Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance)/Archive R

• Village pump
  • Policy
  • Technical
  • Proposals (persistent)
  • Idea lab
  • WMF
  • Miscellaneous

Village pump (assistance) archive  

This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (assistance). Please do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to revive any of these discussions, either start a new thread or use the talk page associated with that topic.

---

< Older discussions · Archives: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S · 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

What about this spammer? (72.228.88.88)

Usually I thought I know hot to identify vandals and what to do. However, in the Paid to surf article, some IP user keeps on ignoring any edit summaries and reposting such statements as "tell your friends about it. It’s a win-win situation. It is very simple and easy to do". Nobody else noticed it, I was the only one who keeps deleting it. What is the procedure in this situation? Can it be considered an exception for the 3 revert rule, and I should revert it until I get to the final warning, and make that IP blocked? --V. Szabolcs 21:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Umm... I guess if it benefits Wikipdia, be bold and ignore all rules! Rahk E✘[[ my disscussions | Who Is ]] 01:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Use the {{uw-spam}} series of templates to warn and, if they don't stop by {{uw-spam3}}, report them to be blocked. - BanyanTree 07:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Search function

Allow me to introduce my self, Im the user currently working in developing "The Finance and Economics Association" wikipage. Could you be ever so kind to let me know why can't I find my page by using the "search" function? Thank you.

Best Regards,

Sergio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sv2146 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 8 July 2007

Probably because of the delay in database updates. Please don't forget to sign and make a new section from the tab at the top. Adrian M. H. 21:21, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

And you can always check your contribs. Adrian M. H. 21:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

It's most likely a redirect problem that issues from the use of capital letters in the name of the article. Compare: Finance and Economics Association - Finance and economics association. --ざくら木 12:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

I have no idea which part of the dispute resolution to use for this: an editor repeatedly inserts an unverifiable claim, in full awareness that it is unverifiable and what the policy says regarding that. I don't want to ask for someone else to step in if they're just going to regurgitate the same policies that the editor has already rejected. What is the best solution here? –Unint 20:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, simply make people aware of the problem. If we all agree that it's an unsourced and unhelpful edit that he keeps adding, we'll revert. Strength in numbers. A good step would be to mention the page and edit you're referring to. (Otherwise, I can't tell whether you're characterizing the dispute fairly or not.) – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 21:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. This is quite an obscure topic, and not knowing the general level of reception RfCs or Accuracy disputes get, I guess I was afraid there wouldn't be enough support. But if this is to be the forum to bring it up, so be it.

The dispute is at Talk:Red Flag (band)#Suicide?; after that one highly conspiratorial comment the IP made I decided to stay out of it, but I also felt like this was a delicate situation and couldn't figure out how to go about getting intervention. It's quieted off, but I have no idea how often any of the other editors involved check the page. –Unint 22:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I changed the text, and I'll be watching the situation. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 01:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. I probably second-guess myself too much for a case like this. –Unint 03:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Questionable Deletion

First of all, im a wiki newbie, so I have no idea where to post this. Additionally, the first time I posted it, I messed it up bad.

There was a fantastic page at http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/DKP_%28Point_System%29 but now its gone. I checked the recommended for deletion list and saw talk about removing the Shroud DKP system page, but wasn't able to find anything about the removal of the main DKP page. DKP has been by players in nearly every MMO to date, and the article discussed the origins of the system, how it evolved through the years and games, and ending with discussion of the current systems. Its a shame to see the article gone. Was it ever scheduled for deletion?

Mangojuice (talk · contribs) deleted it, as seen from the deletion log. You'll have to ask him about it. Rahk E✘[[ my disscussions | Who Is ]] 13:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

The log lists CSD#R1, so I assume that it must have been turned into a redirect whose target was subsequently deleted or moved. Adrian M. H. 16:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Found a few comments about the deletion on Mangojuice's page. Continuing the discussion there.

Sorry to hear about the loss of one of your favorite pages. I've never been a big fan of the AfD approach: it's too easy for a chance grouping of a few opinions to eliminate an otherwise perfectly good article. (Obviously I'm an inclusionist, but I end up having to peruse AfD every day for reasons like this. :-) — RJH (talk) 17:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Plane on conveyor belt

Someone please check Airplane - Treadmill Conundrum. I have seen this before but cannot find it and so don't know what policy is. Note that it has been discussed on the Ref Desk here and here. -- RHaworth 04:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're asking. Is there something you'd like done? – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)}

I think RHaworth is asking to what article this should re-direct... comments in the page history regarding the page not being a speedy candidate because it could possibly be re-directed. Sancho 05:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Colours

Hello, I've noticed that on various infoboxes (and some user signatures) a variety of different colours are used. When I look at the code, the code for particular colours usually looks something like #FEDABC or something. The trouble is I have no idea how to use these codes to make the colours I want. Does anyone know where I can find out? G-Man * 20:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Does this help? Or this, or maybe this? – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 21:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

You're sending him out of house? Shocking!  ;) See Web colors#X11 color names. - BanyanTree 12:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. G-Man ! 21:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Veganism

Hello. I am trying to edit the page on Veganism ( at least) so that it contains counterarguments. Currently, the article is completely imbalanced. All of the editors for that section are members of the Wikipedia Animal Rights project, and as far as I can tell they are all confirmed animal rights proponents.

They continuously remove my attempts to add conflicting content, or even links to it, on the ground that it is insufficiently academic. But my counterarguments, although they are simple, are ones I had to derive on my own BECAUSE no academic or internet source contained balanced information about this subject. The effects on my personal life have been devastating, and I consider this a very serious issue, like having Wikipedia's page on drugs not mention anything negative.

I attempted to turn this matter over for formal dispute mediation, but the proposal was rejected, I think because I had not yet exhausted all other options. I consider that these options are likely to be fruitless, but I am prepared to try them all at this time so that I can get assistance from the Mediation committee in the future. I will not repeat the discussion here, but instead link to the mediation request page, which contains links and discussion:

Repeat2341 11:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to say it, but the link you are trying to add (a link to a webpage you created) was rejected on very sound reasoning. Your webpage does not count as a reliable source under wikipedia's policies and guidelines. For one thing, it does not really contain a scholarly reasoned argument (for or against) on the subject of Veganism. All it contains is your personal views. It fails WP:V and WP:RS as a self-published website. This isn't a case of blocking a contrary opinion, it is a case of blocking the addition of a specific link. You say that there are not any other sources that express your opinion on the topic. If that is the case, then your opinion falls under the heading of a Fringe view, and is not noteworthy enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. See WP:NPOV#Undue Weight for the relevant guideline on this. Blueboar 17:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Whatever, then. My opinion is the fringe view. My totally mainstream, straightforward, easy to understand, logical opinion, that I had to learn from a complete stranger 10 years after veganism destroyed my life is a fringe view. The view held by nearly every non-vegan I've met since. This place is run by children who can't think straight.

I understand it's outside of your policy, but you're all being, in a word, pathetic. Think straight or it's your fault. If a schizophrenic destroys society, it's your fault. If a vegan commits suicide, like my mom's best friend, it's your fault. If another person winds up nearly 30 with weak mental and physical health and no friends, it's your fault. Because you won't consider the PROBLEM WITH WIKIPEDIA. Grow up.

Well, here's an idea for you... form a foundation to get your message out through other means. Build a grass roots movement so this becomes more than just your view. Write a book about it. Then, what your views (now the views of a notable grass roots movement and not just those of one persion) become notable and there is a book (which would be a reliable source) which can be used as a citation in Wikipedia. It may take a bit of time to do this... but you seem to care enough that it should be worth it. Blueboar 19:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Editing to increase server speed

I seem to remember reading several months ago a guideline that edits should not be made to a page for no other reason than to increase the speed of the Wikipedia servers or reduce the load on the server. Does such a guideline exist and if so could someone point me to where I could find it? Thanks. VerruckteDan 23:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Don't worry about performance. -- MarcoTolo 00:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. VerruckteDan 13:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Survey for a Dissertation

a Graduate student at the University of Manchester is doing a survey for a dissertation relating to Wikis. Anyone who is interested is invited to participate here: http://www.surveyconsole.com/console/TakeSurvey?id=362152 ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I took this survey. Off-topic, but I think the questions may be too general to yield useful results. Shalom ^Hello 17:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

It's about wikis in general... but yeah, I'm not sure what the gentleman is attempting to learn. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 12:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

redirect? or a seaching glitch?

I have noticed that if you search the term "Anno Lucis" you get to the article Anno Lucis ... but if you don't use the capital letters and search "anno lucis" you are sent to the article Calendar era (which does not mention the Anno Lucis dating system at all). I suspect that a redirect has been applied to the non-capitalized version. Could someone who know how to check on this please do so... I would think that both "Anno lucis" and "anno lucis" should both redirect to Anno Lucis. Thanks. Blueboar 18:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

See Special:Whatlinkshere/Calendar era for info. Among the redirects is Anno lucis with a lowercase L, so that's probably to blame. Adrian M. H. 19:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and changed the redirect to point to Anno Lucis. Adrian M. H. 19:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Login problems

Every time I log in and go back to the page I was in, it logs out when I reach the page! Please help!

Check the "remember me" box at the login page, and make sure you have accepted cookies in your web browser. Cheers, #29 ^(talk) 17:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Khali

This is Thedeadmanandphenom and I was wondering what part of the article you were talking about. Is it the Health article? I will make it in my own words, that won't be very hard. Thedeadmanandphenom 15:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Hold on a moment; a bit of context would be welcome. Adrian M. H. 16:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Updating Template

I'd like to know how to make a template that has self-updating content. I remember seeing one on a user page that had all of the speedy-deletion candidates on it, so I'm fairly sure it's possible. The one that I'd want would be one I could put on my user page with this section on it only. If there's not a way to do it, I can always just put a link to it on my page. Thanks, ~ thesublime514 • talk • sign 04:19, July 5, 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that can't be done. Some pages "transclude" subpages to make them more manageable. For instance, if you edit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, you'll notice that the "current" and "old" deletion debates are transcluded like templates by adding {{/current}} and {{/old}}. You could transclude either of these on your user page, which is probably what you saw. But the Wikipedia:Requested moves page isn't formatted that way. You could transclude the entire page onto your userpage, but you probably don't want to. Sorry. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 05:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

It can be done, but as far as I know, only using a bot (unless you get a proposal passed to get that particular section to be transcludable). Either of those would probably be a lot of trouble to do. Sir Link 10:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, this is a bot kind of thing. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 12:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Unless it involves dates - we have {{birth date and age|1985|10|24}}, for example, which uses various parser functions. This might be useful for keeping track of the oldest person in the world's age every day without manually updating it (as I've seen asked before). x42bn6 Talk Mess 14:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you can have a self-updating list of speedy deletion candidates. See here. Gracenotes^T § 18:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Renaming an article without prior debate

<copied from AN/I in light of identical case> The article A.R.S.R. "Skadi", about a rowing club, was moved to Algemene Rotterdamse Studenten Roeivereniging by a new editor in his first edit to the page.[1] For very important reasons, that at this moment are beyond my capabilities to comprehend, this editor chose to change the name without prior discussion and to a factually incorrect name. Despite that he refused to undo the move. In response to my request at WP:RM I was told that first a discussion is needed as to whether the move should be undone. As I tried to explain here, here and here the club itself uses either A.R.S.R. "Skadi" or Algemene Rotterdamse Studenten Roeivereniging "Skadi" as its official name. Again, for very important reasons, it is impossible to undo the move and reinstate the name the club itself uses on their website and in correspondence.[2][3] Since it apparently is policy to discuss undoing hit-and-run edits I bring it here since I would appreciate restoring the article to its proper name, i.e. A.R.S.R. "Skadi" or Algemene Rotterdamse Studenten Roeivereniging "Skadi", (I prefer A.R.S.R. "Skadi" but have no objection to Algemene Rotterdamse Studenten Roeivereniging "Skadi") without the sillyness of waiting 5 days.

Second, for my information I have some questions:

1. Is there any policy on WP prohibiting the use of the official name of a rowing club?
2. Do I understand correctly that if I go to an article I never edited, I can rename it and its current editors are obliged to have an extensive debate on whether or not my move should be undone? Or, if a move is contested is it first undone and then a debate is started to see if the new editor (me in this example) can find consensus?
3. Can somebody restore the article to its correct and official name?

Nomen Nescio^{Gnothi seauton} 00:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

These questions belong at the village pump for policy discussion or village pump for assistance. This page is meant only for things that require urgent admin assistance, but the issue here is a content/title dispute. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, undoing the move requires admin tools does it not? Second, why is it impossible to undo what to me appears to be disruption without having an extensive debate? Shouldn't the move be immediately undone and the hit-and-run editor asked to start a debate? As I asked above, are you suggesting I can go to other articles, rename them, and then the editors there are forced to await disscussion on whether it should be undone?

Second, how can there be a content dispute with an editor that has never editted the article and made only one contribution? That is silly.Nomen Nescio^{Gnothi seauton} 00:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

That is a content dispute, a dispute about content. Sort it out amongst yourselves. By the way, it doesnt matter if that was the users first edit or their 50000th. Viridae^Talk 00:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the information, I am on my way to start some "content disputes." My questions are answered and as it stands now the onus is not on one-time hit-and-run editors but on people contributin to an article to undo. Sigh.Nomen Nescio^{Gnothi seauton} 00:40, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Since it is impossible to have someone at AN/I undo this hit-and-run-edit, which is erroneous and unsupported by consensus, I want some input here as to:

1. How can one have a "content dispute" with a one-time editor who only renames an article and does not, and did not, contribute in any form on said article? Am I to infer that I can force similar debates on every article in WP, I never edited before, by unilaterally and without discussion moving them?
2. Why is it impossible to undo this disruption without having the burocracy mandating some kind of UN inspired delay through debate? Especially in light of an identical case where it was possible to undo the mess and it was mandated that movers should first seek consensus.
3. Is there any policy in wikipedia that obliges the current editors of a page to start a debate after a one-time editor arbitrarily moves the article? Even if said editor has taken no further interest in the page and no other people are discussing the matter?
4. last, regarding the rationale behind the illfated move. Is there any policy in WP prohibiting the use of the officially chosen name of an organisation, see above, as title for an article?

Please can someone answer me those questions?Nomen Nescio^{Gnothi seauton} 10:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

First of all, with but a quick look at this person's history they have well over 3000 edits to the project. Not that it matters actually, but this isn't just some "one edit account" like you seem to be implying.

Also, using an abbreviation in the name is against our naming conventions.

Lastly, this is what redirects are for. Simply adding some recirects from alternate names to "Skadi (rowing club)" something you should work on.

For future reference... Dispute resolution is over that way --> WP:DR ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 12:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

You misread my comment. This user, who probably is a major contributor, made one edit to this article. That one edit was moving it to a factually incorrect and never discussed name. To me moving an article by an editor that, besides that move, has no history with said article seems odd. Especially, if that move subsequently cannot be undone for bureaucratic reasons.

My principal question is still, whatever the policy here (BTW, why does Algemene Rotterdamse Studenten Roeivereniging "Skadi" violate policy?), why can't we use the official name an organisation chooses for itself? Is there policy against the use of official names? If so, could someone point me to it? Or, do we think policy should trump everything even if it results in us not being able to name an article adequately?Nomen Nescio^{Gnothi seauton} 07:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Audio still down

Hello, is audio working on English Wikipedia? -Susanlesch 12:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yep, seems to work. At least at reggae, which I tested. Cheers, #29 ^(talk) 12:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Cheers. I must just be having trouble with all those 0 byte uploads. Thanks for your reply, #29. -Susanlesch 20:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• Now the four uploads from yesterday all work fine. I think I saw that happen once before and thought it was my error. Now I will know it might be something else. -Susanlesch 22:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Tagging an article as needing lots of work

Sorry, I can't find the tag for indicating an article needs work. Can someone help me?

BTW, the article I have in mind is Clothing. It contains "original research", opinions, and conclusions with minimal or no references. It has an odd focus on fetishism, sweat stains, clothing materials, and sexual signalling, to the exclusion of tailoring, style, couture, status, function, climate, regional variations, and culture. I swear, it reads like it was written by a registered sex offender.NuclearWinner 23:07, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

From your description, I would suggest {{refimprove}}, {{NPOV}} (needs discussion) or {{unbalanced}}, and {{originalresearch}}. Look through WP:TC and WP:CTT. Adrian M. H. 14:28, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Bloomin' lists!

List of United Kingdom Executive Agencies, Departments of the United Kingdom government and QUANGO are all terribly repetitive of each other, and don't really offer any explanation of, say, what an NDPB is, never mind differentiating it from the others. What's to be done?--Rambutan (talk) 17:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Help:Merging and moving pages. — RJH (talk) 20:20, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Poor English welcome templates

From time to time, a well-meaning person who does not write well in English will try to help edit the English Wikipedia. The results are usually unsatisfactory. Other editors will then explain the problem to them, and suggest editing another Wikipedia in a language they know better.

Unfortunately, sometimes the person's English is so bad that they cannot understand this suggestion. Therefore I have created a category of templates, each of which will offer the suggestion in English (for any other readers who happen upon it) and one other language. Since I only write well in English, thus far there are no translations. I invite the community to contribute some. Tualha (Talk) 15:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

False IP?

I'm sorry if this is already covered somewhere else, but I have a question about Wiki & false IP.

Can Wiki software indentify if person who posted or edited some content is using false IP? Or can it even use false IP?

I'm not sure what you mean by a "false IP". It's very hard to actually falsify an IP address, but the IP that you use does not necessarily belong to your computer. Most internet services route traffic through their own servers, which have different IPs than your individual computer. -20:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Problem with article Jeroboam II

When displayed, the relevant categories, template and other language links are missing. they appear on the edit page, and saving the page with them doesn't make them appear on the content page itself.--ArnoldPettybone 20:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You had a <ref> in there without a </ref>, so it thought everything after the <ref> (including the template and categories) was part of the reference. Happens to me all the time. Just doublecheck your refs. You also might want to put <references /> at the end of the article, so those references actually display. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 20:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

My edit has been removed

–My edit to a page Bed and Breakfast in The British Isles has been removed and although re written a further twice has still been removed. I consider the item to be inaccurated and misleading, how do I get my edit left on ?Bee and bee 14:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

See above. Advertising is not tolerated here. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Bee and bee... Try finding a reliable source that discusses the concept of B&Bs having a "Unique Selling Point" rather than giving an example or linking to a specific B&B. Blueboar 15:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Beds and Breakfasts

I edited an article on Bed and Breakfast in The British Isles as I saw that it was not accurate and was likely to be misleading to anyone outside the UK. My addition to the item was removed so I rewrote and posted a further twice. It was still removed leaving the item as it was, inaccurate and misleading. I'm new to Wikipedia and can't say I'm too impressed so far. How do I contact the person who removes my addition.Bee and bee 14:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You can click on the "history" link for any page and see previous versions, along with what user made the change and what those changes were. So, for instance, in the Bed and Breakfast article I can see that you did not actually correct any accurate or misleading information, but merely added text advertising a Bed and Breakfast chain whose name happens to be the same as your user name. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Search function

Allow me to introduce my self, Im the user currently working in developing "The Finance and Economics Association" wikipage. Could you be ever so kind to let me know why can't I find my page by using the "search" function? Thank you.

Best Regards,

Sergio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sv2146 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 8 July 2007

Probably because of the delay in database updates. Please don't forget to sign and make a new section from the tab at the top. Adrian M. H. 21:21, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

And you can always check your contribs. Adrian M. H. 21:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

It's most likely a redirect problem that issues from the use of capital letters in the name of the article. Compare: Finance and Economics Association - Finance and economics association. --ざくら木 12:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Assistance required from a creative person

I was surprised to see that there isn't a barnstar for copyright issues yet. I'd like to introduce a barnstar with a GNU logo in it. This barnstar could be handed out to people who do exceptionally good work with sorting copyright issues and fixing licences. I'm not all that good with art/paint programs, so I'd appreciate it if someone could create this for me :-). SalaSkan ^{(Review me)} 19:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

A user kept removing a well referenced sentence in Kung Fu Hustle

A user has removed Matrix references from Kung Fu Hustle, even though they are clearly referenced. He claims that Chinese references are not valid (when reliable sources in any language are acceptable), and is accusing me of vandalism here, I don't want to start an edit war. So, can something be done about it?--Kylohk 15:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

• OK, looks like the problem has been resolved. Thank you very much.--Kylohk 13:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Which version of notes works better?

I've been working on sprucing up some of the lists of U.S. governors, using a template I established for Alabama, and it's been going along swimmingly, but then I came across Minnesota, and I wanted to ask folks for an opinion.

Take a look at List of Governors of Alabama and then take a look at List of Governors of Minnesota. Specifically, look at the fact that the Alabama table has a Notes section, whereas the Minnesota one keeps all of the extended information in footnotes linked to the names. (And little if any extended information, like why the governor resigned, etc.)

(And there's some other options too - List of Governors of Delaware only has space for a single word in 'notes', so all the detailed information had to go in the footnote; however, I don't want to thin the table, because that's a featured list.)

Another example of each type: List of Governors of Georgia follows the notes-in-table format, whereas List of Presidents of the United States follows the bare-footnotes-only format.

Which do y'all think works better? --Golbez 13:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I really prefer footnotes to a "Notes" column, since not all governors will have notes and what exactly should be contained in notes is a bit ill-defined. I stopped working on List of Governors of Kentucky in part because I needed to ponder this same issue, but now that it's been brought to the fore, let's see if we can hammer it out. Acdixon 14:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm partial to footnotes as well, for much the same reason as Acdixon. older ≠ wiser 00:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe why the governor resigned is in that governor's page, unless it is important to the history of those governors. But if it is important maybe it should be repeated in the article text. (SEWilco 04:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC))

OK, I've switched it to an all footnotes system, and I think it looks pretty good. However, this leads to another problem, one that's irked me for over a year - any suggestions on how to best split the references from the footnotes? :( --Golbez 13:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Superimpose & Location map

Look at these images in Mozilla and in Internet Explorer. On my screen this template works fine in Mozilla but shifts the dots downwards on IE, off the map. Is it just me? --maclean 06:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

class=notpageimage| Location	class=notpageimage| Location
Superimpose	Superimpose

Category:Ancient Greek cities

A good number of the cities aren't even part of Ancient Greece

I think there is a case of pov overcategorization. Even the capital of Turkey is an ancient Greek city at the moment.

Many cities in modern Turkey was a part of ancient Greece, ottoman empire, Byzantium empire and god knows what other civilizations I have missed. For example Rome isn't categorized under Roman Empire or ancient roman cities (or whatever).

-- Cat ^chi? 13:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree... The category needs a slightly more limited criteria for inclusion. At the moment it seems to include any city that existed in one of the various Helenistic empires... regardless of whether the city pre-existed Greek/Macedonian rule. In the case of Ankara, since it was founded by the Hittites, I have removed it from the category. That said, there are a lot of cities in Anatolia and the Near East that I would categorize as "Ancient Greek cities"... in that they were founded by the Ancient Greeks. Blueboar 14:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Categorizing by founder country seems problematic to me. Constantinople was the secondary capital of the roman empire, the capital of Byzantium empire, and it was the later capital of the Ottoman empire. Indisputably it is notable to all three of the empires. It should however not be categorised under either three of them.

I would be more than fine with a List of Ancient Greek cities (in fact it exists). I would find a number of additional lists based on individual Hellenistic empires more helpful.

-- Cat ^chi? 15:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

"Who founded it" is but one possible criterium... I agree that there are others ... my point is that some form of inclusion criteria is needed. What makes a city "Ancient Greek"? Blueboar 17:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

To throw out one possible (albeit incomplete) solution, why not put the Ancient Greek city tag on the historical articles of those cities/towns? To give an example of what I mean, there are 3 articles covering the capital of Turkey, each focussing on one period of time: Byzantium, Constantinople, & Istanbul. Byzantium would get the Ancient Greek city tag, Constantinople the Roman city tag (if one exists), & Istanbul the Turkish city tag. Obviously, this won't work in all cases (there are a number of small towns or villages where there will always be one article), but at least it's a start. -- llywrch 23:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Only "historic" articles (aka articles strictly discussing history) should be tagged by this. Byzantium, Constantinople are such articles. Athens for example is not. Athens is a city in Greece founded by ancient Greeks but it shouldn't be tagged as such as the article covers the city as it is today. -- Cat ^chi? 14:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

So whats our status? -- Cat ^chi? 14:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Move Page

I just tried (several times) to move Chad white to Chad White, but I got an "error: could not submit form" message. This hasn't ever happened to me before. Any suggestions? — thesublime514 • talk • 20:13, July 11, 2007 (UTC)

EDIT: nevermind, it's protected. It was a very new page, though, so that didn't really occur to me. — thesublime514 • talk • 20:15, July 11, 2007 (UTC)

Looks deleted to me :D -- Cat ^chi? 14:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I deleted it. I should have mentioned it here. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 16:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

My talk page

I requested deletion of my userpage, and the admin deleted my talk page too. Could someone please restore it. --MichaelLinnear 18:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Done Sancho 19:02, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Deleting search history?

I'm not sure where to go to read about deleting search history, or if such a section even exists. Is this even possible to do? I read through much of the help sections and the search section but I haven't read how to do this anywhere. Sorry if this was answered somewhere and I just missed it, but I have looked everywhere I've thought of. Maybe it was described technically and I'm too dumb to understand. :)- Qtkate 11 19:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

July 15, 2007 2:54 (UTC)

Do you mean the search history in your browser? Like a google search history or something? Sancho 18:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

You're intelligent enough to ask the question in the right place. :) As to the question, I'm afraid I don't understand what you're describing. Do you mean the history of searches done through Special:Search?--Chaser - T 18:55, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I mean, how do I delete the history that has been saved in the dropdown of the search box? Qtkate 11 18:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

This sounds like a browser thing. What's your browser?--Chaser - T 19:02, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I mean in the Wikipedia search box. Sorry, I should've made that more clear. I use Microsoft Internet Explorer otherwise. Qtkate 11 19:05, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. Oddly there is a difference as Firefox doesn't seem to keep the search history, whereas IE6 does. Besides switching to Firefox, I can't find a way to do this directly. I suggest trying Window Washer to get rid of the search history.--Chaser - T 19:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I was thinking about switching to Firefox anyway, but I'll try Window Washer. Qtkate 11 19:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Go to tools-->internet options-->content--->autocomplete and clear forms and passwords.--Fuhghettaboutit 20:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Some weirdness @ Kurdish people

User adds a hard to understand intro which feels forky. What do you guys think? -- Cat ^chi? 22:16, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

User reverted unexplained odd additions to last good version by User:Dbachman. Brusk u Trishka 22:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Blue horseshoe.svg

Image:Blue horseshoe.svg is a Commons image listed as having been created by User:Howcheng. But it is an exact copy of the Indianapolis Colts logo (Image:IndianapolisColts 1001.png, being used quite properly only in the Colts article) and is being used all over the place in Userboxes to indicate that Users are Colts fans. This is surely an egregious copyright violation? I posted this on Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems, but nobody has responded there, yet. Corvus cornix 20:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I reviewed the situation, and have answered you on Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems. -- Steven Williamson (HiB2Bornot2B) - talk 20:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Links to an external website

I'm dealing with an OTRS ticket for the guy running http://www.doctormacro.info. His concern is stale links in Wikipedia to his old site, http://www.doctormacro.com. I have pointed out he can fix it himself but, like me, I don't think his Google-fu is up to finding all the pages.

Can someone help out here? --Brianmc 07:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

• So, what is the article in question?--Kylohk 10:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Special:Linksearch will search all the external links in Wikipedia. This is the direct link. --Cherry blossom tree 08:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Would you like me to run a script to make these changes? (It would be tedious to do it manually.) If so, let me know on my user talk page. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 10:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Assistance required from a creative person

I was surprised to see that there isn't a barnstar for copyright issues yet. I'd like to introduce a barnstar with a GNU logo in it. This barnstar could be handed out to people who do exceptionally good work with sorting copyright issues and fixing licences. I'm not all that good with art/paint programs, so I'd appreciate it if someone could create this for me :-). SalaSkan ^{(Review me)} 19:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Another list question

There is somewhat of a discussion on FLC about this, and I wanted to ask here. What kind of picture style to folks like in lists of people? There's three different kinds:

1. No pictures at all. (List of Governors of Georgia)
2. Pictures along the side of notable or picture-available people. (List of Governors of Alabama, List of Governors of Kentucky)
3. Pictures for every entry. (List of Governors of Louisiana, List of Governors of California).

Personally, I greatly prefer option #2; I feel that having pictures in the table bloats it horribly. Also, there's the situation, especially on Alabama, where over half the people don't have good free images available; that's why, for example, I don't have a picture of George Wallace there. When I had the pictures in the table itself, it was full of "placeholder" images, which didn't add any value to the table whatsoever. I can see an exception for national office holders, since 1) it tends to be easier to get pictures of those, and 2) they're far more recognizable than governors or lesser offices. But I wanted to see where other folks stood on this. (and FYI, the Georgia article only has no pictures because they haven't been added yet, but I wanted to portray that option as well) --Golbez 03:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I prefer option 3, the more pictures, the better. They're informative, after all :-). SalaSkan 16:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I like #2 also - While #3 adds more pics, it does indeed bloat that table. Besides, these pics should be avaliable on the individual pages Corpx 16:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I prefer option #2, as well, also. --Agamemnon2 16:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Numbered Lists

I am an administrator of a MediaWiki based wiki. I would like to change the way the numbered lists appear in the rendered pages. For example,

#    1
##   1.1
###  1.1.1
##   1.2
###  1.2.1
#    2
##   2.1

I have done some googling and saw that this could be set with CSS properties of

ol { counter-reset: item }
li { display: block }
li:before { content: counters(item, ".") " "; counter-increment: item }

Where is the best place to define this? Would common.css be a good place? Thanks in advance. --68.21.231.154 13:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Is it a good idea to do this with CSS? - I thought the point of CSS was to separate style from content. By using the CSS to generate your section numbers you effectively are putting content under the control of the CSS. How would such a page be displayed in a non-css capable browser? Chris 13:21, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

In a non-css browser it would be displayed as:

1. Example text
   1. Example text
      1. Example text
   2. Example text
      1. Example text
2. Example text
   1. Example text

Which would still display the content but with a different style of section numbering. Yes, MediaWiki:Common.css is the best place to put those style rules. Tra (Talk) 16:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Too many one-sentence paragraphs

I was wondering if there is a warning template for a section that contains too many single-sentence paragraphs? There didn't appear to be anything appropriate on WP:Templates. Thank you. — RJH (talk) 14:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest {{cleanup-restructure}} or {{cleanup-rewrite}} as the closest, together with a talk page note. Adrian M. H. 22:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Even better, instead of a BIG UGLY BOX atop the article concerning a minor situation that is a style judgment call, why not limit yourself to a note on the Talk page with an appropriate comment in the edit summary? Or you could even do the editing that you think needs to be done, instead of telling other people to do it and then moving on.

The biggest complaint I hear from people who use wikipedia - as compared to those of us who edit it - is the explosion of in-your-face boxes squatting at the top of articles. Please don't multiply them unnecessarily. - DavidWBrooks 00:01, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. To me the good thing about a BIG UGLY BOX at the top of the page is that (in some cases) it can serve as a warning to the reader that the page isn't quite at an acceptible level of quality. It can also serve as an incentive to get the page fixed, so I don't have an issue with that approach. — RJH (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

If more articles were up to a reasonable minimum standard at the time of their creation, there would be far fewer tags. They help to indicate the expected standard to both readers and editors, from which readers will know that what they see is not the norm and the contributing editors may be prompted to improve their work. Most editors have to divide their limited wikitime between a lot of areas and tasks in which they are most interested or concerned and may not have the time to improve other people's work on a frequent basis. From me, rewrites are quite rare but when they happen, they are usually a committed and total rewrite. Such expenses of time and effort can only happen periodically. Adrian M. H. 16:10, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

That's a good argument for serious issues involving content - lack of attribution or major NPOV violations, that sort of thing - but not for style questions that are judgment calls, particularly a dinky one like "I think the sentences are too short"! (Why not a box reading "This article under-utilizes semicolons; please help improve it"?)

If an editor finds an article that's wrong or misleading, then a notice box to readers is understandable; if we just think it isn't written terribly well, then a nag box is just contributing to the problem by making it harder to read. (In my opinion, of course.) - DavidWBrooks 00:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

When comparing versions you get Line xx - any tools for counting to Line xx?

When using 'Compare selected versions' from the History tab, you get 2 columns with a Line xx showing start of change. Anyone know of a tool which allows you to find Line xx? It's easy to find if it's line 1 but when it's Line 145, and not obvious what's been done... TIA. Mercury543210 21:51, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Can someone explain...

...why on Image:HyderabadMosque.jpg, the "File links" section shows the image: page as displaying the image? 68.39.174.238 20:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Can't help you, I'm afraid, but it's not limited to that image -- many images exhibit the same phenomenon. EdJogg 22:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

External links on Mamod page?

I had removed a number of external links from the Mamod page which linked to several commercial suppliers and a discussion forum, in keeping with WP:EL. However, one anon editor is strongly objecting to the discussion forum removal (see the talk page for our 'discussion'), and the low-contribution-count editor who added the commercial links originally has just undeleteed them.

This person/people seem to think I'm targetting that page out of spite, or something. Could someone else please have a look and see whether I am being too heavy-handed or not?

Thanks EdJogg 12:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Conversion of canal water into drinking water

Hi,

I'm pretty new to this, so someone may tell me this is the wrong place for this, but can someone have a look at this article Conversion of canal water into drinking water, I didn't want to instantly request deletion because, to be honest, I couldn't really work out the page! lol! --LookingYourBest 08:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi to you.  :-) I have marked this as a candidate for deletion, as it is a pretty terrible excuse for an article. See this article's entry under Articles for Deletion (AfD) to see a log of other users' opinions. The list will grow over the next few hours/days, so keep posted. ;-)

If you see a similar article that you think may be a candidate for deletion (in accordance with the deletion policy), then check out Wikipedia's deletion templates, which is a good place to start if you're not familiar with the process (this is my first time too).

Thanks for bringing this to my attention, and I hoped I have been of help. :-) Leevclarke 15:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Superimpose & Location map

Look at these images in Mozilla and in Internet Explorer. On my screen this template works fine in Mozilla but shifts the dots downwards on IE, off the map. Is it just me? --maclean 06:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

class=notpageimage| Location	class=notpageimage| Location
Superimpose	Superimpose

Dubious statement at SaskTel's article

 Done by Black Falcon. BigNate37_(T) 22:55, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I was hoping someone could take a look at Talk:SaskTel/Archives/2013#Controversies, and make a judgment call on whether mine and another editor's concerns are valid. As I explain there, I'm hesitant to touch the article because of a conflict of interest. BigNate37_(T) 17:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Smoking

While I was editing the Psychoactive drug article, I wrote the following sentence:

...nicotine and THC are often smoked...

I noticed that the smoked link redirects to the method of preserving food. So, I wanted to fix the link by redirecting it to an article about smoking. However, when I searched for "smoking," I was redirected to Smoking, a disambig page with links to various different kinds of smoking. The closest things I could find to the general practice of smoking were these articles: Tobacco smoking, Pipe smoking, and Cannabis smoking. However, I feel that this organization leaves a gap... where do I go to learn about smoking in general, such as in that sentence from the psychoactive drug article? An article on smoking in general is needed, as the practice of smoking any substance has a long history, cultural traditions, health risks, physics of evaporation, biology of inhalation, etc. The current organization does not include that kind of general information and ignores the existence of other smoked substances like cloves, salvia, or cocaine.

Shouldn't there be an article with information about smoking in general, not just one particular kind of smoking? Jolb 17:36, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

You're quite right. I think Smoking should be turned into an article about the practice, with sections on the various types of smoking. In fact, I think I'll be bold. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 21:18, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

What do you think? A good start? I'm a non-smoker, so if you could expand and improve it, it would be much appreciated. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 21:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Peter Isotalo has done a bang-up job improving this article. It's beautiful now. Hard to believe it was a poorly-formatted disambig just yesterday! – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 10:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I've just taken the liberty of fixing the link on the word "smoked" in the Psychoactive drug article, so that it does now point to the article on smoking instead of smoked food. :-) Leevclarke 14:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:Ancient Greek cities

A good number of the cities aren't even part of Ancient Greece

I think there is a case of pov overcategorization. Even the capital of Turkey is an ancient Greek city at the moment.

Many cities in modern Turkey was a part of ancient Greece, ottoman empire, Byzantium empire and god knows what other civilizations I have missed. For example Rome isn't categorized under Roman Empire or ancient roman cities (or whatever).

-- Cat ^chi? 13:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree... The category needs a slightly more limited criteria for inclusion. At the moment it seems to include any city that existed in one of the various Helenistic empires... regardless of whether the city pre-existed Greek/Macedonian rule. In the case of Ankara, since it was founded by the Hittites, I have removed it from the category. That said, there are a lot of cities in Anatolia and the Near East that I would categorize as "Ancient Greek cities"... in that they were founded by the Ancient Greeks. Blueboar 14:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Categorizing by founder country seems problematic to me. Constantinople was the secondary capital of the roman empire, the capital of Byzantium empire, and it was the later capital of the Ottoman empire. Indisputably it is notable to all three of the empires. It should however not be categorised under either three of them.

I would be more than fine with a List of Ancient Greek cities (in fact it exists). I would find a number of additional lists based on individual Hellenistic empires more helpful.

-- Cat ^chi? 15:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

"Who founded it" is but one possible criterium... I agree that there are others ... my point is that some form of inclusion criteria is needed. What makes a city "Ancient Greek"? Blueboar 17:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

To throw out one possible (albeit incomplete) solution, why not put the Ancient Greek city tag on the historical articles of those cities/towns? To give an example of what I mean, there are 3 articles covering the capital of Turkey, each focussing on one period of time: Byzantium, Constantinople, & Istanbul. Byzantium would get the Ancient Greek city tag, Constantinople the Roman city tag (if one exists), & Istanbul the Turkish city tag. Obviously, this won't work in all cases (there are a number of small towns or villages where there will always be one article), but at least it's a start. -- llywrch 23:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Only "historic" articles (aka articles strictly discussing history) should be tagged by this. Byzantium, Constantinople are such articles. Athens for example is not. Athens is a city in Greece founded by ancient Greeks but it shouldn't be tagged as such as the article covers the city as it is today. -- Cat ^chi? 14:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

So whats our status? -- Cat ^chi? 14:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

List of everything related to astronomy

It is in the end of the List of astronomical topics in awful condition. I need automatic interlinking for tens of thousands of words (I do not know how to do it) and making a coherent list with a paragraph for each term. If one knows how to do it, it must be an easy job. So, I am waiting for an ordinary programmist. I am grateful in advance. --Quellem 14:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I attempted to do that a few months back, but it's a hideous job and I eventually gave up. Personally I think the page should just be deleted. It adds nothing that isn't better organized under Category:Astronomy. — RJH (talk) 18:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

But User:Misza13 has programming skills that helped me to put in order the first part of a similar list. I am just not able yet to come with him into contact. --Quellem 19:33, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that the finished list will be usable, it will be just too large to manage, and I guess there's a chance that the 'Recent Changes' tool will be overloaded. Nevertheless, if you have access to a word processor, then the task should be completable in an evening. The following instructions are for Word 2000 Professional, but other word processors/versions should be able to do similar things.

1. Create your Category Tree output
2. Copy-and-paste the entire list into a Word document
3. Select Find-and-replace, and click More to show the Special button
4. In the Find what field, select ^p (Paragraph mark) from the 'Special' list
5. In the Replace with field, enter ]]^p* [[
6. Click Replace all

   -- You should find that each line is now a wiki-link, on a separate line, starting with a star.

7. 'Select' the entire list
8. From the Table menu, select Sort, then Sort by: paragraphs, ascending
9. Click OK and you have your sorted list!
10. Simply copy-and-paste the resulting list into a Wikipedia edit window, check, and save.

I've just tried this on a small set of articles (12) listed using 'Category Tree'. (You will need to exapnd every category you wish to view...). It was pretty easy, but you are wanting to list a very large number of articles...

Hope this does the trick for you.

EdJogg 22:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow! I use a slow broadband connection (Verizon wireless) and it just took me over five minutes to download that list! The text alone is worth 360.3kB, and that isn't counting the 222 images, (mostly at full size). This monster is enough to crash many people's browsers, not to mention the fact that cleaning up vandalism on something so huge is bound to be a headache. Since the stated purpose of this list is to harness the Related changes function, and since that function does work when used from a category, I'd have to agree with RJH that it should be deleted. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 20:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry! Sorry! Sorry! Sorry! Sorry! Sorry!

I didn't realise what a monster I would unleash. It took several minutes to load for me, and I have a broadband connection!

I have copied the page to User:Quellem/List of everything related to astronomy so that Quellem has access to his list, and restored the original page to something more sane (for everyone else)!

EdJogg 08:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Redirecting links

I recently wrote a stub about a book called Garden of Pomegranates, which in its third edition and is now called A Garden of Pomegranates: Skrying on the tree of Life. how do i link AGOP:Skrying on the Tree of Life on other pages to my Garden Of Pomegranates" stub? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny savage (talk • contribs) 19:16, 22 July 2007

You don't need to. Typically, subtitles are not included in the article title on a book. IPSOS (talk) 18:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD on WP:SUMMARY of controversies clamed to be a POV fork... Help?!?

Resolved

Nevermind, moved it back in to the article. BenB4 14:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

The Ron Paul article was getting long, and it had a lengthy section on a couple controversies. So another editor, who is actually a supporter of Paul (I'm not), in perfect accordance with WP:SUMMARY, starts Ron Paul controversies. Someone puts it up on AfD because they think it is a "POV fork created for/because of an apparent content dispute in the main article. By definition this article can never be NPOV." But it's not a POV fork, it's a wp:summary style section that got moved, just like Hillary Rodham Clinton controversies and Controversies of Rudy Giuliani. Several people vote "Delete blatant POV fork" and the like.

For now I put in a note to the closer asking him to put it back in the article before deleting. The problem is, there are a lot of little controversies, and this section is going to grow and ought to have its own article. I'd like to keep this state of affairs, and I bet if the AfD voters knew what was going on, they would, too.

What do I do? Canvas the talk pages of all the delete voters explaining about summary style? Wait until it gets deleted and take it to DRV? Wait until it gets deleted and recreate it with a better explanation of summary style?

Sometimes I feel like we ought to limit AfD to people who have been around a certain length of time, in hopes that they might be more familiar with policy and existing articles. I fully understand how impractical that is. Sigh! BenB4 10:01, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Dead link

When I click "my preferences" up above, then "Misc", then "Stub link", nothing happens - it doesn't even behave like a redlink. I presume that link was intended to explain what "Threshold for stub link formatting" means. If instead I click "my preferences" then "Editing" then "section editing" or "edit toolbar", those links work. Art LaPella 00:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

That's because 'Stub link' is there to demonstrate what a link to a stub looks like and the other links you mentioned are to provide more information on a particular setting. Tra (Talk) 01:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Best location to confirm copyright status

Hi, I have a copyright related question for images on the NSW State Library website. The photos are public domain, but the library claims copyright on the (apparently) bulk-scanned images.

I have asked this question at Wikipedia talk:Public domain and Wikipedia talk:Public domain image resources. So far no response - have I overlooked the correct place to ask that question?

Thanks,Garrie 21:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

See Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. hbdragon88 23:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, but in that article's External links it linkst to this response. So, I'm none the clearer. And how does it apply to Australia?

Again, my question here is:have I overlooked the correct place to ask that question? If so - where should I be asking the question "are images of public domain photographs (scanned in Australia) in the public domain or are they copyrighted?"

Thanks,Garrie 04:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll still my neck out here with all the "I am not a lawyer and am entirely unqualified to comment on this" caveats I can muster: The quick answers to your questions are, "You haven't really overlooked anything" and "We don't know." The most relevant page, Wikipedia:Requested copyright examinations, appears to be largely inactive. More in depth: Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp hasn't been verified by the Supreme Court, but until such time as it is overruled, it's fair game. Note that museums, including those in the U.S. to whom Bridgeman explicitly applies never acknowledge that they might not own the copies to the PD images they scan, so the museumscopyright.org.uk page you link above is probably about as extreme a bias as you can get. The Australian courts don't seem to have ruled on this at all, but the definition of "artistic work" in the relevant law is "an artistic work in which copyright subsists", which is spectacularly unhelpful. Note also the unhelpfulness of the relevant line in Copyright expiration in Australia#Bridgeman v Corel: "However, this case in American law does not necessarily reflect views on copyrightability outside of the U.S."

Frankly, you can take as a given that the museum doesn't want the scans of its collections used, but also that this has not been legally clarified. If you agree with the museums' argument that scanning a work is an artistic endeavor, don't upload them. If you think this argument is silly, do. If the description of the image notes that significant work has been done to the scanned image, e.g. reconstructing a damaged portion, that might count as creative input, resulting in a copyright reset. If you think the museums' argument is silly but are sympathetic to museums, upload the images as PD but make a note of where the image was scanned both in the image description page and the image caption to assuage your guilt. Note that PD images should go on Commons: and that repeating your question there, where practically all questions revolve around copyright, may get a better answer. - BanyanTree 09:22, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. My opinion is, the library is trying to scare people out of using something for free, that the library hopes to sell. Nothing wrong with selling people bottled water, even if the tap water is a pleasant temperature and fit for human consumption...Garrie 05:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

About different places to ask, there is also Wikipedia:Media copyright questions which is quite active. Garion96 (talk) 19:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. I will restate my original question there, so I can get back to the person who asked me!Garrie 05:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

About the Copyrights

i want to ask that can i upload an image of a sportsman taken from TV?--Adeelbutt88 ^talk 17:53, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

In general no since the image would not be free content. An exception is if the image could pass the Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. Garion96 (talk) 19:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Wen Tianxiang - Review of book entry

I entered the following reference for Wen Tianxiang:

• WEN T'IEN-HSIANG: A Biographical Study of a Sung Patriot William Andres Brown, Chinese Materials Center Publications, San Francisco, 1986 (ISBN 0896446433)

I would like to put a short review of this book into Wiki. How would I go about that and where is the best place to create this review? -- Geminni 05:14, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

A review by yourself would be considered original research, and is prohibited. Copying a review from another source into the wiki would be considered a violation of the owner's copyright, and would be also be removed. A freely licensed book review could be linked from the relevant page, and there would be no need to insert it into the wiki. I can think of no situations, off the top of my head, where the addition of a review would add value. Reviews are welcome at sites such as Amazon.com, which may be reached from the wiki by way of the ISBN number link you added. Thanks, BanyanTree 08:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Numbered Lists

I am an administrator of a MediaWiki based wiki. I would like to change the way the numbered lists appear in the rendered pages. For example,

#    1
##   1.1
###  1.1.1
##   1.2
###  1.2.1
#    2
##   2.1

I have done some googling and saw that this could be set with CSS properties of

ol { counter-reset: item }
li { display: block }
li:before { content: counters(item, ".") " "; counter-increment: item }

Where is the best place to define this? Would common.css be a good place? Thanks in advance. --68.21.231.154 13:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Is it a good idea to do this with CSS? - I thought the point of CSS was to separate style from content. By using the CSS to generate your section numbers you effectively are putting content under the control of the CSS. How would such a page be displayed in a non-css capable browser? Chris 13:21, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

In a non-css browser it would be displayed as:

1. Example text
   1. Example text
      1. Example text
   2. Example text
      1. Example text
2. Example text
   1. Example text

Which would still display the content but with a different style of section numbering. Yes, MediaWiki:Common.css is the best place to put those style rules. Tra (Talk) 16:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Deleted article

I wrote an article about 10 minutes ago, and it was deleted almost immediately. I understand why it was deleted but I would like to have the article back, perhaps undelete it for 5 minutes so I can copy/paste it into a word document.

It would be greatly appreciated.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ginaginz (talk • contribs)

That is not generally done, but there are a small number of admins (none of whom I know of specifically) who sometimes recover deleted material for this purpose. Check through the admins category and you may be able to find one if none of them see this section. Adrian M. H. 15:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

See Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles. Also, the formal process for requesting a copy is at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Content review, though you don't have to go through that if you find admin directly who will help you.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It was an attack page, and because of that I doubt anyone will be willing to get that for you. Prodego ^talk 20:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Drawing board

Hello all. Lately I've been the only one responding to posts on the Drawing board. I'm taking a wikibreak until August 1 and I'd not want queries to go waiting, so I'm hoping some other editors will be willing to lend a hand there. It would be good to have other perspectives besides my own for those editors seeking help even after I'm back. Thanks! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 02:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Sonnet 115

I'm being told that because every one of these articles is written the same way, they don't have to follow Wikipedia policies of WP:NOR and WP:V, as well as not needing context (such as explaining that these are written by Shakespeare, and explaining what a sonnet is). Corvus cornix 01:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Accidental Edit to [Image:Voyager-bottom.jpg]

Not knowing what I was doing I reverted to a previous version. To undo this effect I reverted to my previous edit from April. Overall I am just letting you know that you can delete those two reverts I did on 2007-07-26T22:03 and 2007-07-26T22:06. --ANONYMOUS COWARD0xC0DE 22:28, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. --Golbez 22:58, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Move of Georgetown College

Recently, User:Paulus89 moved the contents of Georgetown College to Georgetown College (Kentucky) to make way for an article about the undergraduate school of Georgetown University. First, I question whether an article about an entire college should be displaced to make way for one about part of a college, even if the college it is a part of is better known. At the least, perhaps Georgetown College ought to be a disambiguation page. Regardless, the page move was done improperly, as the user just copied the content into a new article, then copied the talk page content to the new talk page and blanked the old talk page. This loses the edit history for the previous article. I should know how to go about fixing this, but I don't. Can someone please help me out? Any comments regarding appropriate disambiguation between the two topics is also appreciated. Thanks. Acdixon 14:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I've fixed the cut-paste move, so at least y'all can fix the naming and disambig issues at your leisure. --Golbez 18:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Table

I'm trying to make a table, and for some reason the border color isn't working:

{| class="wikitable" style="border: 2px solid red;"
|-
|thingy thing
|}

makes

thingy thing

However:

{| class="wikitable" style="border: 1px solid red;"
|-
|thingy thing
|}

makes

thingy thing

Help? — Bob • (talk) • 05:58, July 26, 2007 (UTC)

What exactly is the problem? Both seem to make a nice red boarder for me (the 2px being a bit fatter than the 1px, as it should). Perhaps it is a local issue with your computer? Blueboar 14:11, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Could everyone - Bob and Blueboar - please say what BROWSER they are using? For me in Firefox 2.x, the first one has a red border, the second does not. --Golbez 18:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Appears to be a Firefox issue. I'm also running Firefox 2.x and see what Goldbez sees. But when I use the IETab extension to switch to IE view, I see what Blueboar is seeing. Acdixon 18:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree, and what's more, when I take out the class=wikitable, I see the red border in both browsers. Is there something non-standard in the wikitable class css? – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 18:43, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess that's it. I'm running Firefox 2.x (sorry, should have mentioned that). I guess I can just remove the class part. Thanks — Bob • (talk) • 19:08, July 26, 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of user subpages

Hi! I was just wondering if an administrator could delete all my current user subpages? I'd like to start over on my userpage and subpages, and it would be great to get them deleted. They are User:SilverBulletx3/Userboxes, User:SilverBulletx3/wikiwikiwa, User:SilverBulletx3/daddyplaying, and User:SilverBulletx3/gallery, and User:SilverBulletx3/Autograph Booklet. Thanks!   •Silver•   Talk 17:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

• Just put {{db-user}} on them. An admin will be along shortly. Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 17:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Will do! Thanks!   •Silver•   Talk 17:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

luxembourg family

I HAVE A PENNET/FLAG THAT ENTIRE FAMILY SIGNED,ON BOARD THE USS TRENTON DURING WW2.THIS PENNET ALSO HAS PORT OF CALLS,CAPTAIN NAME,DATES.MY FATHER WAS A SEAMAN ON BOARD,WHEN THE FAMILY WAS ESCORTED OUT OF THERE COUNTRY TO ESTABLISH A GOV'T IN EXILE.MY FATHER WAS PRESENTED WITH THIS PENNET FOR TAKING PERSONNEL CARE OF FAMILY — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.223.152.177 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

A) Please don't write in ALL CAPS - its the written equivalent of shouting and is difficult to read; B) Please "sign" all your posts with ~~~~ at the end; C) I'm not sure if you're asking a question or just announcing that you have an historical item - could you please clarify? Thanks. -- MarcoTolo 16:11, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Image question

I have a book on Robbie Ross, who died in 1918. The book contains several photographs of him from 1882 to 1916, that I presume are now public domain given how long ago there were taken. Am I allowed to scan in these images and upload to Wikipedia/the Commons? Can I scan in images on anyone from then and before regardless of where I got them from? (I am wondering how people acquired the images on Ferdinand II of Aragon). Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 14:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

• Any image that was published before 1923 can be scanned and uploaded. Beyond that - there are complications. See Wikipedia:Public domain WilyD 15:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I think I'd better contact the author and ask him if any of those photos are public domain. Reading the Illustrations page it looks like he got most of them out of family archives. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 15:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

(ec) The key is that the photo must have been "published". While this seems like a "Giant who cares" moment on the face of it ("How would I have access to a photo if it wasn't published, smart guy?"), it does come up when dealing with images from, say, a photo archive. Example: I was looking for a photo of the architect Cass Gilbert and found one from the Minnesota Historical Society archive. The "photo date" is listed as 1901, but that doesn't mean that it automatically falls under the pre-1923 rule unless I can learn if the image was published prior to 1923. So, as Wily pointed out, generally speaking, the answer is "Yes, but....". -- MarcoTolo 15:31, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, doublechecking, unpublished works enter the public domain after 120 years or author's life + 70, I believe. So 1882 pictures may be public domain anyways (I ain't a lawyer, however, and live in a godless foreign communist country, where copyright law may be different. WilyD 15:53, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Yu-Gi-Oh! Online article

The article Yu-Gi-Oh! Online was recently nominated for deletion and "merged" into Yu-Gi-Oh! Trading Card Game. The reasons given were that it failed WP:NOT and WP:WEB. However, I fail to see how it failed WP:NOT, and I have found multiple reliable sources. Can somebody help me by either telling me why it still does not deserve an article or by undeleting the article (or whatever you do on Wikipedia to bring a deleted article back)? The discussion is at Talk:Yu-Gi-Oh! Trading_Card Game#Yu-Gi-Oh! Online article. EDIT: Forgot to sign.... VDZ 15:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Table bleed-over

Anyone know what the deal is with the first table in List of Kentucky state insignia? Looks fine in Firefox, but in IE, the words in the description column bleed over onto the left border. Any help would be appreciated, as this list is currently an FLC (which is how I discovered the strange rendering in "the inferior browser.") Acdixon 00:08, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Image help

Being a user of the German Wikipedia, I'm familiar an happy with the service of de:Wikipedia:Bilderwerkstatt, a forum for individual technical image modifications. Do you guys provide such a service? I would like to suggest a modification of Image:Univphxonline.jpg... -- Scriberius 10:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You might want to go to Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Great, thanks! It's hard to find, there was no iw link at de... Greetings, -- Scriberius 13:36, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Image editing help

Greetings, the image of this cornerstone [4] doesn't work very in the article and I'm looking for assistance to edit it so that we we use it in the photo it's easy enough to read. Benjiboi 11:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

You might want to go to Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! will do. Benjiboi 11:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Own website

hi i would like to make my own websit but i dont know how to start would yo peas help me make one ,bythe way i found an ad from @wiki.com for creating website but i missed it thanking you ahmedahmed 04:39, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You're in the wrong place. Please post at Wikipedia:Reference desk for questions not directly related to improving Wikipedia. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:56, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Word use policy

Can anybody outline when a country or a state can be characterized democratic in Wikipedia? For example is it correct to say German Democratic Republic was democratic and if not, why? Can also anybody outline the usage of the word regime in Wikipedia when applied to political order or government in a country? Is it possible to say "Putin's regime", "Soviet regime" etc?--Dojarca 03:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding democracy, this isn't the place to have a discussion about the meaning of that word, since there is an entire article about it. Regarding "regime", that's a matter for editors to agree on, or to agree that a different word makes more sense. "Regime" almost certainly is a good word in some articles and a bad word for others (for example, "FDR's regime" is pretty meaningless). So it's much better to have the discussion in the context of a particular article (that is, on the article's talk page), than here, as generalities.

In general, I think it's best to avoid getting into fights about whether a particular word ("label") fits. Instead, say something like "While the constitution of the GDR stated that it was a democracy, and provided for elections, the country's Communist Party selected candidates for all elected positions, and these candidates had no opponents on the ballots when the voting was done." (I offer that sentence as an example, not to start an argument; I believe it's true, but even if not, it is intended to demonstrate what a factual statement looks like.) If an article simply provides the facts, then each reader can decide if (in his/her mind) the term "democracy" (or whatever the contested word/label might be) applies or not (or to what extent it applies.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 12:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Btw, there was no communist party in GDR. I agree with you though but I need arguments to justify this position. The actual dispute arose around Mongolia article where there is given a date of "transition to democracy". I tried to reword this, but faced oppostion. In fact Mongolia was regarded one of "People's democratic countries" in the USSR and there are several peer-reviewed publications by professional historians from the USSR where it is called so. My position is that indicating only one point of view would be improper. In fact though I hoped there are some general regulations in Wikipedia to exist.--Dojarca 20:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

The policy is neutral point of view; section headings as well as text are required not to express a particular point of view (as in whether the current regime is or is not a democracy, for example). A section heading like "Transition from control by the U.S.S.R" or "Transition, 1991 to 1994" would be much more neutral in point of view. (I've not read the article; these two suggestions are intended to be illustrative, not necessarily accurate). Where there is a dispute (was Mongolia "part" of the U.S.S.R; is Mongolia now a democracy and if so, when did it become so), it should not be "settled" by one side of the other in the dispute "winning"; the solution is to state things as factually as possible (e.g., "Several professional historians consider Mongolia to have essentially been in the U.S.S.R, [cite], [cite], [cite]". "However, the country was X and did Y, unlike A and B."). After the facts have been laid out, let the reader decide. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 20:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Need to change license but which one?

Ok, I just uploaded these two images 1 2and realized that I may have chosen the wrong licenses. Alright, the reason I chosed those licenses in the first place was because felt that they counted more as a screenshots (FYI I chopped those screenshots) rather than as "found it somewhere".

Anyways, I need assistance determining the license and getting the right template for it.

But please don't report for this, I am trying to fix my mistakes here.Worlder 01:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

All images are deleted

Why?

I am a poor english speaker.

All fair use images are deleted.

See my talk page.

• 1. you think replaceable?
• 2. If your think is correct, replace it to free image yourself !!
• 3. and delete fair use image.

all article is only text.

what is replaceable fair use image?

delete that templete and policy.

you can think it is replace to free image?

only think?

find it and replace ir

you make many articles to only text articles.

example: Goh Kun

only text. I uploaded only one fair use image. it is speedy deleted. replace image? you can see any free image in that article? nothing. it is vandalism.

• File:Uri Party's Logo.jpg
• Kang Jae-seop
• File:Goh Kun.jpg Goh_Kun
• File:KDX-3.jpg

-- WonYong (talk • contribs • count • logs • email) 11:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Our fair use policies are based on statements by the Wikimedia Foundation, and the rule is not "use a fair use picture until a free use one exists", but currently is "use a fair use picture only if a free use one can not exist any time soon" - so a fair use picture of a person now dead is ok, but if they're living it's still possible to go and take a photo of them and release it under CC-BY-SA-2.0 or whatever yourself. The reason is because fair use is a bit of a thin line in US (and other countries') copyright law, and we'd rather be well on the safe side where possible. Confusing Manifestation 01:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Repeated personal attacks by an anonymous IP

Note: This has been also posted on WP:ANI.

After I gave him a simple level 2 warning for deliberately adding a typo to an article: [5], User:65.32.93.17 has been constantly giving me personal attacks (see here: [6]) and accusing me of vandalizing his talk page, while I gave several WP:NPA warnings for doing so. His user talk also has a consistent offensive remark, which he continually reverts to after additional warnings have been given.--Kylohk 04:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• Doesn't matter now, it's been take care of at ANI.--Kylohk 04:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

How to cite references?

Hello,

if I write an article on a creative work[1] that I have as a physical representation with me, but I cannot find anything about it in the net how should I cite references to it.

I've seen article on game rules that have a note that further references are needed when there was a link to the definite game manual on the net.

I've also seen articles on comics that I have on my bookself and the information is accurate but no way to reference as I cannot just scan the comic pages and publish them on the net.

Is a link to someones homepage where he states that he owns a copy of the work enough.

[1] Be it a book, a piece of music, a play, a movie, a game etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linkato1 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 1 August 2007

The source does not have to be available on the web. If you have the article itself, just cite it using the Template:cite news or something similar. Acdixon 18:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The reality is that for Wikipedia articles about games, comics, movies, and similar, the rule requiring reliable sources (and citations in general) tends to be ignored. For example, see List of Pokémon (121-140), describing 20 Pokemon cards.

Please note, however, that there is a major difference between creating an article about something you personally have in hand, and adding to an article on a subject that is has already been judged to be notable enough to be in Wikipedia. If what you want to write about has never been mentioned on the Web (for example, a self-published book that has sold a total of 20 copies), then it is not notable - please do not create an article about it.

Requests for feedback

Are there any experienced editors who would like to get more involved with RFF? It is under staffed at the moment and would benefit from more editors watching it. A lot of relatively new editors use this page and they could feel discouraged by a lack of responses. Adrian M. H. 15:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• Sure. Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 20:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Map Template

Does anyone know how to make the text on this image hyperlinks?

I'm thinking I'd have to make the text html hyperlinks, but positioning that over an image would present a problem.

Any Help would be appreciated. Thanks

Lofty 12:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

What you want to do is use an imagemap. It doesn't make text into wikilinks per se; instead, you can specify different areas of an image (areas where text appears) as clickable links. The difference isn't apparent to the user, of course, you make a mistake in specifying the coordinates of an area.

You'll find info at mw:Extension:ImageMap and examples at Category:Wikipedia imagemaps. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Error on wiki page about Kellen Winslow

The entry for Kellen Winslow is messed up at the beginning. I have no clue how to fix the problem. Somebody should fix it.

Y Someone had put something in the wrong place which broke the template. Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 07:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

List of postal codes in Sri Lanka

The table of postal codes in Sri Lanka is a cut-and-paste job from some other website, and the formatting does not match Wikipedia's formatting. Deletion discussions such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of postal codes in Nepal have established that such articles are valid.

At the risk of sounding lazy, I don't care to format the article properly, especially because there are at least three viable ways to do it. Any ideas or recommendations (or volunteers)? Shalom ^Hello 18:54, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The AFD discussion is much weaker than my initial thought. It seems that it was only kept because it would be unfair to delete Nepal and not anybody else. Thusly, someone needs to nominate all the postal code articles at once to satisfy this caveat. hbdragon88 08:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Deleted article

I wrote an article about 10 minutes ago, and it was deleted almost immediately. I understand why it was deleted but I would like to have the article back, perhaps undelete it for 5 minutes so I can copy/paste it into a word document.

It would be greatly appreciated.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ginaginz (talk • contribs)

That is not generally done, but there are a small number of admins (none of whom I know of specifically) who sometimes recover deleted material for this purpose. Check through the admins category and you may be able to find one if none of them see this section. Adrian M. H. 15:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

See Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles. Also, the formal process for requesting a copy is at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Content review, though you don't have to go through that if you find admin directly who will help you.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It was an attack page, and because of that I doubt anyone will be willing to get that for you. Prodego ^talk 20:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Help me, proofread it

Hi !

I'm just done translating the French featured article about Battle of Bir Hakeim (fr:Bataille de Bir Hakeim) : User:NicDumZ/Bir Hakeim.

If some of you, native english speakers, could read it and correct it, it'd nice ! No need to be able to understand (in French), it's all about language misuses, inaccuracies, and style improvements. Especially, I do believe that my translated quotations particularly lack of style !

Thanks a lot !! NicDumZ ~ 12:48, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I ran it through MS Word and found a few issues—now fixed. However, it appears that the notes are still in French. — RJH (talk) 22:10, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Personal knowledge and WP:BLP

An IP user (128.125.65.64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)) has been removing information from the Garrette Ratliff Henson and Marguerite Moreau articles that describe their marriage. The general gist of the discussion can be found here. The information is supported by IMDb; however, the IP user claims that he or she has "direct personal knowledge" that they are not in fact married. What's the proper protocol in this case, especially since there are few other sources on the Internet, and considering that this is governed by WP:BLP? Thanks! --Ratiocinate ^{(t • c)} 20:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• IMDB is generally not considered a reliable source. I'd find a second source or drop it. WilyD 20:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

issues with another user

can someone please tell me where i can go to report someone who's leaving negative comments on talk pages and being a general jerk? i asked the user to only contribute if it's helpful and the reply was they "didn't care". it's very immature, thoughtless, and discouraging to those who want to improve the article. can something be done about this user? (see the bottom of my talk page for an example of their comment.) FyreNWater 09:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

If it continues, post something about it at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Blueboar 17:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

thanks! it's stopped for now, but it was only after another user threatened to report him. FyreNWater 10:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

nominating for renaming?

If there is an article with a bad name can it be nominated for renaming? In AFD's I have sometimes seen people vote for renaming the article, but I don't think I want to go so far as to nominate this one for deletion just to try to get it a new name. Thanks. Steve Dufour 19:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Depends on the definition of "bad name." If it's something like an improperly capitalized name or a misspelled word or something, just go ahead and move it. Otherwise, you might post it on the article's talk page and see if you can find consensus as to how to proceed. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 20:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. In this case the name of the article seems to carry a negative connotation. That's fine with the regular people who work on it. However, I would like to put the question before a larger forum. Steve Dufour 20:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requested moves deals with requests like this. --Cherry blossom tree 06:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Steve Dufour 12:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism procedure

I've found what I believe is wholesale copying of a copyrighted source at Stock Exchange of Thailand. The whole History section is, not checking every word but a good number of them, copied word for word from http://www.set.or.th/en/about/overview/history_p1.html , the stock exchange's official history. The Roles section first paragraph is word for word from "Roles of the Stock Exchange of Thailand" on the official site, and it's second paragraph is nearly word for word from http://www.sec.or.th/en/iosco/b.shtml . I haven't looked at the other sections in that wikipedia article. what's the procedure for this? Revelian 19:12, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

See WP:COPYVIO. --CrazyLegsKC 21:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

If you can completely rewrite affected sections, cut it down to acceptable content, or revert to an acceptable previous version those are always the best options. Otherwise, use SD if there is no salvageable material. Adrian M. H. 21:46, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Need for copyeditors

Looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors/proofreading, it seems that they have a backlog to January! Please help if you can, -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Own website

hi i would like to make my own websit but i dont know how to start would yo peas help me make one ,bythe way i found an ad from @wiki.com for creating website but i missed it thanking you ahmedahmed 04:39, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You're in the wrong place. Please post at Wikipedia:Reference desk for questions not directly related to improving Wikipedia. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:56, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Word use policy

Can anybody outline when a country or a state can be characterized democratic in Wikipedia? For example is it correct to say German Democratic Republic was democratic and if not, why? Can also anybody outline the usage of the word regime in Wikipedia when applied to political order or government in a country? Is it possible to say "Putin's regime", "Soviet regime" etc?--Dojarca 03:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding democracy, this isn't the place to have a discussion about the meaning of that word, since there is an entire article about it. Regarding "regime", that's a matter for editors to agree on, or to agree that a different word makes more sense. "Regime" almost certainly is a good word in some articles and a bad word for others (for example, "FDR's regime" is pretty meaningless). So it's much better to have the discussion in the context of a particular article (that is, on the article's talk page), than here, as generalities.

In general, I think it's best to avoid getting into fights about whether a particular word ("label") fits. Instead, say something like "While the constitution of the GDR stated that it was a democracy, and provided for elections, the country's Communist Party selected candidates for all elected positions, and these candidates had no opponents on the ballots when the voting was done." (I offer that sentence as an example, not to start an argument; I believe it's true, but even if not, it is intended to demonstrate what a factual statement looks like.) If an article simply provides the facts, then each reader can decide if (in his/her mind) the term "democracy" (or whatever the contested word/label might be) applies or not (or to what extent it applies.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 12:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Btw, there was no communist party in GDR. I agree with you though but I need arguments to justify this position. The actual dispute arose around Mongolia article where there is given a date of "transition to democracy". I tried to reword this, but faced oppostion. In fact Mongolia was regarded one of "People's democratic countries" in the USSR and there are several peer-reviewed publications by professional historians from the USSR where it is called so. My position is that indicating only one point of view would be improper. In fact though I hoped there are some general regulations in Wikipedia to exist.--Dojarca 20:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

The policy is neutral point of view; section headings as well as text are required not to express a particular point of view (as in whether the current regime is or is not a democracy, for example). A section heading like "Transition from control by the U.S.S.R" or "Transition, 1991 to 1994" would be much more neutral in point of view. (I've not read the article; these two suggestions are intended to be illustrative, not necessarily accurate). Where there is a dispute (was Mongolia "part" of the U.S.S.R; is Mongolia now a democracy and if so, when did it become so), it should not be "settled" by one side of the other in the dispute "winning"; the solution is to state things as factually as possible (e.g., "Several professional historians consider Mongolia to have essentially been in the U.S.S.R, [cite], [cite], [cite]". "However, the country was X and did Y, unlike A and B."). After the facts have been laid out, let the reader decide. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 20:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Request to Create New Page Wikipedia Policy Discourages Me From Creating

Hello, all. First time on the Village Pump. My name's Bill Beutler, I've been a semi-active Wikipedian for about a year and a half now.

My request for assistance is for somebody to create a page that does not currently exist, and which I believe I should not create on account of conflict of interest guidelines -- the subject is also my employer. To start this properly, I have posted a request to the Business and Economics project request page.

The business is New Media Strategies, an online marketing and intelligence company in Arlington, Virginia. It meets and exceeds the Notability requirement for organizations and companies. Most importantly, the firm has been the subject of multiple independent news articles, including a recent profile in the Washington Post.

Additionally, our intelligence analysis has been published by USA Today, Politico, Wall Street Journal, our clients include numerous Fortune 500 firms, and we've been reported as advising the Fred Thompson testing-the-waters committee (just in case you're wondering, I avoid editing related pages). Earlier this year we were acquired by publicly-traded Meredith Corporation, whose other holdings also often have entries.

So I've prepared and posted (to a page on the company website) a "prospective entry for NMS. The first part is a screen grab from the WIkipedia Sandbox, where I worked out the formatting (though it wouldn't show the references). Below that is the formatted for Ctrl-C & V-ing if appropriate for inclusion.

Looking at it again now, I also see there is at least one typo -- so it's not perfect, but I think it's a pretty good stub, aiming to satisfy both WP:NPOV and WP:Advert concerns. If there are disagreements, feel free to make changes, and I'll offer help on the Talk page.

If anyone thinks they could help with this, please let me know, here or on my page.

--WWB 00:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Please consider creating the page User:WWB/New Media Strategies, and putting the content in there. That will make it easier to review your work. When done, if it meets our standards, the article could simply be moved into main space using the 'Move' button without any cutting or pasting. EdJohnston 03:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Ed, I have now created such an entry at User:WWB/New Media Strategies. I'll probably add a stub footer later this morning. Anyone should feel free to review it, make changes if necessary. I'm open to discussion. --WWB 11:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm concerned that your proposed article contains no reliable sources. Will continue the discussion at User_talk:WWB. EdJohnston 12:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused about there being a WP:RS problem, since there are 3 references including a fairly major piece from the Washington Post. Anyway, if you post over there, I'll reply on my User talk page. Thanks for the help. --WWB 12:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Image help

Being a user of the German Wikipedia, I'm familiar an happy with the service of de:Wikipedia:Bilderwerkstatt, a forum for individual technical image modifications. Do you guys provide such a service? I would like to suggest a modification of Image:Univphxonline.jpg... -- Scriberius 10:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You might want to go to Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Great, thanks! It's hard to find, there was no iw link at de... Greetings, -- Scriberius 13:36, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Image editing help

Greetings, the image of this cornerstone [7] doesn't work very in the article and I'm looking for assistance to edit it so that we we use it in the photo it's easy enough to read. Benjiboi 11:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

You might want to go to Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! will do. Benjiboi 11:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

"Fred Woods"

Can someone move this to Fred Woods? I can't figure out how to do it.--Palindrome7 16:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Y Done -- Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 16:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Need advice about two articles

1. Latin American Literary Awards was created after i removed a personal website from the external links of Latin American literature as seen of this diff. The user later created the Latin American Literary Awards page, no sourced, not nothing. The title says it is about literary awards from Latin America yet he has people who have won those awards, and some awards are not "Latin American". The page he created was from his personal webpage which i deleted, this one [8]. Has he done anything wrong in terms of breaking policy or such? I have tried to work this out with the user but does not respond.

2. Talk:Monteverde#BANK RAID, 2005, i deleted the section on the Monteverde article regarding a bank raid that occured there in 2005, it was OR, POV, and irrelevant, or so i would think it is. Can i have opinions or thought on it? The user has re-added the section, should it stay or should it be deleted?  LaNicoya  •TALK• 10:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Be bold and edit them. If that does not work, nor does bringing the issue to the talk pages, you may look for more comments through Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Request comment on articles, or possibly nominate for deletion - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion - if you think is the case for the first article. - Nabla 18:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Messing with the sandbox

Is repeatedly blanking the wikipedia:sandbox considered vandalism?

Geocator

talk contribs

21:52, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I suppose it depends how often you do it. The stuff there isn't meant to stay permanently, but if there's a bot blanking it every half second, the page becomes a lot harder to use. Tra (Talk) 22:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

This was a specific user (user:Noahwoo) who was screwing around with the bot that maintians the page. He blanked it about 15 times in 10 minutes.

Geocator

talk contribs

22:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Personal knowledge and WP:BLP

An IP user (128.125.65.64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)) has been removing information from the Garrette Ratliff Henson and Marguerite Moreau articles that describe their marriage. The general gist of the discussion can be found here. The information is supported by IMDb; however, the IP user claims that he or she has "direct personal knowledge" that they are not in fact married. What's the proper protocol in this case, especially since there are few other sources on the Internet, and considering that this is governed by WP:BLP? Thanks! --Ratiocinate ^{(t • c)} 20:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

• IMDB is generally not considered a reliable source. I'd find a second source or drop it. WilyD 20:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Anti-subst template

I would like to add some code to a particular template so that it displays a warning when subst'ed (the template is not supposed to be substed). Can someone give me an idea of how to do this please? >Radiant< 09:14, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

See User:Pathoschild/Help/Template special effects.--Patrick 10:49, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at this user's edits for spam

I have a strong feeling all of Nakoshi (talk · contribs)'s edits are spam links to (probably his) website selling the products under the guise of a resource page. I am off for the day, but someone should probably take a look at it. I reverted his edit to Bicycle rack (a page that is somehow on my watchlist), and haven't looked at the others much. --User:Krator (t c) 22:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Two links at Stanchion cover to the same site; checked and removed. The other two articles are affected by similar links to another site, which might all need to be removed to avoid discrimination. Adrian M. H. 09:49, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

DEACTIVATING an Article/Page

I recently made a page but I need to deactivate it until I have fully completed editing it. How do I achieve this?

Also, how do I edit the title of my article - the title which is in the largest font. Currently, it is "Syndicated network television association" -- I want to change it so that it is in title case, and add an abbreviation to the end to make it: Syndicated Network Television Association (SNTA)

Thanks!

SyndicatedNetwork 15:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "deactivate", but if you mean lock if from others editing it... you can't.--Isotope23 ^talk 15:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, someone userfied it for you. Generally nobody will edit it while it is in your userspace.--Isotope23 ^talk 15:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Moved to User:SyndicatedNetwork/Syndicated Network Television Association, where you can work on it further. Note that putting '(SNTA)' in the title may not be allowed by our manual of style; someone else may know this better than I. It would be legal for you to create a redirect called SNTA. Ask how to do this after your article has been improved enough for release. EdJohnston 15:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I DON"T Want a Page About Me

I never minded having a Talk Page under my editor-name (User talk:Artemis-Arethusa), but I never was interested in posting a page about me. But now somebody has started one by posting a comment to my wiki editor name, Artemis-Arethusa. I don't want a User Page about me! I actually liked being able to scan down history lists and find my name by the red link. Surely a Talk Page is enough if anyone wishes to discuss my edits, or even interests. I'm not interested in advertising myself. Can't I make this page go away? Please help. Artemis-Arethusa 19:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Not a big deal, someone just mistook your userpage for your user talk. I deleted it for you. Garion96 (talk) 19:27, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I think I was under the impression that once started, a Wikipedia page was hard to get rid of. Artemis-Arethusa 19:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

There are limited circumstances in which users can request speedy deletion of pages. One of these cases applies to pages in your own User: (but generally not User talk:) space. — TKD::Talk 19:38, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Vanity gallery a mess of editing and counter-editing, but no discussion

This article: Vanity gallery (which was apparently already deleted once under suspicious circumstances) seems to consist of a back-and-forth of self-serving edits and no discussion at all (until I put in my 2 cents). People are making changes in what looks suspiciously like the interests of their business rather than a neutral description. Are there suitable Categories or Tags for urging verification, removing text that sounds like advertisements, warning about self-aggrandizing entries, etc.? Compared to this, Vanity press is a model of writing, scholarship, sourcing and honesty. Vanity gallery, which is about a practice just as vilified, keeps getting torn down to almost no information. Is this because the literary world is better at writing than the art world? Artemis-Arethusa 18:10, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

persistent spammer

Where do you report a persistent spammer? User:Maggiescrochet is repeatedly posting links to maggiescrochet.com into multiple articles, violating WP:SPAM and WP:USERNAME, and ignoring talk page messages asking them to cease. wikipediatrix 13:45, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Header, WP:AIV. ←Ben^B4 13:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

dressing up my talk page so it looks fabbo and neat

My talk page is looking dowdy, and I've seen some really fabbo-looking user pages with those little boxes that say "This user is a Young Earth Creationist" and "This user is a serial killer", and so on. Megakooky!!! I've noticed that the most colourful pages belong to complete idiots and sociopaths. I would like one that looks like theirs, while keeping my editorial integrity intact. How would I go about this? I am not a techie. I am over 11 years old. (11 1/2 actually). See current really sad user page here >>> Myles325a 06:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

As long as you stay within the realms of user page guidelines, you can do almost anything. Adrian M. H. 07:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm firmly of the opinion that userpages are simply unfashionable without a really big giant blood-red ankh, but for some reason few people share this view. I think you are looking for Wikipedia:Userboxes. ←Ben^B4 14:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

viewing user contributions

Electricity confuses me, as do non-electrical devices. I can view "my contributions" which is a gas, but I have heard that one can view the contributions of another user/editor in like manner. But how can you do this? Myles325a 06:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

It is a simple two step process... Go to an article that you know the other user edited, and click on the "History" tab. Then find his or her name and click on "contributions" (in parentheses next to their name). Blueboar 13:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Need help with connecting a link!

I've been working on an article relating to the Village of Westwood (in Cincinnati, Ohio - Hamilton County). It appears all the other villages listed link through Hamilton County, so I appear to have messed up in having the link through "Westwood, Cincinnati" - Is there any way to correct this in my article so everything regarding Westwood is identified/links through Westwood, Ohio? - Any assistance would be appreciated!

• I moved the article to Westwood, Ohio. Let me knwo if this resolves your issue. Contact me directly and I'll walk you throught the fix. --Kevin Murray 22:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Image Use

I need help on proper image use in an article. I uploaded an entertainment industry promotional picture or "headshot" of an entertainer to accompany an article about that particular entertainer.

The photo was given to me by the entertainer as part of his press kit. The photo has no photographer's name nor any copyright information. It was produced for the express purpose of being used in mass media to advertise the entertainer.

Getting to the point, the photo was removed from the article. I need someone to advise me on what I need to do to make the photo acceptable and usable in the Wikipedia article.

Srplemmons 01:13, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

You'll need to get the copyright holder (in this case, probably the entertainer) to release the photo under a free license that is compatible with Wikipedia. See WP:COPYREQ for guidelines on how to go about doing that. --CrazyLegsKC 09:56, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

The entertainer is probably not the copyright holder. It's probably the photographer. Corvus cornix 01:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaced page-preserving both articles with histories?

While doing some work on uncategorized pages I ran across the article Richard McKinney. While it initially appears to be an article about a reasonably notable football player, a look at the history reveals that it used to be an article about an Olympic medal winning archer. So I'm wondering, how would I go about getting the two articles split while maintaining the appropriate history for both? I've seen this problem before but usually one of the articles was non-notable and it didn't matter, these both seem to be reasonable to include. Advice or pointing in the right direction greatly appreciated. Stardust8212 23:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

See WP:SPLIT. Corvus cornix 01:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

So if I tag it to be split will an administrator need to do that? Because I tagged Deflection three months ago and nothing has happened which still has me confused as the page doesn't have any instructions or information on how the split would actually be performed. I'd do it myself but that would be essentially a copy-paste move which I thought was a bad idea so...I just wait? Stardust8212 02:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

can wikipedia be cited in wikipedia?

I remember reading somewhere that one cannot cite one wikipedia article (or talkpage) to verify a fact in another wikipedia article. I read through WP:CITE but I couldn't find anything mentioning this. Am I remembering this correctly? I really appreciate the help. Naufana : talk 20:54, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

It is unwise (and very unprofessional) to cite what is not reliably referenced, and if it is referenced, you can use that source instead. We all need to avoid things that reinforce any outside-held impression that WP is lax about the facts. Adrian M. H. 21:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

There are however a few limited exceptions where specific edits from known individuals are cited (e.g. an important edit by Jimbo in an article discussing Wikipedia). In those few cases, the reliability turns on having a notable editor whose identity is verifiable. Dragons flight 21:20, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree, you see someone made such a citation and I was looking for a clear "you can't do that" kind of wikipedian rule to show them that such a citation isn't proper. Naufana : talk 21:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

The ban on citing another Wikipedia article used to be included in both Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable Sources... both of which have been heavily edited in recent months, so it may have been removed. However, the concept is still there. Since "anyone" can edit an article in Wikipedia, we have no way to verify who wrote the article being quoted or what their expertize is. More importantly citing Wikipedia is what is called a "Self Reference", always a poor way to reference an encylopedia. That said, while using Wikipedia as a citation is discouraged, pointing to another article through wiki-linking and "See also" sections is strongly encouraged. Blueboar 22:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Great, thanks blueboar. Naufana : talk 00:00, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism procedure

I've found what I believe is wholesale copying of a copyrighted source at Stock Exchange of Thailand. The whole History section is, not checking every word but a good number of them, copied word for word from http://www.set.or.th/en/about/overview/history_p1.html , the stock exchange's official history. The Roles section first paragraph is word for word from "Roles of the Stock Exchange of Thailand" on the official site, and it's second paragraph is nearly word for word from http://www.sec.or.th/en/iosco/b.shtml . I haven't looked at the other sections in that wikipedia article. what's the procedure for this? Revelian 19:12, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

See WP:COPYVIO. --CrazyLegsKC 21:39, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

If you can completely rewrite affected sections, cut it down to acceptable content, or revert to an acceptable previous version those are always the best options. Otherwise, use SD if there is no salvageable material. Adrian M. H. 21:46, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

What to do about mis-licensed images?

User:Mastercaster has been uploading a bunch of endcaps from ITV companies of the seventies, each of them with the edit summary "I made this file myself." and licensing them all as GFDL with "I, the copyright holder of this work..." Now, perhaps Mastercaster is somehow authorised by ITV plc, but if so zie hasn't given any indication, and I suspect that these are actually labelled with the wrong licence. There's an argument to be made that they're free use, and so I don't want to list them for deletion; what's the proper way to request a review of the licensing terms of an image? (Also note that Mastercaster uploaded Image:Border 1.JPG over the top of an existing image so that it incongruously appears here. The Wednesday Island 18:55, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I would have thought that the fair use screenshot tag would be the tag to use, provided that these images actually qualify for fair use in terms of their illustrative benefit (which they might not). But I don't profess to be expert in WP's image licenses, so you could also ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Adrian M. H. 21:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Read-over needed on video game article

Could someone please read over Wildlife of Pikmin? I am in the process of improving the article's citations, but am unsure which facts may need citation. I would be very happy if someone could read over the text and add {{citation needed}} tags where appropriate. Feel free to be harsh in adding tags where needed, I have the resources to cite almost any of the text. Also, it would be excellent if someone could point out which subsections need improvements in prose, as it's been a long while since the article has been properly edited. Please leave a note on my talk page when this has been finished. Thanks in advance, RyanGerbil10(C-Town) 22:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Need advice about two articles

1. Latin American Literary Awards was created after i removed a personal website from the external links of Latin American literature as seen of this diff. The user later created the Latin American Literary Awards page, no sourced, not nothing. The title says it is about literary awards from Latin America yet he has people who have won those awards, and some awards are not "Latin American". The page he created was from his personal webpage which i deleted, this one [9]. Has he done anything wrong in terms of breaking policy or such? I have tried to work this out with the user but does not respond.

2. Talk:Monteverde#BANK RAID, 2005, i deleted the section on the Monteverde article regarding a bank raid that occured there in 2005, it was OR, POV, and irrelevant, or so i would think it is. Can i have opinions or thought on it? The user has re-added the section, should it stay or should it be deleted?  LaNicoya  •TALK• 10:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Be bold and edit them. If that does not work, nor does bringing the issue to the talk pages, you may look for more comments through Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Request comment on articles, or possibly nominate for deletion - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion - if you think is the case for the first article. - Nabla 18:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Getting more people involved with FACs

Is there a good place to request additional comments for a FAC discussion? None of the options at WP:RFC seem appropriate. I'm specifically looking for people unfamiliar with The Simpsons to share their thoughts at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Simpsons. Zagalejo 17:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Never mind. Too late. Zagalejo 20:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Obscene user talk page posts

Could somebody let me know the appropriate action for the case of suggestive and obscene posts to user talk pages by YouCanTellMeAnything? For example:

please tell me about your sex life and provide tips. i hear you are the sex master thanks --YouCanTellMeAnything 16:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[10]

The Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace page didn't seem to have anything appropriate. Thank you. — RJH (talk) 16:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

That account has been blocked indefinitely for this stuff. Ignore it. Hut 8.5 16:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes. This is trolling and spamming. Wikipedia is not a chat host and if that individual isn't here to build an encyclopedia they can go elsewhere. Revert and ignore.--Isotope23 ^talk 16:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank ye. But what about my question? — RJH (talk) 17:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd say this is one of those times that it would be preferable to write up a custom warning rather than template.--Isotope23 ^talk 17:28, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

The appropriate action is to first ask such a user to stop. If they don't, report it at WP:ANI. Blueboar 13:28, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. — RJH (talk) 22:27, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Need someone with GameInformer March 2006 issue

It's possible that this rather old addition [11] may be a copyvio from Game Informer (it was sourced from Game Informer) or somewhere else. Most of them have probably copied from us without attribution but it's possible there is another source for this. I've already listed it in the copyvio article but as this is a soon to be released computer game, the article is likely to get a lot of work so it would be good if we could get an idea of where we stand copyvio wise ASAP. If someone with the magazine could check the addition against what was in the magazine, we could get an idea of where to go from here. Potentially the story section is going to me majorly rewritten once people play the game anyway but it'll be good to know if we can't re-use anything that's there Nil Einne 15:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

There's no one listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Magazines with that particular issue but it might be worth while sending a message to the users who have others issues, on the off chance that they haven't added it top the project page. - X201 16:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

This is very unlikely to be a copyvio. The prose is not up to the standard of a print magazine article, its short choppy sentences do not flow well. User:Drat is a pretty decent editor. Why has this section leapt at you compared to other articles? Given that this game is being (has just) been released, the story section is probably going to undergo a total rewrite anyway. - hahnchen 17:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Peaches Geldof & The Rumour Mills

Ok, so, the article on Peaches Geldof was a big mess of tabloid jank, so a bunch of people did a hackjob on it, and now it is quite nice. Fine. However, our article quotes her name as Peaches Honeyblossom Michelle Charlotte Angel Vanessa Geldof. This was one of the few pieces of original text to survive the slaughter, because it is sourced, with a direct quote. However, there was still some moderate handwringing over at the talk page as people weren't sure about this or that, then some guy submits this potentially damaging tidbit at Everything2. He claims that his friends put all the middle names apart from Honeyblossom in as a joke, before which they were printed nowhere, and then wikipedia was used as a source by a lazy journalist, and the new full name spread memetically. However, the Contact Music source above seems to have Geldof responding directly and affirmatively to the full name as we have in the article. Who is more reliable, a teenage boy on Everything2 or a bored entertainment news reporter at a marginalised e-zine? Now I'm just zis guy who edits articles about minor British tabloid celebrities, so this is kind of beyond my remit, but could this not be potentially very damaging to wikipedia? The implication is not just that we report false things, but that we create them!? As well as that I would like to know what to do, in the short term, with the name at the top of the article, but I just thought I should maybe bring this issue to wider attention in case it was significant. Any help appreciated, cheers! Jdcooper 04:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

It is unfortunately not unheard of that wikipedia can spread misinformation so widely that it becomes difficult to tell what the truth is. This definitely isn't the first case I've heard of nor will it be the last sadly. In cases where you suspect wikipedia may have introduced the misinformation, try and find a source predating its introduction to wikipedia and it there's none, it's often better to go back to what can be reliably sourced predating wikipedia. Nil Einne 15:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Photos: how to mesh with article, and a copyright issue

I can provide photographs of Nun to illustrate the article on Nun Kun, but can't find info about how to size the photo and edit the page to fit it in. Would someone please direct me to the right source?

The photo was taken by the Club Alpin Francais and published in the book The Mountain World: 1954, published by a London publisher in 1954, printed in Switzerland, and copyrighted under the Berne Convention. I gather from reading the Berne Convention that the duration of photograph copyrights is left up to individual countries, and also gather that the British rule for photographs is 50 years from publication for photos taken before June 1, 1957. Does anyone know if this is correct?

Thanks. 69.19.14.19 20:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC) David Salmon 69.19.14.19 20:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

AFAIK, the first thing that matters is did the Club Alpin Francais transfer the rights to the publisher? It's easily possible they allowed the photo to be published in The Mountain World but retained the rights to the photo Nil Einne 15:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

seeking advice

i went through an article in this site on social phobia and I'm seeking someone to translate some information to and ask some questions. how and who should i meet? its really important and urgent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Standby01 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 13 August 2007

I recommend posing your questions at the Wikipedia:Reference_desk. Good luck. — RJH (talk) 22:26, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if you're seeking help for a phobia you're suffering from, you should see a psychologist or a psychiatrist not the reference desk. Nil Einne 16:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I DON"T Want a Page About Me

I never minded having a Talk Page under my editor-name (User talk:Artemis-Arethusa), but I never was interested in posting a page about me. But now somebody has started one by posting a comment to my wiki editor name, Artemis-Arethusa. I don't want a User Page about me! I actually liked being able to scan down history lists and find my name by the red link. Surely a Talk Page is enough if anyone wishes to discuss my edits, or even interests. I'm not interested in advertising myself. Can't I make this page go away? Please help. Artemis-Arethusa 19:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Not a big deal, someone just mistook your userpage for your user talk. I deleted it for you. Garion96 (talk) 19:27, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I think I was under the impression that once started, a Wikipedia page was hard to get rid of. Artemis-Arethusa 19:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

There are limited circumstances in which users can request speedy deletion of pages. One of these cases applies to pages in your own User: (but generally not User talk:) space. — TKD::Talk 19:38, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

image in Robert Patrick

So the article Robert Patrick had an image in its infobox that spanned the whole screen and screwed up everything. I removed it because I don't know how to fix it (I tried, it didn't work).

So if you want the image put back, please mess around with the Robert Patrick article The image I removed can be found via the page history (or by reverting my edit).

-- Guroadrunner 11:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

In fact, the same issue is for Jeffrey Tambor and Chevy Chase. I think someone screwed up the image coding for the actor infobox template.

See {{Infobox actor | name = Jeffrey M. Tambor | image = Jeffrey Tambor at the 1991 Emmy Awards.jpg | imagesize = 300px | caption = Jeffrey Tambor interviewed at the 1991 Emmy Awards | birthdate = {{birth date and age|1944|7|8}} | location = [[San Francisco, California|San Francisco]], [[California]] | deathdate = | birthname = | othername = | homepage = | notable role = '''[[George Bluth Sr.]]''' in <br> ''[[Arrested Development (TV series)|Arrested Development]]'' <br> '''Hey Now [[Hank Kingsley]]''' in <br> ''[[The Larry Sanders Show]]'' }}

Jeffrey M. Tambor
Jeffrey Tambor interviewed at the 1991 Emmy Awards

Redirects listing is broken

For several months there has been a request for admin assistance at Wikipedia talk:Special:Listredirects. Special:Listredirects is broken, and only lists the first 1,000 redirects, which only allows AlgeriA-Borromini! (Is there a better place to get admin attention than here?) 79.73.45.86 23:11, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

"Fred Woods"

Can someone move this to Fred Woods? I can't figure out how to do it.--Palindrome7 16:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Y Done -- Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 16:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Are Requests for Comment completely useless?

I filled out an RfC 6 days ago which showed up at Template:RFCpol_list but nobody's helped with Talk:State University of New York at Plattsburgh#Request for Comment: Alpha Phi Omega Trivia. 1) Are RfC's useless waste's of time? 2) Can somebody please chime in on my RfC and comment on our "debate"? Thanks. --Fife Club 15:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello? Hello, Beuller? How fitting that my problem about Wikipedians not helping on a RfC also be ignored by everybody!  :( —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fife Club (talk • contribs) 12:48:03, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

Talk page of SMK Bandar Utama

(Sorry if this question is on the wrong section - I don't know where else to go to) I find its talk page disturbing and has no relevant discussion about the article at all. What can be done regarding this issue? — Yurei-eggtart 13:37, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

When there is nothing but borderline incoherent nonsense on a talk page, you can just remove it (as I have done.) Only leave comments that are relevant to improving the article. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 13:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh so it's that simple. Thanks for the quick reply and that edit of yours! — Yurei-eggtart 13:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Need help with connecting a link!

I've been working on an article relating to the Village of Westwood (in Cincinnati, Ohio - Hamilton County). It appears all the other villages listed link through Hamilton County, so I appear to have messed up in having the link through "Westwood, Cincinnati" - Is there any way to correct this in my article so everything regarding Westwood is identified/links through Westwood, Ohio? - Any assistance would be appreciated!

• I moved the article to Westwood, Ohio. Let me knwo if this resolves your issue. Contact me directly and I'll walk you throught the fix. --Kevin Murray 22:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

clerk help

i've been trying tirelessly to promote resolutions for the disputes on battle of jenin but i feel that some of the involved editors are more centered on slowing the article down with polemics than help resolve the issues.

i would appreciate someone volunteering to be some type of clerk and examine the (disruptive) conduct on the article and on the talk page so that i, an involved party in the dispute, won't be forced to manage the page as if i'm an official clerk.

p.s. 3rd opinions are also good. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 19:45, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

What English does Wikipedia use?

What is the rationale for the reversion to a linguistically poorer version on Anuruddha [12]? This reversion also looks very contrary to Wikipedia's policies. There the removal of some spaces have made the software's version comparison useless. Which one is better?

The cable declared that Washington would no longer tolerate Nhu remaining in a position of power and ordering Lodge to pressure Diem to remove his brother.

The cable declared that Washington would no longer tolerate Nhu remaining in power and ordered Lodge to pressurize Diem to remove his brother.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.91.254.87 (talk) 15:56, 18 August 2007

That depends on the subject matter and the authors. WP:ENGVAR. Adrian M. H. 16:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Grammar errors such as you have pointed out frequently sneak in through oversights in the collaborative editing process, and everyone is encouraged to correct them on sight. ←Ben^B4 18:08, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Integrating Wikipedia with Google Earth

Hello,

I want to start a project that will expand the Wikipedia articles on many Chicago railroads, as well as their respective lines and junctions. What I want to do is create a Google Earth KML file that will graphically list all the locations for railroads and rail lines, and this KML file will include links to Wikipedia for more information. I have searched for a long time in Wikipedia how to integrate Google Earth with Wikipedia, and I've figured it has something to do with coor dms. While I am technical to a degree, I have no clue what any of the stuff under coor dms means or how to use it. Is there a relatively SIMPLE way that I could put some code into a kml file, that when I load the file a wikipedia link in the appropriate location on Google Earth pops up, that the user can then click on to get to Wikipedia? Again, please simple is the key here. Please don't reference me to a bunch of technical coor dms pages on standardizing Wikipedia geographic reporting, etc because I do not understand any of that stuff. Just something simple, kinda like Panoramio's instructions on how to see your photos on Google Earth. Thank you.

Sawtooth500 23:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

• There is a template to export to KML at Template:Kml.--Palindrome7 17:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk to User:Gmaxwell -- he is working on something very similar presently. ←Ben^B4 18:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfair deletion of article

I am placing this here because I am getting nowhere with it, and wanted to bring it to the attention of a larger group of people.

Over the past week or so I have been working on Propellerhead Software. This page has repeatedly been created and deleted, but as far as I can tell, in the past it HAS been a rather poor article.

However, on August 12th I recreated this article and worked hard on it over the next few days. I created what I believed was a relatively good article. However, on 23rd August it was speedily deleted, which I believe was unfair, because this could only happen because it had been speedily deleted before. Reason G4 was given, but this states that articles which are substantially identical to the original can be considered for speedy deletion. I requested that the page be restored to give me a chance to add some references. It was and I did this, making what I thought was an excellent article.

The reasons given for the deletion were lack of notability, lack of sources, and advertising. However, I addressed all of these points:

• Notability - the company is very well respected and their software won a major award as I referenced in the article. The company developed software with Abbey Road studios, and this was also referenced in the article. Their software features a regular user technique section in Sound on Sound magazine, and again, I referenced this in the article. One user said "check Google" on the deletion log, and when doing so, Propellerhead Software come up in the first six searches, and in nine out of the first ten.
• No sources - as mentioned, I thoroughly referenced the article.
• Advertising - I do not work for or have any association with Propellerhead software, other than I buy their products and enjoy using them. I considered the article to be well written, non biased and informative.

However, on 24th August the article was deleted again and salted - despite adding these references. I just now found a second deletion nomination (which was cleverly hidden from the article and therefore I couldn't see it). The references I had cited were, apparantly, trivial and not reliable. I do not understand how references from: a major award[13]; arguably the world's most famous recording studio[14]; and Europe's largest selling music recording magazine[15] can be classed as trivial and non reliable.

I have tried to get the article restored but nobody seems to be listening to me (not even taking notice, let alone arguing with me).

What really makes me upset is that this article has only been deleted because it was deleted BEFORE. If an article of this standard which hadn't been deleted before was created now it would simply not be deleted. There are thousands of articles on here that do not cite references and are left well alone. The Steinberg and Digidesign articles are poor and have no references, and Ableton only references offical website and even forums. There has never been any question that these articles be deleted.

The article I made was well referenced and well written, the company are well respected and make excellent software. I believe the article deserves a place on Wikipedia.

I request that a few admin look at the article I made just before it was deleted, check its quality and references and restore it, and tag it so it cannot be speedily deleted again. At the very least, I would appreciate an admin copying the article code into my userpage so I can work on the article until it's agreed it can go back on.

Thanks--Mrtombullen 01:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The best place to take a discussion such as this is deletion review. You'll need to be sure to indicate policy issues that you feel should be considered with regards to replacing the article. Please do note that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a compelling argument for any article, however. Tony Fox (arf!) 02:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Who knows Ivan O. Godfroid ?

Hi,

A big and very good fake seems to be on Wikipedia : Ivan O. Godfroid.

See my post on [[16]].

If you are able to understand french you can also read the posts in [[17]]

Help needed to clean Wikipedia, Wikisource, WikiQuote from this megalomaniac.

Pppswing 16:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

This article is at WP:AFD. Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 19:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Obstinate image Image:Haemanthus albiflos03.jpg

I've tried to include the above image in a gallery at [[18]] but can't get it to show. It shows quite happily when I place it outside the gallery!! I've even gone as far as reloading the file, but still no joy. What is going on? Raasgat 06:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I see it in the linked revision, so you may just need to purge your browser cache. Cache purge is ctrl-shift-r in Firefox. - BanyanTree 07:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

That worked! Thanks. Still puzzled about why it didn't show originally.....hidden characters? Raasgat 07:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Most probably when you went on Haemanthus previously, your browser cached all the images on the page. And then when you uploaded the new image and went back, the browser basically told itself "no need to recheck for new images, as we were just here." It's happened to me on occasion. By purging the old cached images, you've forced the browser to recheck the page, and so it picked up the new image. It's also possible that it's a server side issue, and it took a few minutes for the servers to sort out the new image and get it to transclude properly on the page, but it's very unlike if a cache purge solved the problem. Regardless, I'm glad it's sorted. - BanyanTree 07:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Copy-editor wanted

Hi, I shall soon be renominating Troilus as a good article. When the previous nomination failed, it was suggested that a good copy editor be involved before the article is renominated. The file is nearly 100K including pictures, notes, references etc. The preferred spelling is British English. I shall be cross-posting this request to a number of suitable places, so I suggest any volunteer announces their presence at Talk:Troilus. --Peter cohen 22:48, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I will be glad to do it, but it won't be until tomorrow (or today by my local time!) because it's late now. I just made a quick edit that jumped out at me when I scanned over it. Adrian M. H. 23:43, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Adrian --Peter cohen 10:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You would probably be better served by listing it at Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors, possibly with a note to other subject-related WikiProjects, rather than posting everywhere and hoping someone shows up. - BanyanTree 07:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Banyan. I wasn't aware of the league of copyeditors, hence my picking here. The only other place I have posted so far is WP:Mythology. I would have gone on to other related projects if Adrian hadn't already volunteered.--Peter cohen 10:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I viewed the line "cross-posting this request to a number of suitable places" with some alarm as some users I've seen consider dozens of posts to pages such as Talk:Main Page to be 'suitable'. Fortunately, I was alarmed without cause. - BanyanTree 06:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Read-over needed on video game article

Could someone please read over Wildlife of Pikmin? I am in the process of improving the article's citations, but am unsure which facts may need citation. I would be very happy if someone could read over the text and add {{citation needed}} tags where appropriate. Feel free to be harsh in adding tags where needed, I have the resources to cite almost any of the text. Also, it would be excellent if someone could point out which subsections need improvements in prose, as it's been a long while since the article has been properly edited. Please leave a note on my talk page when this has been finished. Thanks in advance, RyanGerbil10(C-Town) 22:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

images with watermarks

Does Wikipedia have a policy on them?--P4k 08:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, see the last paragraph in the section Wikipedia:Image use policy#User-created images, as well as Template:Imagewatermark. - BanyanTree 08:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.--P4k 08:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Notability question

I'm interested in creating an article on Dr. Samuel B. Wylie of Philadelphia, but I really don't feel like creating an article without being able to demonstrate his notability, so I'd like opinion(s) on this question. I'd be using this and http://famousamericans.net/samuelbrownwylie/ this as independent sources, plus a note about this painting in the Smithsonian Institution, plus a reference to the original print form of this book (published by a later minister of his denomination). Are the first two sufficiently strong enough to demonstrate his notability? Nyttend 05:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I would say so. - BanyanTree 07:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

A copyright question

As I know there is a copyright template for pictures created by myself. What about pictures created by a friend of mine, who is not an editor but agreed for me to post the picture anywhere? What copyright template should I use? --V. Szabolcs 14:14, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Depends on how they're being used, I think. What license/permission does he allow them to be used under? GFDL? Creative Commons? Public domain? There's different templates for all of them. --CrazyLegsKC 21:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

No specific license at all. Just said I can do with it whatever I wish. So it looks like public domain, isn't it? --V. Szabolcs 22:04, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Probably, but you'd better check with him to clarify. Make sure he's okay with anyone using it for any purpose, including commercial use and making derivative works, and for it to be used on other websites besides Wikipedia. If he explicitly releases it into the public domain, you can use {{PD-release}}. If he doesn't explicitly release it, but is still okay with all the uses mentioned above, you can use {{Copyrighted free use}}. --CrazyLegsKC 22:55, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

At first I was thinking about a derivative of {{PD-self}}, but the "Copyrighted free use" seems the most appropriate now after your answer. Thanks for your help. --V. Szabolcs 01:35, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

For pictures "created by a friend of mine, who is not an editor but agreed for me to post the picture anywhere," you need to follow the steps at When copyright permission is confirmed. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 15:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Need help moving from stub to article

How do I move an entry from stub to article. I'v added content and removed the "article stub" tag. What else do I need to do? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Plichtenheld (talk • contribs) 04:24, August 22, 2007 (UTC).

It is still a stub, so I returned the tag. Adrian M. H. 11:34, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

So, how do I get it moved to a full article? P. Lichtenheld —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.154.9.117 (talk) 11:45, August 22, 2007 (UTC)

To begin with, it needs to be longer and more detailed. It doesn't say enough, clearly, about what this company does. And it has only one reference and that one is to a dense piece of legalese; it is hard to see how it serves as a reference to the article. A non-stub article, such as Voting machine, you will notice, has a basic definition followed by a table of contents (this is automatically generated from the text), numerous discussions of the different types of voting machine, related entries, good references, and useful external links. The article you worked on has a way to go. On the other hand, there's nothing disgraceful about an article with stub status, and the "stub" classification does attract more editorial attention and potential help from other editors. Artemis-Arethusa 20:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

User page spam?

There is a user, User:Liquidroof which is obviously hosting ad pages on their userpage. Is this OK, seeing as it is a userpage? Sljaxon 15:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

It definitely reads like a ad for a product. I will raise the issue with an admin. Blueboar 15:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

It's gone now, but boy, was that egregious. I note that the Liquidroof's only editorial contributions were to his/her/its userpage. Does this happen often? Artemis-Arethusa 18:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately, it does. Adrian M. H. 11:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

? about how to make a bands page

i was looking all over and even started one with my email soulsharborax@yahoo.com i believe but i couldnt find out how to start up a bands page..like i fyou go to korn you can see their picture and info on the band bios, cds, stuff like that...but i started a page under souls harbor and i cant figure out how to get the pictures up there or the box with "dates of band" "label" and stuff like that..so i was wondering if you could help me start one up

august 17th 4:30 pm eastern time

First off, you should ensure that the band satisfies Wikipedia's Notability guidelines for bands. Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 20:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

where do i go and do that? i havent been able to find anything im also not as computer smart as most..we are signed and what not if thats what it..

ok i went and looked and we have been played on national radio and toured and some of the others such as magazines and newspapers and the nationaly known contest august 16th 4:34

Click on the words "Notability guidelines for bands" above. Blue text indicates a link. Also, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 20:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

ok i went and looked and we have been played on national radio and toured and some of the others such as magazines and newspapers and the nationaly known contest (Tony bigley 21:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)) 20:45, 16 August 2007 (is this what the tildes is?)

i havent heard anything back. i went to the guidlines and we met them sooo what do we do next (Tony bigley 08:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC))

Create your article making sure you use reliable sources to verify your band's notability. Good luck! The Rambling Man 09:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I just want to highlight that there is a conflict of interest here... a member of the band creating a page about the band. This is not in itself forbidden, but there are rules about it... see: WP:COI. I assume that your band has fans (if not, it isn't notable), perhaps one of them could write up the article for you. Blueboar 12:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

yeah that would be fine..i can get someone to do that..b/c we have been signed and all that..i just saw it and i was wondering how you get all that..so should i just have a fan email wikipedia about us and then they will start up the whole bio on us and info? or? (Tony bigley 05:33, 20 August 2007 (UTC))

ok i had someone write up some bio info about us and they have the info about cd that was released...who do they send it to so it can become a part of wikipedia? (Tony bigley 05:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC))

Ask them to post it to Articles for creation, where it can be assessed by an editor. Adrian M. H. 11:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

thank you so much !!! (Tony bigley 20:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC))

Unfair deletion of article

I am placing this here because I am getting nowhere with it, and wanted to bring it to the attention of a larger group of people.

Over the past week or so I have been working on Propellerhead Software. This page has repeatedly been created and deleted, but as far as I can tell, in the past it HAS been a rather poor article.

However, on August 12th I recreated this article and worked hard on it over the next few days. I created what I believed was a relatively good article. However, on 23rd August it was speedily deleted, which I believe was unfair, because this could only happen because it had been speedily deleted before. Reason G4 was given, but this states that articles which are substantially identical to the original can be considered for speedy deletion. I requested that the page be restored to give me a chance to add some references. It was and I did this, making what I thought was an excellent article.

The reasons given for the deletion were lack of notability, lack of sources, and advertising. However, I addressed all of these points:

• Notability - the company is very well respected and their software won a major award as I referenced in the article. The company developed software with Abbey Road studios, and this was also referenced in the article. Their software features a regular user technique section in Sound on Sound magazine, and again, I referenced this in the article. One user said "check Google" on the deletion log, and when doing so, Propellerhead Software come up in the first six searches, and in nine out of the first ten.
• No sources - as mentioned, I thoroughly referenced the article.
• Advertising - I do not work for or have any association with Propellerhead software, other than I buy their products and enjoy using them. I considered the article to be well written, non biased and informative.

However, on 24th August the article was deleted again and salted - despite adding these references. I just now found a second deletion nomination (which was cleverly hidden from the article and therefore I couldn't see it). The references I had cited were, apparantly, trivial and not reliable. I do not understand how references from: a major award[19]; arguably the world's most famous recording studio[20]; and Europe's largest selling music recording magazine[21] can be classed as trivial and non reliable.

I have tried to get the article restored but nobody seems to be listening to me (not even taking notice, let alone arguing with me).

What really makes me upset is that this article has only been deleted because it was deleted BEFORE. If an article of this standard which hadn't been deleted before was created now it would simply not be deleted. There are thousands of articles on here that do not cite references and are left well alone. The Steinberg and Digidesign articles are poor and have no references, and Ableton only references offical website and even forums. There has never been any question that these articles be deleted.

The article I made was well referenced and well written, the company are well respected and make excellent software. I believe the article deserves a place on Wikipedia.

I request that a few admin look at the article I made just before it was deleted, check its quality and references and restore it, and tag it so it cannot be speedily deleted again. At the very least, I would appreciate an admin copying the article code into my userpage so I can work on the article until it's agreed it can go back on.

Thanks--Mrtombullen 01:34, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The best place to take a discussion such as this is deletion review. You'll need to be sure to indicate policy issues that you feel should be considered with regards to replacing the article. Please do note that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a compelling argument for any article, however. Tony Fox (arf!) 02:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Email editors?

Has this feature been removed? I use the old Classic skin, and my user Talk page still has the "Email this user" link. I have email enabled, but clicking says I don't accept email from others. Switching to the standard MonoBook skin, I see it doesn't have the link at all. Has emailing via Wikipedia been removed? — Frecklefσσt | Talk 13:01, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

No. I've recently received Wikipedia e-mail. I try clicking on my own, and it functions. When I try clicking on yours, I get "This user has not specified a valid e-mail address, or has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users." Any chance there's a problem with your e-mail address? --Moonriddengirl 13:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I found the problem. Thanks for the assistance. :-) — Frecklefσσt | Talk 13:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure. :) --Moonriddengirl 14:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

appropriate image use policy

I've modified Image:Triangle.EulerLine.svg slightly (the placement of one black line was incorrect), and I'm wondering how I should upload it. (I've never uploaded anything, so any help is welcome although I'm mainly asking about the policy.) The current SVG picture seems to have been released into the public domain, but it's based on the GFDL-licensed Image:Triangle.EulerLine.png. I didn't know this was possible; nevertheless, what's the appropriate policy for a file that is not wholly my own work, but which is based upon a free image from Wikipedia? Thanks. Tesseran 22:58, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Good day! You can upload an image through the Wikimedia commons. I'm familiar with the commons, so if you should require hel[, let me know Have a nice day!N734LQ 10:31, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use Photos

I heard that one of the photo sites like Flicker or Picasa has many of the users photos as 'fair use' and anyone can use them for free without having to ask. Does anyone know which one? Thank you. ΞBMEDLEYΔSUTLERΞ 07:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Are you asking if Flickr/Picasa users are uploading images under a "fair use" rationale or if Wikipedia users are using Flickr/Picasa photos and claiming fair use? If the first, no - by definition, one cannot free ride on another person's claim for fair use. If the second, possibly - though Wikipedia users would have to claim fair use as normal, including by detailing what articles it is claimed for and why it is claimed. See Wikipedia:Fair use for more.

Many photo websites, such as Flickr, allow uploaders to specify a Creative Commons license that may be usable on Wikipedia without a fair use claim. The licenses that fall under the GFDL are "Attribution" (CC-BY) and Attribution & Share-Alike (CC-BY-SA). You can find such images on Flickr on their CC page or by looking for both "commercial" and "adapt upon" CC options in their search page. Here's a search for "apple tree". Note that on every image page, under "Additional Information", there will be the copyright symbols with the text "Some rights reserved" linking to the relevant detailed copyright page. You are free to upload such freely licensed images to Wikipedia, though they would be better off at Commons, where the sister projects can use them as well. Some tools in the upload wizard help you fill in the details such as authorship, date and link-backs, which are annoying to fill in by hand. - BanyanTree 08:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello, this, what you wrote "Many photo websites, such as Flickr, allow uploaders to specify a Creative Commons license that may be usable on Wikipedia without a fair use claim. The licenses that fall under the GFDL are "Attribution" (CC-BY) and Attribution & Share-Alike (CC-BY-SA)." is what I was talking about. Thank you very much! (I sit under the Banyan Tree too!) ΞBMEDLEYΔSUTLERΞ 08:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

The licenses that fall under the GFDL are "Attribution" (CC-BY) and Attribution & Share-Alike (CC-BY-SA). Does that mean that the others should not be used ? (e.g. Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License ) Figarema 13:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Correct. Images with a non-commercial or no derivatives clause are not excepted on Wikipedia. Garion96 (talk) 13:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Coding help?

How would I create a Contents box as seen in almost every large article. I looked at the source and could see no coding for it. Poserlkg 00:47, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

The table of contents is created automatically for every article with four or more headings. There are options to force the table to appear with fewer headings or in a specific place. See WP:TOC#Table_of_contents_.28TOC.29.--Chaser - T 00:50, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Where do I find my sandbox?

I don't want to destroy an article practicing. Poserlkg 23:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Poserlkg (talk • contribs) 23:48, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

I created a personal sandbox for you at User:Poserlkg/sandbox. You can also use the main one at Wikipedia:Sandbox (or WP:SAND and any number of other shortcuts). Cheers!--Chaser - T 00:20, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Yay! *hugs Chaser* Poserlkg 00:24, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

How to apply for an English Teaching Job

Can anyone please provide me with an e-mail address to contact the English Department at Wikipedia. I am an American English teacher who has been teaching in Thailand for the last 3 years and am considering relocating to Vietnam. Thank you for your kindness, Mr. John —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.123.166.198 (talk) 10:43, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

We don't do that. Try http://www.tefl.com --Chaser - T 00:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest Question

Hi,

I would like to make a wiki page for the Sullivan Lab Evidence Project (SLEP) website. It is a resource for researchers in the psychiatric genetics field. This is the website: https://slep.unc.edu/evidence/index.php.

I have participated in creating this website, so I'm guessing that there is a conflict of interest. However, if I created a wiki for the site in a objective, factual manner, would there still be a problem? The chance of me profiting off creating the wiki are slim to none. I am only interested in giving researchs another way to discover the website, so that more people might benefit from it.

Cheers, kneeker —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kneeker (talk • contribs) 15:44, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

I think you are allowed to create the article, but be sure to keep it neutral. We do have guidelines at WP:COI which should be followed. x42bn6 Talk Mess 09:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Help

There is someone vadalizing the jackfruit page. He is trying to make wikipedia seem unreliable. ban him... Someone already went to check on it so no one else has to go. NS Zakeruga 02:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

"If you wish to report vandalism, please go to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism instead." Top of the page:) Poserlkg 23:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Information ecology

I've got a couple of issues with this page I stumbled across ... mainly that it seems to be an advert for a couple of books laced with weasle words. I'm new to this, so what tags / action are appropriate?! Many thanks for your help. LookingYourBest 09:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

This looks like a bid to get a new catch-phrase into the lexicon. At present it is not a terrible article, since it has references, though they should be properly formatted into a reference section using something like WP:CITET. Do you want to try your hand at rewriting the article? I can't think of any tags that apply directly, but everyone is welcome to improve articles. You could try nominating it for deletion on grounds of WP:NEO but I imagine it would be kept, so I won't nominate it myself. EdJohnston 16:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

No, I'll have a fair crack at editing it, would this be a good place to ask for a review afterwards? LookingYourBest 19:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Requests for feedback is a good place to get feedback on an article you've created or majorly improved. --Moonriddengirl 19:15, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Houston Noise Bands

I am in the middle of a slow-motion edit war over at Houston Noise Bands. The page originally had long lists of non-notable bands which do not have Wikipedia articles. I have removed all of the non-linked bands, but anons and one named user keep reverting back to the list of nn's. How do I get this resolved? Corvus cornix 15:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

If they're inserting unsourced information, you might want to start by notifying the editors with {{subst:uw-unsourced1|Article}}. In addition, I'd probably place inclusion guidelines ala Lists: Criteria for inclusion in lists, in this case specifying that additions must either have Wikipedia pages or individual reliable sources per Wikipedia:Lists#List contents. I might add a <!--wikinote--> to that effect, and I'd add a comment reminding of the verifiability policy on Talk:Houston Noise Bands. Once that's done, so that the editors have to know that what they're doing is not policy, I'd escalate warnings on an individual basis and seek blocking if required. If multiple violators persist, I'd look into page protection. --Moonriddengirl 20:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem is, it's different accounts with each edit. Corvus cornix 20:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

That's the reason I suggested making the list criteria evident at the page. (And, in fact, I took the liberty of doing so.) These edits may have been made in good faith by new users unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policies. I took the liberty of establishing criteria at the article and adding a note on the talk page. I don't know if that will help, but if multiple users persist in violating policy, it might be easier now that policy is explicit to make a case for page protection or to seek assistance through other means of dispute resolution. The first step in that case is always to take the matter to the talk page. Hopefully, it won't be an issue. --Moonriddengirl 20:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I've notified several of the recent editors about Wikipedia's verifiability policy. Looks like you've been fighting this battle for a while. :) I imagine that's been frustrating. --Moonriddengirl 20:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Help with repeated user violations

GoHuskies9904 just vandalized an article. Somebody will fix it soon so don't worry about the article. But I checked his/her user profile and I see that they've been warned against vandalism several different times and they keep deleting the warning messages on their talk page. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that strictly forbidden to remove warnings like that? Can somebody please do whatever needs to be done about this guy. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.63.111.34 (talk) 14:44, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

It's a common misperception, but currently it isn't forbidden to remove warning labels, per Wikipedia:User_page#Removal_of_warnings. I'll go take a look at the user and his history and see if I can help. --Moonriddengirl 14:52, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

HELP please someone is stealing our wiki

We run a website called 350z-tech.com. We have compiled a huge wiki on the Nissan 350Z. The site address is http://www.350z-tech.com/zwiki/350Z-TECH. We found out today that someone is stealing our wiki here http://www.wiki.wynajem-gdynia.info/ they have taken all the information that we have on our wiki. They haven't take then pictures yet. We need to get this site taken down PLEASE help! You can contact our administrator/site owner at toykilla@350z-tech.com or you can contact me at jinxxycat@gmail.com THANKS! We have spent a LOT of time on this 350z wiki and need this spammer gone!!!!  :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jinxxycat (talk • contribs) 14:43, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, we don't like copyright violators, but it's not our problem. Shalom ^Hello 19:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHERE TO GET HELP FOR THIS THEN? OR WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT?!?! PLEASE!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jinxxycat (talk • contribs) 21:57, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

I'm not that familiar with international law, but if you're in the US you should probably start by contacting an attorney. Your attorney might start by contacting their ISP and pointing out that the individuals are in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 or by sending a "Cease and Desist" letter to the offender. --Moonriddengirl 22:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:GUNDAM needs some help

This particular Wikiproject has been plagued with problems: it grew out of the old WP:CE, which focused on material from one particular Gundam anime, and got ballooned into a project covering all Gundam material. However, very few editors are knowledgeable about the material that was not covered by WP:CE, and to compound matters, every now and then, random editors attempt to mass-delete Gundam-related material from the wiki (as opposed to trying to improve it). Actually, something like that's happening now, if someone could look at the AfDs ongoing... but I digress. What WP:Gundam needs are people who are good at copyediting and so forth to go through articles and straighten them up, and help find sources and so forth. There are mabye four or five editors who could even be called regulars, and that's not enough to manage the vast amount of Gundam-related material on this wiki.

The largest problem with most of the articles is that they have a relatively low quality as far as writing goes, and lack sources and references. In addtion some bot deleted many images used by articles that are under the aegis of the project, reducing their quality further.

Compounding matters is that people will almost always attempt to delete these articles rather than improve them. One of the few exceptions to this rule attempted to improve three of the better articles with a hacksaw and ended up making them worse... But yeah. WP:GUNDAM needs more manpower, and definitely more people who are knowledgeable about the subject matter. Jtrainor 11:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

References aren't showing

I have no idea why, but the references I've added to Wood kindergarten are not visible. THe superscript is fine, but nothing shows in the References section at the bottom of the article. Any ideas? BrainyBabe 20:38, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

It helps a lot if you include a References section! ;-) [22] Adrian M. H. 20:45, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there was one there when I first saw the article, but with nothing in it. I added real references but they didn't show. So I tried removing and adding it, to no avail. Thanks for your help; it's fine now. BrainyBabe 20:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

It didn't have a {{reflist}} in it for some reason; that was the crucial missing ingredient. [23] Adrian M. H. 21:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I've replaced {{reflist}} with <references /> and renamed the section as "References" (it was "References and Notes"); the first change is to display the footnotes in full fontsize and the second is to use the standard name for this section. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks both for the help. What I don't understand is why, when I insert a reference (correctly!) into the text, it doesn't create a reference section. I thought the first reference automatically forced one into existence. BrainyBabe 09:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

(undent) Wikimedia software isn't programmed to do that (I'm not sure where you got the idea that it was). Unfortunately, there are some standardization issues with name of the section that contains footnotes: "References" is sometimes used for another type of citations, in which case "Notes" is commonly used for the footnote section. And, as you probably know, the norm whenever something isn't always done exactly the same way is to let humans handle the situation. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 12:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Static HTML dumps page always down

http://static.wikipedia.org/ (see also [24])
Hello, the Static HTML dumps download page is never working. Is there a non-wikipedian mirror where we can download the complete 2007 HTML version of en.wiki (and fr:wiki as well)? Or maybe a torrent? Except the 2003 dump by Tero it seems there is no HTML dump anywhere.
NB:This is for a personnal offline use, and XML is too complicated for me. Thx for your help. 14:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

License help

I need some help with a license issue... We've got a user (User:Theeuro) who works for the ECB and as such can influence under which license the ECB releases their national euro coin face pictures, with which we've had problems a few times up to now. Under what license would they have to release it so that we can upload their pictures here on the Commons without running into any trouble? Thanks! —Nightstallion 23:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

You can also ask this at Wikipedia:Media Copyright Questions. --Boricuaeddie 00:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

GFDL and or CC-BY-SA.Geni 00:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl

Hi, I was hoping to get some help over at Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl#What?. I was looking for some people who haven't made edits to the page to get some input. It's not an RfC, because I don't believe we've reached that point; I just want some fresh eyes first. If this should go to RfC, then I can do that. I wasn't sure where else to post this, so I chose here. --Son 16:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)