvements at the village pump proposals.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent tool, Fuhghettaboutit. Thanks for the quick reply. Thomprod (talk) 12:28, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the truth

I guess I was wrong about this site I thought it was about letting people know the truth about certain things but I guess I was wrong. I see you are just here just as an advertisement for companies and don't care about their dishonesty —Preceding unsigned comment added by Honestone527 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where do you get that from? Yes, we have articles about companies, but their written with Neutral point of view, just like any other encyclopedia. Paragon12321 (talk) 23:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia sometimes hides the truth, that is why we must uncover it.--Uga Man (talk) UGA MAN FOR PRESIDENT 2008 23:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you had a bad experience but I don't know with what. Wikipedia:Verifiability says: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". People often disagree about what "the truth" is. Wikipedia doesn't allow an editor to add something just because that particular editor is personally convinced that it is true. You can satisfy Wikipedia:Verifiability by giving references to published reliable sources, but also note Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. We are not here to advertise for companies and many company articles contain criticism, but it should be based on reliable sources and not on the personal experiences and opinions of the editors. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Such concerns can only be addressed if we know which part of the encyclopedia you were looking at. So, do you have an example where you believe Wikipedia is "just here just as an advertisement for companies and don't care about their dishonesty"? Astronaut (talk) 01:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]