From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Help desk
< December 26	<< Nov | December | Jan >>	December 28 >

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

Contents 1 December 27 1.1 Problem with Tables 1.2 edit template 1.3 account problems 1.4 Search 1.5 Editing a photo 1.6 What is the policy for creating articles on TV shows? 1.7 How do I use a page name that's already in use, and the new reference is more well-known than the current reference? 1.8 how do i delete or rename an article? 1.9 Number of files 1.10 Someone has redirected a topic page to a potential sub-topic page... 1.11 Slow response time acccessing Wikipedia 1.12 Using templates from other Wikipedia's 1.13 Article talk page archiving 1.14 Gerald Ford's Page 1.15 replacing an image with a new one 1.16 Check Queen Elizabeth's site - There is filth on the entry. 1.17 How to contribute to Talk Page 1.18 +'s and -'s 1.19 Numbers listed in history 1.20 Problem with Reference Section 1.21 Esther Garcia Cartagena 1.22 How to place links between different language pages? 1.23 links 1.24 Abuse 1.25 Importance issue with new article 1.26 importing images from other language wikipedias 1.27 autograph page 1.28 Question on new articles about books

[edit] December 27

[edit] Problem with Tables

I'm working on creating the List of Spiral Galaxies article, but now when I add new rows to the table, they don't show up. Look my sandbox and press edit this page. You will see that I have rows for NGC 1365 and NGC 1512, but they dont show up in the preview or in the page. I think it may be some issue with my reference tags, but I still can't fix the problem. THanks in advance for any help and feel free to edit my sandbox to fix the issue if you find it. Imaninjapirate^{talk to me} 00:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I just fixed it. The problem was that you used <ref/> instead of </ref>. --Derlay 00:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, duh! Thanks much for catching my stupid mistake.

[edit] edit template

There is a template common to a series of books which I think needs to be edited. How do I go about it?

You will find the template transcluded in the article as follows: {{foo}}. Go to Template:Foo and start editing. (Replace Foo with the name of the template) — Lost^(talk) 02:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] account problems

I am trying to open an account with you just a few minutes ago, but am having trouble. Have used the following account set-up but unable to sign on without being told "Wrong Password".

Username: benelli

Password: gardener

When contacted by Wikipedia via e-mail with instructions to click on below, did so and was then brought back to home page to log in. When doing so am then told "wrong password". Kindly help me as I do want to be able to sign on and get started. Thanks for any assistance.

The fact you posted it here compromises your account anyway. Sign up for a new one. --Wooty Woot? contribs 03:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

It will have given you a new password in the email (I got given a jumble of letters and numbers) you must enter that as your password. Once you have logged in you can change the password using the preferences at the top right of the page. James086^{Talk | Contribs} 03:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Search

Why is the Search in Wikipedia Context sensitive. Google and Yahoo are not. Thanks Marc -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mstrassburg (talk • contribs) 23:13, December 26, 2006

Because the search is looking for article names, and articles on Wikipedia are named very specifically. Capitalization counts in article names here! Google and others are just searching for particular text all over the web, where context may not matter. -- Kesh 04:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

In other words, sometimes...whether a word is capitlized or not will take you to a different article. This is rare, but it does happen. In most cases, redirects get created for alternate captilizations, so you can use the search button as if it wasn't case-sensitive, and the vast majority of times you will get to the correct article. --`/aksha 11:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

It's due to the searching algorithm used by Wikipedia. Due to the nature of the project, Wikipedia is forced to use a free software version (Lucene), which sadly was developed without the resources that Google and Yahoo had behind the development of their engines. The algorithm wasn't designed with Wikipedia in mind, so its results are not optimal. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:25, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

But that limit has now become a feature. Capitalization differences are used in places to disambiguate articles with the same name, but different capitalizations. (Although I can't come up with any examples right now). User:Zoe|(talk) 22:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Editing a photo

How do I change the image that's in an article? I am a registered user of Wikipedia and I don't like the images in one of the articles. I have sites with better images and I also have better images saved in My Documents folder. How do I change it in the article? Answer soon, please! Thank you!

Danni D 04:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

There's an image tutorial on how to put the images into the article, but before you replace an existing image, make sure there's not a good reason why a better image is already there: in particular, is it possible that the image in the article is "better" than yours under the image use policy, e.g. it is in the public domain, or licensed under GFDL or a Creative Commons license (the average picture on a web page somewhere is likely to be copyrighted, which means we can only really claim fair use if there isn't a better licensed picture available). Confusing Manifestation 04:58, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What is the policy for creating articles on TV shows?

What is the Wikipedia policy on articles about TV shows? What is the criteria to say something should be included in Wikipedia or not? I recently tagged The Lost Room with a notability notice because it appeared to violate item #7 on the list at WP:NOT#IINFO. I can understand having articles about shows that have had significant cultural influence such as The Simpsons or Sienfeld. But this article appears to be about a six hour miniseries that's very recent (not enough time to exert any historical or cultural impact). I'm not trying to stir up trouble, but I do want to know what is acceptable policy on Wikipedia. Was tagging this with a notability notice appropriate or misguided? Are articles on any and all TV shows welcome or should they be limited to ones that meet certain criteria? I've searched for a list of criteria for creating TV show articles and I can't find it. I'd appreciate any insight from more seasoned editors. --Mperry 05:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, i was recently involved in a naming debate regarding TV articles, which led me to look at a LOT of articles on various TV shows. From what i can see, anything show that's been officially aired is fair game for an article. I don't know what the guidelines say, but i can assure you we have a LOT of articles for TV shows, including a lot of articles for really (IMO) obscure/old/little-known/unimportant TV shows. I guess it's sort of like how we seem to have articles for all movies and all albums, regardless of how good/well-known/important/etc. they are. --`/aksha 11:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Some editors might insist on there being multiple independent, reliable and verifiable sources for a TV show or an episode of a TV show for and article about it to be kept. If someone remembers an episode of a dramatic program or a game show where such and such happened, and they base the article on only their recollection, it might be considered original researce, and unverifiable. If they can cie, say a book about TV shows of that genre, and a review in say the New York Times, then they migh be justified in having an article on that particular episode. Edison 05:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How do I use a page name that's already in use, and the new reference is more well-known than the current reference?

I would like to create a page with quite a bit of detail, but the best name for the subject is already in use. The current subject is an obscure Australian tv show that aired for a few months in 1970, and the page is also a stub. The page I want to create is about a significant event that happened within the last 10 years, and would be known to a much wider audience.

My questions are:

1. What is the best way of creating my page so that it will have the same name as the existing page?

2. Can I move the existing page and rename it "name (tv show)" or something similar and then create a new page with "name"?

3. Is swapping the pages the best way to go about it? I.e. creating my page under another name, moving the old page to a new name, requesting that the original page be deleted, moving my page to the original page name, etc.

Basically, I'd like it so that the page I'm writing is titled as what the existing tv show page is currently titled. As I said, the current page is a stub and doesn't have nearly as much information as there will be on the new page. Any help would be appreciated, as I'm new to wikipedia. Thanks!

DEMKID 06:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

PS. I also want to try and avoid doing disambiguation with my new page. Meaning, I dont want my page to be named with a description in parenthesis behind it, "name (xxxx)". Is there a way this can be done if the new page is more well-known and will be much more detailed than the current one? Thanks

DEMKID 06:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest creating the article at User:DEMKID/Sandbox then leaving a note on the talk page of that article saying what you plan to do (#3), give it some time, and if there isn't any opposition, move the article to name (tv show) then either go through with #3, or simply copy paste your text from your user subpage into the now-redirect. Chris M. 06:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] how do i delete or rename an article?

how do i delete or rename an article?

See WP:MOVE and WP:DELETE, depending on which you'd rather do. Hope that helps! Luna Santin 10:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• And note that moving can (and often should) be done without deleting anything. Make sure you read the links carefully before acting. -- Mgm|^(talk) 15:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Number of files

On the Special:Statistics page it is said that: we currently have 664,287 media files (excluding files from the Wikimedia Commons). So, what is the total number of files including files from the Wikimedia Commons? Thank you.

--Meno25 10:15, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

According to the Special:Statistics page on the Wikimedia Commons, they have 1,052,452 media files. So the total between wikipedia and the commons would be 1,716,739 media files. -- Sir Escher ^talk 10:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for answering my question.

--Meno25 19:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Someone has redirected a topic page to a potential sub-topic page...

Hi!

I would like to contribute a article on a specific topic (eg. a Therapy-Type), but have found that someone has set up a Page-Redirect to another page, that of the discoverer and main practitioner.

Surely the way to set this up is to write a page on the "Therapy-Type", with links to the main practitioner etc.?

The article in question (the destination of the redirect) shows a number of alerts, including:

• This article needs sections.

• This article or section is missing citations and/or footnotes.

• This article or section reads like an essay and may require cleanup.

MY QUESTIONS:

1) How can one remove the redirect, without starting a dispute? (There is potential for one here)

2) I plan to LINK to the specific Person Page, and expand on the main topic...

Any guidance will be gratefully received! Thanks Peter Palurie 10:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Assuing this therapy type fits all our guidelines for an article (i.e. it is notable...etc), then i'd say the redirect most likely exists because no one has bothered to write an article for it. So instead of just leaving it as a red link (i.e. no article exists under that name), someone has gone and created a redirect to a relevant article.

To turn the redirect into an article, all you have to do is edit the redirect page. So go to the redirect, and hit the "edit this page" button. Delete the redirect line, and replace it with a proper article.

I don't believe this will set off any disputes, it seems pretty uncontraversial to me. If you want to be sure - go to the redirect page, and hit the "discussion" or "history" tabs. If there's been no discussion, and the history is fairly short (no previous edit wars), then i think you're pretty safe. Just go ahead and start the article, linking to whatever other relevant articles. --`/aksha 10:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• If you go to the redirect page, you will be redirected, to go back to actually edit the redirect page, click the link on top that says "redirected from...". - Mgm|^(talk) 15:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Slow response time acccessing Wikipedia

To whom it may concern.

Hi, I have dedicated Cable Broadband with Optus. Over the past week or so the response time in accessing Wikipedia has been very slow. In some cases a blank page has "hung" with the Wikipedia address in the address bar and the screen showing "done" in bottom left hand corner. Access to other web pages has not been a problem, could it be your experiencing heavy traffic loads over this period or should I make some adjustments my end, if so what do I need to do.

Regards,

Savio Grossi. 58.107.168.168 12:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The access is fine for me. Sometimes Firefox gives me trouble but IE6 runs fine. I'd suggest to check at your end unless there was a recent bug that I dont know of — Lost^(talk) 12:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is running extremely slowly today. It took over 10 minutes to load the Help Desk Q&A down to this page. Reference Desk has the same glacial slowness. Everything else except Wikipedia on the internet opens fine with my broadband connection. What is the opposite of "Wiki" (which is supposed to mean "hurry up?") We need a term from the same language meaning "move with infinite slowness" for days like this. Edison 18:37, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

For what its worth, I have been using wikipedia for hours today, and I have not noticed any slowdown at all. -- Sir Escher ^talk 22:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Using templates from other Wikipedia's

Is there a way I can use an official template of another Wikipedia without duplicating it in the English one? For example, if in Italian Wikipedia I am used to include in my pages templae {{anItalianTemplate}}, is there a way I can access it in an English Wikipedia page? Thank you in advance.--Dejudicibus 14:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• I'll give you the short answer. No, you'd have to replicate it and make sure the required parameters like namespace names are translated properly. - Mgm|^(talk) 15:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I did it, but template was deleted and now my pages are garbaged. I cannot finda similar template in English Wikipedia. That is why I hoped it was possible to use a sintax like {{it:anItalianTemplate}} --Dejudicibus 15:43, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

An alternative could be to have a private template. It is possible anything like {{User:Dejudicibus/Template:anItalianTemplate}}?--Dejudicibus 15:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

You can put the template code in your userspace in whatever subpage you'd like and reference it exactly as you guess, above (this would work if you put the template in User:Dejudicibus/Template:anItalianTemplate. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• What was it called? Perhaps we can fix whatever got it deleted. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:25, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article talk page archiving

What's the preferred protocol (I mean method) for archiving talk pages? I'm considering a partial archiving of an article talk page to cut down on the length. The portions in question aren't controversial, they're just seriously old, and not germaine to the current effort. Thanks, NinaEliza (talk • contribs • logs) 16:07, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The best method I've seen is an {{Archivebox}} template. See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page for instructions. -- Kesh 16:58, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gerald Ford's Page

There is an incorrect link on President Gerald Ford's page. In the information box, it lists his children. If you click on Jack's link it goes to Jack Ford's page; however, Jack Ford is the African American mayor of a city. I believe this is an error. How can it be corrected? ~~O'toole Dupree

Many people in the USA are named Jack Ford. It just so happens Gerald does have a son called Jack. -- Kesh 17:42, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

You can correct that by creating another article about the other Jack Ford and naming the article appropriately and then linking to that article instead. Please be sure that Mr. Jack Ford meets the Wikipedia:Notability guidelines. Also see Wikipedia:Disambiguation for further details — Lost^(talk) 18:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] replacing an image with a new one

Dear Wiki Helpdesk

I am trying to change fat controller magazine's logo, as the one on the site is now out-of-date. It appears that I cannot just upload a new picture with the same file name.

How can I change the logo that is up just now (remove it) so as to put the correct image in its place?

Dylan.morris 18:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Please upload the logo under another name. Use the right tag i.e. {{logo}}. To remove the current logo from the article, go to the edit mode and replace [[Image:fatcontrollermagazine.jpg|right|frame|Fat Controller Logo]] with the current image name — Lost^(talk) 18:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Lost is right. Don't replace the uploaded image. Replace what image is included in the article. Also, think about it first. Will replacing it improve the article? - Mgm|^(talk) 20:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Check Queen Elizabeth's site - There is filth on the entry.

queen elizabeth, someone has written a lot of filth on the site. There is use of F... etc. I hope someone cleans it up so a child can't read it.

Er, which Queen Elizabeth page? There are a lot of different pages, and I didn't notice anything wrong with the disambiguation page Queen Elizabeth or with Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom in their recent changes. By the way, you are welcome to revert any vandalism yourself that you see. BigNate37_(T) 19:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm guessing it was this version of Elizabeth I of England. the vandalism seems to be fixed now, though. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 20:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How to contribute to Talk Page

I'm a new user attempting to contribute to the following discussion page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:September_11%2C_2001_attacks

When I click on the link below within the discussion page, 'click here to start a new topic', it brings me to a list of templates for the content at the top of the discussion page, but I don't see a new topic window in which to write a post. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:September_11%2C_2001_attacks&action=edit&section=new

I can't tell, is the discussion page also locked in addition to the main page? How can I contribute to the discussion? Apologies in advance if i'm missing something obvious, or violating any protocol in this post.

Thanks Geological 19:37, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, that link you gave, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:September_11%2C_2001_attacks&action=edit&section=new , really should be working. There might be some malfunction somewhere between your computer and wikipedia. You're supposed to be presented with two empty text boxes, a small one at the top for entering a subject, and s large one for entering a message body. It ought to look very similar to a webmail application (if you use Yahoo mail or Gmail or Hotmail you know what I mean). It appears that you're doing everything right... if you're not seeing these text boxes to type in then there might be a technical problem. Let's see what some other help desk users have to say. In the meantime, if you've got the time, try purging your cache, with the instructioons at WP:PURGE. — coelacan talk — 19:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I followed the purge instructions and appended the purge command to the url in all of the page tabs related to the article. Within the new topic page, it did result in a change, the page reloaded with a text box with the heading: 'You can view and copy the source of this page:' followed by the content that was previously there, but unfortunately not the normal text boxes for starting a discussion topic. I tried to start a new topic using IE7 instead of Firefox with identical results. I also tried on another pc on my network which has never accessed any of these pages, with the same result. Slightly perplexing but I imagine there's a simple cause. Thanks again. Geological 20:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Might be a problem with your connection. Try logging in using this link. That's the secure https connection, which is slower but may help solve your issue. -- Kesh 22:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, I tried that but still no luck. I see a new topic has been added to the discussion since yesterday so I'm assuming other people can access this functionality. Can anyone confirm their ability to correctly access the new topic text box? I'm truly perplexed because I get the appropriate new topic text boxes for all other wiki pages, for example the following link comes up fine: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:United_States&action=edit&section=new

Could it be that the discussion page I'm having trouble with is locked from new user participation? Geological 16:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] +'s and -'s

I have just been looking at my watchlist and I saw lots of +'s and -'s. What are they all about? Henchman 2000 19:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Watchlist#What do the colored numbers mean? — coelacan talk — 19:48, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Numbers listed in history

I was wondering what the numbers listed in the Recent Changes or History changes were for.

• (diff) (hist) .. Dundas Street (TTC); 14:52 .. (+53) . . Geo android (Talk | contribs)
• (diff) (hist) .. N User:Azndavecho‎; 14:52 .. (+10) . . Azndavecho (Talk | contribs)
• (diff) (hist) .. Macy's South‎; 14:52 .. (+92) . . Greathotelsfan (Talk | contribs)
• (diff) (hist) .. Tennis Player Rankings‎; 14:52 .. (-100) . . Jeffreyneave (Talk | contribs)
• (diff) (hist) .. Talk:Wedge strategy‎; 14:52 .. (+368) . . CliffC (Talk | contribs)
• (diff) (hist) .. N User talk:Joeoeoeoeoe‎; 14:52 .. (+537) . . SkierRMH (Talk | contribs)

I have listed an example above from the recent changes page. The numbers in "( )" are what I am asking about. I just noticed these in the last month, so I was wondering what changed and what they were used for. Thanks --Brian_{(view my history)}/^{(How am I doing?)} 19:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Nevermind :) You answered it above --Brian_{(view my history)}/^{(How am I doing?)} 20:02, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problem with Reference Section

On this article List of Qassam rocket attacks, the reference section isn't showing up--some help needed please. Thx Publicus 20:01, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Corrected — Lost^(talk) 20:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Esther Garcia Cartagena

She was a community activist who died last august in new york city and was covered in the villager newspaper. 100s attended her funeral. Her life is worth mentioning and remembering since in the lower east side (Loisaida) of new york she played a crucial role in community affairs and in the lives of young people here. Is there some way I can write a small biography and upload a picture as a remembrance and example.

Please go through WP:BIO guidelines. If you think she passes the guidelines, then See: Help:Starting a new page. You might also look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article. You need to have an account to create a new article — Lost^(talk) 20:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How to place links between different language pages?

Hi,

I could not find solution how to place links between different languages, in other words, certain topic, proper name or object only appears or find matches in certain language(s), for example, while editing English page using Japanese name written in Roman letters did not find any match, but if it is written in original Japanese text, it finds matches in Japanese wikipedia, however I could not place this link to this Japanese wikipedia match from English wikipedia page even though I included Japanese letters which suppose to find match through out wikipedia domain regardless of what language was chosen since I believe that wikipedia is using Unicode system so that any language can be included in any language page whenever necessary. Well, that was my guess, but it doesn't seem to work. Do you have any advice or solution in this matter? Because I think that it is a relevant feature to enhance the given article even though it may be useless for users do not understand other languages, but reality in many modern civilized readers are actually multilingual, aren't they?

I hope you understood my question.

Best regards,

Tsalsa

Perhaps an example might help. This page is in the English Wikipedia and can link to any article here with the normal link syntax, for example Oda Nobunaga. This article has a corresponding article in the Japanese Wikipedia which can be linked to like this, ja:織田信長 (please look at the source for this response, there is a leading ":" character in the link that does not show up in the formatted reply). Omitting the leading ":" character in this link creates an interlanguage link, indicating the article the link is placed in exists as the indicated article in the Japanese Wikipedia (if you look at the source for Oda Nobunaga you will see such a link). These interlanguage links (links to the same article in other languages) are listed on the left in the "in other languages" box. If I haven't answered your question, please clarify. -- Rick Block (talk) 21:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanx Rick! for the prompt response, I'll experiment how it works. --Tsalsa 22:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, it works fine, though I don't particularly like how those ja:, ru: etc appear in front of interlanguage link, because it simply does not look good or smooth, is there any way to get rid of them? Why such prefix does not appear at “in other language box” by using template such as "ja:link" while it requires extra colon in front of it within the body of the article to make it work such as ":ja:link"? Could it be some kind of over sighted bug or something? Anyone has a clue?

Many thanx in advance! --Tsalsa 23:24, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

If you simply want to put a link to a certain page in the text, then you can use the piped links as you would normally. For example, you can link to the German version of this page like de:Wikipedia:Fragen zur Wikipedia or Wikipedia:Fragen zur Wikipedia or even Fragen zur Wikipedia. You may also be interested in Wikipedia:Interlanguage links. --Cherry blossom tree 00:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Huummm..., thanx for your input, it seems that side bar section somehow allows us to getaway without placing extra colon in front of such foreign links, but not in the body of article in order to place links to other languages. I wonder why? Well, I'll experiment with it and report my findings in the near future :) I hope it is helpful to the others experiencing similar problems while editing. In the meantime, please point out if I'm misunderstanding or missing something very fundamental in this issue.

--Tsalsa 01:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Fantastic! Finally it works as I hoped it to be using your last option of templates with little modification -> ":de:Fragen zur Wikipedia|Fragen zur Wikipedia". Well, I don't know why it requires redundant statement repeating ":de:link|link" in order to get rid of "de:" in front of each foreign link? Certainlly, it is not logical, but I guess I just have to remember it as one of those tricky ones.

Thanx4 everyone helped me figuring this out. And now you know how to do this as well when needed.--Tsalsa 02:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, if you just place a pipe (|) after the link, it will automatically omit the namespace. Eg, [[:de:Fragen zur Wikipedia|]] becomes Fragen zur Wikipedia. -- Sir Escher ^talk 02:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] links

I am doing some wiki pages for work and would like to know how to do the following processes. 1. I need to create a link from a picture icon or a word text, to an executable file from a local folder. 2. How to create a desktop menu for the page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Diverich (talk • contribs) 19:43, December 27, 2006

This might be a better question for the Reference Desk, as it's about setting up your own Wiki rather than Wikipedia itself. -- Kesh 01:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abuse

I was attempting to read the page on Gerald Ford; however, there was a pornographic picture someone apparently decided to place there. (It may no longer be on the page.) I thought it was a virus, but I kept refreshing, and unfortunately, it wouldn't go away.

Here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.162.221 (talk • contribs) 20:00, December 27, 2006

Looks like someone already got to it. Front page articles get vandalized a lot, but they also have a lot more people watching them, so it gets reverted quickly.

You can also learn how to correct these things yourself at Help:Reverting. -- Kesh 01:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, I've corrected your link above. Take a look to see how I formatted it by clicking on Edit to the right of your Abuse header. -- Kesh 01:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Importance issue with new article

How can I adjust a new article so that it meets the Importance guidlines?

You don't. Perhaps you could adjust the subject. --Wooty Woot? contribs 03:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

But if the subject does actually meet the appropriate notability guideline, you'll need to add the appropriate proof to the article - e.g. citations of newspaper articles focusing on the subject, reference to major awards won, etc. Confusing Manifestation 04:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] importing images from other language wikipedias

I've noticed some useful images on the French and German language versions of Wikipedia. How does one import them to the English version?Smiloid 03:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

It is probably best to upload them to Commons, then link every image to that one. Your second option is to simply re-upload them to en. --Wooty Woot? contribs 03:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• Only upload to commons if the image has a free license and don't forget to include all the info from the original image description page. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] autograph page

how can i create an autograph page? Kathzzzz^{kiSs me!} 03:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean by "autograph page"? --Wooty Woot? contribs 03:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The one where wikipedians can add their signatures on, just like User:AndonicO/My Autograph Book Kathzzzz^{kiSs me!} 03:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, then what you want is a subpage. User:Kathzzzz/insertnameofpagehere will create a subpage in the user namespace, and you can then edit that to make whatever you want. For example, I have four subpages, User:Wooty/b, User:Wooty/sandbox, User:Wooty/sandbox2, and User:Wooty/sandbox3. --Wooty Woot? contribs 04:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question on new articles about books

Is it acceptable to include reviews for a book in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoffa fett (talk • contribs) 22:33, December 27, 2006

I would say no, as it would consist of either original research or a non-neutral point of view. However, referring to existing reviews, especially if they demonstrate a particular attitude towards a book (e.g. using the NYTimes review of a book which called it "atrocious" as an example of one of many such bad opinions of the book) is certainly allowed. Confusing Manifestation 04:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Citing existing reviews would be appropriate, but simply including their text in the article would not. -- Kesh 04:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)