Help desk
< May 17	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 19 >

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.

May 18

Photograph licensing - how do I share?

Resolved

Hi! I would like to ensure that my photographs available to the public on Flickr are able to be used by editors at Wikimedia projects within articles or other non-commercial usage. They are currently given a Creative Commons "Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike" license. I want to be certain that they can be altered, used freely, but permission is asked of me before usage here or at other Wikimedia projects (just so I am aware that they are being used! :> ). If the license needs to be changed, please let me know. Any advice would be appreciated. The available licenses are found here if that helps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.95.44.134 (talk) 01:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I found a partial answer here- http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/Free_licenses. So... I suppose my revised question here is: what do Wikipedia editors prefer for the Creative Commons license to be, given the situation described in my original question here? 24.95.44.134 (talk) 01:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Generally CC-BY-SA is standard. CC-BY is also accepted, but all other flickr licences are not accepted as free images, though they may be suitable for fair use. If you're uploading free images, I suggest uploading them to the Wikimedia Commons rather than Wikipedia, as commons images are available for all wikimedia projects. See the commons flickr upload tool for information. -mattbuck (Talk) 02:18, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! 24.95.44.134 (talk) 02:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In your first post you mention that you want to restrict use to non-commercial and with permission. You do understand now that neither restriction is acceptable to Wikipedia, right? —teb728 t c 03:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Please see our image use policy, which states: "Images which are listed as for non-commercial use only, by permission, or which restrict derivatives are unsuitable for Wikipedia and will be deleted on sight." Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 03:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Title issues

Resolved

– Improper pagemoves fixed by Fughettaboutit. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 03:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having issues with Nikola Žigić. The article is in one place, and it's talk page is in another, at Talk:Nikola Zigic. Also, the article history is messed up. Can someone figure this out? Spencer^T♦^C 02:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everything's back in place. There was apparently a few page moves with "move associated talk page" unchecked.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Spencer^T♦^C 14:18, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominate image for deletion question

Resolved

– Image deleted as a copyvio. PeterSymonds (talk) 08:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this image should be nominated for deletion. How should I go about doing that? Does anyone else feel the same way that an image of "grey poopon" is not needed. image:GreyPoopon.jpg --SportsMaster (talk) 05:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at WP:IFD. Tiggerjay (talk) 05:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't quite make out the two graphics flanking the word GREY. If that is a Grey Poupon logo, there is a copyright problem. —teb728 t c 07:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, a quick google image search reveals that this is a dog toy, so this is copyvio since he is most likely not the copyright holder to this work.[1][2] Will tag. Tiggerjay (talk) 07:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done PeterSymonds (talk) 08:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Integrating a list notable news sources

Resolved

Hello, for an article I'm contributing on I want to include a short list of notable news articles as they are being referred to as important point.

For what I read this is acceptable by wikipedia policy as it adds extra information for readers. The option to not create the list but write about the articles instead I believe is no option in this case, as it would make a much longer text, I will however comment on the list in detail. None of the news articles are likely to disappear from the internet any time soon.

Should I just add the list in the section I am commenting on it? Or should I create a section at external links with an internal link in the actual section. Are there any other articles with such a list?

The basic layout for the list I have in mind is * title of news article (date, publisher)

Thanks in advance, Species8473 (talk) 07:51, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For much needed context, please see Talk:Homeschooling#Homeschool_Legality_World_Map. -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 08:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of how you list your links, you should make proper footnotes for them so they appear in Homeschooling#References. See WP:FOOT, WP:CITE, WP:CITET, and WP:EIW#Citetools for everything you need to master citation footnotes on Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 20:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Live Map On Wikipedia !!!

Resolved

Hello WOrld ! Is there any body who tell me how to get a live image of world Map on wikipedia? If this kind of feature available please know me...U can notify me by posting ur coments on this page. Also tell me about other Internet based GPS system if any.. Know me how to get connected with that site...

Thank You---- Parag E-Mail--> <removed> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.124.191.157 (talk) 11:17, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you wish for them to be permanently removed from the page history, email this address. Please sign your post by typing four tildes (~~~~) or clicking the signature button above the edit box which looks like this: . Do NOT sign in articles....... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 11:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a little hard to guess what the IP is actually looking for, but guessing that they're looking for recent satellite photos, probably the closest thing to a "live" map is Google Earth. It's not live as in being able to see people walking around in real time, but it does show reasonably up-to-date satellite photos of almost all the Earth's land surface with resolutions under 1 metre per pixel in many places (usually major cities). Astronaut (talk) 13:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Live images from various locations are available from some webcam sites, but most of these are not in a map format. Wikimapia is an online map and satellite imaging resource that combines Google Maps with a wiki system, allowing users to add information (in the form of a note) to any location on earth. Wikimapia might sort of be "live" in the sense that Wikipedia is "live," as in continuously under editing by users, but the aerial photos in Google Maps are by no means live; the photos for my area are years old, and don't show many recent developments. To see a live display of your location on an old map, if you are able to carry along a Global Positioning System receiver and a sufficiently capable mobile computing device, see the GpsDrive program. For information about maps on Wikipedia itself, see: WP:EIW#Map. If the questioner will tell us his or her specific interest, we can reply more specifically. What does the questioner want to do with the GPS? Geocaching? Route navigation? Surveying? Is the questioner on foot, on a bicycle, in a motor vehicle? The means of travel constrains the hardware options and influences what a person is trying to do. --Teratornis (talk) 20:00, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Intersection of categories on article and talk pages

Resolved

Is there an easy(-ish) way of finding pages where the article page is in category X, and the talk page is listed in category Y? As an example: Category:Railway stations in Gwynedd and Category:Start-Class UK Railways articles don't actually intersect, because the 'class' category is on the talk page.

Pushing this a bit further, how about the article page being listed in category X, and the talk page not listed in category Y?

Ansbaradigeidfran (talk) 11:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AutoWikiBrowser includes a tool which can do this. Epbr123 (talk) 16:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

spinal

Resolved

– No medical advice...... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 11:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i have to go to see a nurosurgen i have pains in kneck headakes blured vision and dizzines what could be the problem and the oucome —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geoffrc (talk • contribs) 11:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot offer medical advice. Please see the medical disclaimer. Contact your General Practitioner....... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 11:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One simple question

Resolved

– Responded PeterSymonds (talk) 12:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nb: I've made this account for the purpose of asking this question, because I do not wish to receive loads of speculation on the motives of asking it on my main account. I am simply curious, that is all, but gossip travels faster than a vandalbot on a rampage.
When a checkuser is performed on an account, does the result show every account editing from the original account's Ip address, or only the Ip address of the account in question? For example, if two suspected sockpuppets were taken to Requests for Checkuser, would the check show every account editing from their Ip address (assuming they are sockpuppets) or only that they both use the same Ip? I hope thats clear enough to understand. Thank you. Onesimplequestion (talk) 12:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A checkuser can see all the usernames an IP has been editing from, and all the IPs that an account has been editing from. However, there are limits to this, as it only goes back a few weeks at most. Read WP:Checkuser for more info. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 12:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So if there were two sockpuppets and one legitimate user editing from the same Ip at a public computer, the legitimate account would also show up even if it wasn't in question before? Is that how puppetmasters are found out? Onesimplequestion (talk) 12:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it would. But each IP would be recorded, and checkusers look for suspicious editing patterns. One exception isn't going to worry them too much. PeterSymonds (talk) 12:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. Onesimplequestion (talk) 12:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No probs. PeterSymonds (talk) 12:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons image editing?

Resolved

Since Image:Rita in Rome at November.jpg is on Commons and permission is granted through OTRS, where do I start to get the picture edited? Right now it look like the woman pictured is snubbing the blue couch pillow next to her. I'd like to get it trimmed so that it doesn't look like such a bad shot. Dismas|^(talk) 13:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Make a commons account, save the picture, crop it, upload the cropped version with the same filename as the uncropped one - overwriting it...... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 13:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't overwrite it. Save it as Image:Rita in Rome at November cropped.jpg at commons remembering to include all of the previous licensing information. Woody (talk) 13:51, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guess I'll have to go learn how to crop an image.... Thanks! Dismas|^(talk) 18:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the image editor software packages I have seen, cropping usually amounts to something like this:

Open the image file.
Select a tool that allows you to drag-resize a rectangle outline on the image.
Put the rectangle where you want.
Select something like Edit | Crop. That removes everything outside the rectangle.
Save the cropped image to a new file.

If you tell us the image editor you use, someone can probably tell you the exact commands. If you don't have an image editor, tell us your operating system and someone will recommend one. Or see Comparison of raster graphics editors. --Teratornis (talk) 20:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

However, for cropping JPEG images, I'd recommend a lossless JPEG editing program such as jpegcrop (scroll down the page). —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:24, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Theatre image width parameter

Resolved

Is there a way to control the image width in {{Infobox Theatre}}? I would like to make the image at Jay Pritzker Pavilion wide enough so that the caption is only two lines and the capacity line is a single line.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you can just use image_size. ~~If not, try Image-size.~~ It's the first one. Good luck, Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 14:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

StatusChanger - HAU not yet working

Resolved

Hi. Please see User talk:CWii for details, I modified my monobook and cleared my cache, but my in busy out is missing. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 16:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think CWii might be the only one who can fix that... but I do know that some scripts only work in Mozilla Firefox, that could be it. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 17:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two articles in need of merging

Resolved

– Resolved, now perhaps a copyright issue Tiggerjay (talk) 05:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, basically i've found two articles about the same person, which are in need of merging. The articles are George Reginald Starr and George Starr. I don't really have time to fix this myself so I was wondering whether there is a kind of merge list or something, so that somebody might get round to fixing this at some point. Looking at the aticles it appears that the former is slightly more substantial, so maybe move that to George Starr and place a redirect on George Reginald Starr? Anyway I just wanted to notify someone and leave it in their capable hands. Thanks very much. Flaming Ferrari (talk) 16:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can tag the pages to indicate that they are in need of merging. Wikipedia:MERGE#Proposing_a_merger discusses how to do this and the different tags to use. Thanks for noticing this! -- Natalya 17:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've merged the articles, but have noticed that there may be a WP:COPYVIO problem (from Peter Manchester's site). It's possible that the article creator is Manchester, so I'm going to email him and find out. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Manchester, a relative of Starr's according to his site, has emailed me that he was indeed the article's creator. Now how do I make note of his permission to use his material? Clarityfiend (talk) 04:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have Manchester send permission to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org however, it is better to have original prose instead of having permission to use copyrighted material. Tiggerjay (talk) 05:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

logging in / logging out

Resolved

can you tell when i log in and out of wikipedia like you can on myspace? 79.76.247.132 (talk) 17:07, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look in the top-right corner. If you see a login link, then you're logged out; if you see a user toolbar, you're logged in. haz (talk) 17:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, can YOU tell if i am logged in or not —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.247.132 (talk) 17:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) No, it's generally impossible to tell whether a given user is logged in or not. (However, if a user makes an edit or other logged change, that implies that that user is logged in at that moment.) You can tell whether you are logged in by checking to see if your username appears at the top-right of the screen, but cannot check any other user. --ais523 17:11, 18 May 2008 (U T C)

Oh, and you were logged out when you asked that question. The general rule is that you can only tell whether another user is logged in when they make an edit or other change to the wiki. --ais523 17:12, 18 May 2008 (U T C)

thank you. so no one but me can tell unless i edit. so if i just loging in and watch my list then you dont know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.247.132 (talk) 17:17, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. --ais523 17:46, 18 May 2008 (U T C)

If you want to let people know your online status, it is possible. See WP:EIW#Status. For example, the WP:HAU page and its subpages use a bot program to indicate which of the editors in those lists are currently online. --Teratornis (talk) 20:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed with copyright rationale

Resolved

Discussion moved to Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

I am marking this as resolved as the discussion was moved to a different location. Regards, RyRy5 (talk) 19:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User scripts

Resolved

– PeterSymonds (talk) 18:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Does anyone know of a user script that closes/relists AfDs? I've installed the AfD closer from WP:US but it's not working. Alternatively, if anyone happens to be good at monobooks, perhaps you can tell me what I'm doing wrong. :) Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know of a script, but I can give you a list of some admins/users who normally close AfDs. They may close AfDs with a certain scrip. Is that okay?--Ryan Cross (talk) 18:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, yeah, that may work. Although I'm pretty sure there's just one script, plus a MfD one made by jj37. It's a shame because half of my monobook tools don't seem to work! (Purge tab, Afd closer, a few others). Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 18:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only users I know who normally close AfDs are User:Philippe (admin) and User:TenPoundHammer (non-admin). I'm positive that there are more but I probably don't know them.--Ryan Cross (talk) 18:40, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)The first one (closest to the top) that doesn't work is the broken one, any below it will be ignored. Remove or fix that and clear your cache and your problems should be solved...... Dendodge .. Talk^Help 18:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all. Do you know how to fix? I moved it up to the top earlier and all the scripts that were working still are. I've still got twinkle, the "vote" symbols on AfDs, the "New pages" link on the toolbox and the "easy-db" script etc. PeterSymonds (talk) 18:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may have to remove it instead of fixing it if someone doesn't know how to fix it. I personally don't know how to fix it.--RyRy5 (talk) 18:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I've tried stealing Philippe's script which he had in his monobook; I'll play around with that and ask him if it works. I'll mark as resolved for now. Thanks all! :) PeterSymonds (talk) 18:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright permission

Resolved

How do I check if permission has been granted to use text? Specifically, for Listen, Darling, the plot is copied from IMDb and the Notes section from the Judy Garland database. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "granted to use text"? Do you mean granted to copyright text?--RyRy5 (talk) 19:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Generally it's not allowed. Unless a site has very explicitly released their content under the public domain or a free license like the GFDL, we can't accept it and it will be deleted. In this case, I've just deleted the article. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:51, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geeze! You didn't have to delete the entire article. Could you undelete it and just remove the offending sections? Clarityfiend (talk) 20:38, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know you can get permission to use copyrighted material - it was done for the American Film Institute film lists. I'd still like to know where I can check such things. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:38, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Had I removed the offending sections, all that would have remained would have been a single sentence which would have fallen under another speedy criteria, either for being too short to identify the subject or failing to establish notability (not entirely valid for films, I know, but the point is there wouldn't have been any point). The first half was copied entirely from IMDB, the second entirely from the Judy Garland site. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, sorry - if you'd like to look into requesting permission for that text, you can email the owner of the site and have them forward permission to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org - however please note that we'd still greatly prefer an article with original prose. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree (about the deletion). It would still have the intro, infobox, cast section and categories. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I suggest requesting the article content by email and reworking the page before you repost it. Good luck with the permission from the website. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 11:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia blacklisted?

While adding a county navbox to various township articles in Itasca County, Minnesota, I found that all my edits were blocked by the spam filter. Here's an example:

The spam filter blocked your page save because it detected a blacklisted hyperlink. If you did not add the link yourself, it most likely was added by another editor before being blacklisted. You will need to remove all instances of the blacklisted link before you can save your edit. If you are attempting a section edit, note that this block may even be due to blacklisted links in other sections. If you need help removing the blacklisted link, post a message at Wikipedia:Help desk.
Blacklists are maintained both locally and globally. Before proceeding, please review both lists to determine which one (or both) are affecting you. You can request help removing the link, request that the link be removed from the blacklist, or report a possible error on the local or global spam blacklist talk page. If you'd like to request that a specific link be allowed without removing similar links from the blacklist, you can request whitelisting on the local spam whitelist talk page. The following link has triggered our spam protection filter: http://wiki.riteme.site Either that exact link, or a portion of it (typically the root domain name) is currently blacklisted.
Return to Trout Lake Township, Minnesota.

What I had done was to place all the templates in the edit window, and then click "Save page" for all the pages in quick succession. I don't normally do it this way (usually, I place the template for a page, save it, and go to the next page), and when I did it with individual pages, it went fine. I'm reporting this here because (not surprisingly!) Wikipedia isn't on the WikiMedia blacklists :-) Any ideas? Nyttend (talk) 21:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't the faintest idea why that happened. Several new links were added today, but none of them of course were wikipedia. Maybe a bug? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Print Wikipedia

Resolved

– PeterSymonds (talk) 22:06, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if this is the right place to ask about this (if it isn't, what is?), but after hearing that there is going to be a desk encyclopedia based on the German Wikipedia, I would like to know if there will be a similar work in English? If not, why? I would happily buy a print version of Wikipedia.SPNic (talk) 21:22, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know that there's a CD version in the works, but I'm not sure about a print version. Personally, I think that would be a bit impractical; if you wanted to cover, say, just the featured articles on Wikipedia (2,049 as of now), and on average each article took 6 pages, you'd need a 12,294 page book to hold it all. And I'm pretty sure we want to save the Amazon. :) Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 21:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently a print version has been considered; see here for more information. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 21:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a CD version of Wikipedia. However, we have over 2 million articles; that's a lot of pages! I don't think a print edition is going to be released yet; maybe in the future for the core topics. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:28, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, sorry MoP, didn't see your reply. :) PeterSymonds (talk) 21:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also see Wikipedia:Pushing to 1.0, WP:EIW#Version1.0, and WP:EIW#Stable. Not that anyone cares what I think, but I think trying to put Wikipedia on paper would be a misallocation of resources. I know that most people on Earth still do not have computers, but Moore's law continues to reduce the cost of computing. Already, the One laptop per child project is becoming possible. In another five or ten years, we'll probably have some sort of mobile computing device cheap enough for everyone who can buy recycled American clothing (guess where all your used clothing donations end up - on billions of people in the Third World) with some sort of low-energy display device capable enough to do justice to Wikipedia. In other words, instead of fretting about the fact that so many poor people cannot afford computers now, I say look at the cost trend of computing - it looks to me as if Moore's law will reduce the cost of computing asymptotically toward zero, and this Wikipedia availability problem will solve itself. This assumes, of course, that the worst-case scenario of peak oil (i.e., the collapse of industrial civilization within the next decade) does not occur. --Teratornis (talk) 21:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, most people don't think there's going to be a print en-Wikipedia anytime soon. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 22:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would make a pretty fantastic library though... but anyway, I digress; resolved! PeterSymonds (talk) 22:06, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another problem is that MediaWiki markup has no built-in support for book page layout. With other markup languages such as DocBook, in theory one can use XSL stylesheets to generate output in multiple formats from a single XML document source file, but in practice one may have to tweak the stylesheets extensively to overcome formatting problems. Since Wikipedia's contributors have generally not even thought about how their work fits on a printed page, there could be a lot of formatting problems. Plus there is additional markup for printed output that MediaWiki doesn't support at all, such as DocBook's many tags for indexing, cross-referencing, etc. Wikipedia articles also do not follow a uniform page layout, for example the different footnote styles. Any publishing house has people who know how to solve these problems, most likely by brute-force copying Wikipedia's content into whatever publishing package they know how to use. If we wanted to add native publishing support to Wikipedia, that would be a major addition. --Teratornis (talk) 19:55, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]