Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance)/Archive 10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Village pumps: Policy • Technical • Proposals (persistent) • Assistance • 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This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (assistance).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: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Contents

[edit] BLP statistics

Do we have any research on specifically BLP related vandalism, BLP problems and corrections, stability, and such? As opposed to "articles in general"?

I'd like to know how large our BLP issues are in reality without assuming. I'd do the classic "review 1000 randomly selected BLPs over 6 months and note how often, what kind, how serious, how durable, and did things get better" thing, but I don't have that kind of resource. perhaps others do, or have ideas how to?

(1000 would be a statistically significant number, able to give fairly tight replies if the data was assessed in a sensible neutral way. Then again, so would 500 probably.)

Thanks,

(Talk | email)

[edit] Seeing a Version That Has Been Edited Recently

Hi-

In January 2008,I read content about a specific subject that has since been edited significantly.

Is there any way I can acess the January version 2008? If so, how?

Thanks, Porthaul —Preceding unsigned comment added by Porthaul (talk • contribs) 17:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes you can. When visiting the article in question, click the history tab at the top of the screen which will provide you with a chronologically list of all the revisions/versions of the article. You may view any one of them. Wisdom89 (T / C) 17:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
More specifically, by clicking on the date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ftbhrygvn (talk • contribs) 12:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:I1a europe.jpg

Could someone with the ability please move this image & image-page (Image:I1a europe.jpg) to "Image:I1 europe.jpg" (just removing the newly improper nomenclature of the ending "a" from the name) as per the discussion on said image page, if it is at all possible for a moderator or other to do so? Nagelfar (talk) 07:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Images can't be moved.Geni 17:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:BLP concern being ignored by administrators

Can I get advice on what to do regarding WP:BLP when appeals to administrators fail? It has been determined by consensus (1, 2) that User:Leshrak's and User:Cambios's edit violate WP:BLP by placing undue weight on the material and by using unreliable sources. User:Leshrak has been blocked, but only for 24 hours and there is little doubt in my mind that he will return to his ways after he is unblocked. I've requested that the article be protected, but that requested was glossed over. I've moved the request back to the top, but based on my previous experience with administrators, I have little doubt that it will again be ignored. So I have two questions: 1.) What is my next step in attempting to prevent WP:BLP violations on Bobby Cox? 2.) What do I do in general when administrators do not do their job (as has happened to me so very many times)? Thank you. Dlong (talk) 15:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I really wouldn't worry. If Leshrak does it again he will probably be blocked again and for a longer time. Wrad (talk) 15:15, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
And now User:Rudget helpfully came by and protected the article.... with the libelous material still in it. Great job, Wikipedia. Dlong (talk) 15:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Where do I go to get my account deleted? Dlong (talk) 15:58, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Accounts cannot be deleted, however, you have the right to vanish. Also, you can request to have your user page and talk page deleted by an administrator. See user page on how to do that. Wisdom89 (T / C) 16:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Could someone improve this article on a Chinese athlete? Thanks!

We are writing an article on a Chinese athlete Jin Jing and want to push this article onto the 'Did you know' on the main page. Could someone help us improve this article? Such as English and materials. Thanks!--Supportjinjing (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] article mentions COI editing by company?

See the WP article for Phorm, especially the section Phorm#Marketing_Team_Admits_Tampering_With_Wikipedia_Entry. This is referenced, and it's available in the edit history, but it seems a bit self-referential to me. There are many companies that make poor edits with a COI. What's the precedence for this kind of thing? Thanks. Dan Beale-Cocks 14:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, it's a blatant copy vio, word for word identical to the first sentence in the register. Dan Beale-Cocks 15:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I've moved it to the article talk page, because of both notability/newsworthiness and WP:SELFREF issues. And please, copying a single sentence is NOT a "blatant copyright violation"; it's fair use. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 23:45, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing. About the copyright - I'm English, we don't have fair use so the US / WP copyright stuff isn't easy. It's not so much the length of the text that confused me, but the fact that the edit contained no original text. It was just a copy paste from some other, copyrighted, document. Dan Beale-Cocks 01:33, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Helper Tools

I just used my account for the first time in two years and wonder what new developments hit the tool market. I happily used Lupin's navigation popups back then, and plan to use them now. My question: Is there anything new and better with similar functionality? Was there anything changed with Lupin's tool I should be aware of? Since Lupin seems to be inactive: Are the popups still maintained? --Yooden ☮

Still going as far as I know. See Wikipedia:Tools/Editing tools for the full list but the old warhorses of popups and AWB still the most used I think.Geni 20:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
So I'll stick with the popups. Thanks for your info! --Yooden ☮
Also, take a look at your user preferences - there is a new tab, Gadgets, which makes adding a tool much easier. And please remember that it's FOUR tildes for your signature; you've used THREE in the postings above, which leaves off the date/time stamp. (Previewing your edit is a good idea, if you can't remember whether three or four is the right number.)
And you might find it helpful to know that there is now an editor's index, so you can check a specific topic - for example, monitoring - to see what tools are listed there. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 23:25, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I found the tab, I think I'll keep it the old way as long as it works.
Thanks for pointing out the Index, it's a very useful resorce! --Yooden ☮

[edit] Controversial template

Dear all, I was looking for a template to place here Electoral_fraud#List_of_controversial_elections - to highlight that it was a controversial topic and care should be taken to reference sources. The {{controversial}} template only goes on a talk page, can anyone think of a good one? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

If you don't need to specify why references should be used, Template:Unreferencedsect and Template:Refimprovesect may suffice. - BanyanTree 07:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Constant tagging on Holodomor Denial

Hello, there seems to be an issue at Holodomor Denial. POV tags are constantly being added and removed. Could somebody please take a look? It seems that the discussion between the contributing editors has come to a standstill. Thanks, Horlo (talk) 06:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

That would be Denial of the Holodomor? --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
It would also be a Freudian slip. In actual fact, there is an ongoing set of worries on the talkpage, centering around the lack of sources stating that this is a form of denialism like Climate change denial or Holocaust denial - which discussion is constantly derailed by the above user asking "can we remove the tag now". The moment that things start to be discussed and changes start to be made, naturally, tags will be removed.
Also, I'm not sure this is WP:RfC. --Relata refero (disp.) 07:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] copyrighted images from non-pubilcally available sources

What is the right procedure for dealing with a copyright violation where the original source is behind a firefall. Image:Baker-2006.jpg was taken from an employee database, the attributed source there is not correct. The CSD db-copyvio tag requires a URL for the original source which is not possible in this case. --Rtphokie (talk) 17:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good question to ask at Wikipedia:Image copyright help desk or Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 23:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

{{db-imagevio}}'s URL parameter appears to be optional. Also, if a page needs to be speedy deleted but there is a problem with the existing tags, use {{delete|1=your reason here}}. --Random832 (contribs) 20:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Photo stopped showing on page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imad-ad-Dean_Ahmad It's my public domain photo so thats not issue. It used to work! Couldn't find specific help for this. Thanks :-) Carol Moore 16:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}

It will show if you specify a pixel count. Someguy1221 (talk) 17:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I take that back...it worked in one preview, but now...Someguy1221 (talk) 17:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
OK, it works now; you can see what I did. I think this image, for some reason, doesn't like to be small :-/ Someguy1221 (talk) 17:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Since I don't know arabic i'll have to say Mucho Gracias! :-) Carol Moore 23:24, 12 April 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}
You might want to keep an eye on that image since it apparently needs a specified pixel size. Another editor may come along and remove the pixel info citing Wikipedia:MOS#Images and not realize that it is needed for this photo. --Gwguffey (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial News Archives

Does WP have any means of accessing commercial news archives (like NYTimes or LATimes)? Perhaps some helpful users who have such access would be willing to do some searches? It seems to me a great amount of the Notability problems for older topics might be solvable if there was some way to view these databases. Low Sea (talk) 16:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Simply by having a library card for my local library, I have free web-based access to ProQuest Newsstand Complete. I would image that many editors have this or something comparable and are not even aware of it. Folks just need to visit their library's website and see what electronic reference materials are available to them. --Gwguffey (talk) 18:19, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree that many users probably do have accesses they don't really use for WP. As a college student I have had access to EBSCOHOST for a while and didn't even think about using it for WP sources until recently. It would be nice if we could somehow start an association (cabal?) of WP editors who would be willing to do searches for other users. Of course the copyright issues of a commercial database would mean that the searchers would have to add the citation themselves since they could not forward the news content to the requester. Still, we have editors who do nothing but spell/grammar check, editors who do nothing but tag, it would be nice to have a few editors who do nothing but add WP:N proofs for difficult to source material.
I also can forsee that such an assistance effort might be plagued by lazy users and for that reason I suggest that users making such requests would need to describe their own efforts as part of the request. Requests would be honored on a voluntary basis only and could be accepted, ignored, or rejected as "insufficient effort". -- Low Sea (talk) 19:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
You might want to take further discussion about this to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. --Gwguffey (talk) 20:04, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notice on my talk page

Could someone who has some design skills please change the notice I have at the top of my talk page to be more "friendly" and less "warning"-like? Mostly I think the layout/colors could be changed, but if you want to change any of the text to be more friendly as well, please feel free. I'd like to have less of a "war" look when someone comes to the page that gets their blood boiling or angers them. I'd still like it eye-catching, so being as big as it is (or bigger) should be a good idea. Thanks in advance for the help. MECU≈talk 15:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bill Ayers Page

Ayers' Connection to Obama

Clearly, Ayers and Obama have a relationship even if it is not personal in nature. There is a political relationship. I have added this information as I was shocked to see it not included in this article. Having a relationship with someone does not necessarily mean that you hold the same views on all issues. However, given that Obama is now a public official running for the Presidency, information such as this is important. My post does not insinuate anything other than a modest relationship and is supported by facts from articles from Bloomberg News and the Washington Post. Comments are always welcome. If you would like to read the articles click on the links below. It seems that the Bill Ayers page has been locked to public editing. I recent made the following contribution.

[edit] Ties to Barak Obama

The below is copied directly from the article's talk page. This WP:SPA IP editor has been trying to insert the same content into multiple articles now, and forum-shopping by cutting and pasting this material into different discussion forums. I've left a warning on the editor's talk page and suggest we archive the discussion to avoid further disruption. Wikidemo (talk) 15:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Ayers has had a longstanding relationship with Senator Barak Obama. He has donated money to Obama's political campaign and served with him on the nine-member board of the Woods Fund.[1] They also lived within a few blocks of each other in the trendy Hyde Park section of Chicago, and moved in the same liberal-progressive circles there. [2]

This edit was removed even though I documented the information with credible sources. I believe that someone removed the information for political reasons. Can this issue be resolved and my edit returned to the page and if not explained to me why it is not. Below is the conversation with myself and the person who removed the edit.


http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=adgAs9YOxRSc

The Washington Post article says the opposite of what you are claiming, that there is no connection, only a Republican attack on Obama: "the Obama-Ayers link is a tenuous one"..."This whole connection is a stretch." The Bloomberg article is the same. It does not describe any relationship between Ayers and Obama, but rather speculates that Obama "might face Republican criticism." It's preposterous to say that a $200 donation to a Senate campaign is relevant. The question of whether Obama's service on that board is relevant to a description of the charity has been raised and discussed, and can be discussed further, but there is no credible source to say that having served together on the same Board creates a relationship. This is a serious BLP violation, and I have again removed this content per BLP policy. If any administrator considers this a 3RR violation despite BLP policy please say so and you or I can revert and we'll take this to AN/I. I suggest the page be protected given the POV pushing and edit warring on the subject. Wikidemo (talk) 06:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I completely disagree with your contention that the article says the "opposite" of what "I" am saying. First of all, I am not saying anything, I am letting the news accounts speak for themselves. While it is true that the Washington Post article speculates about how Republicans will use this connection in the campaign, that is only half of the article. The article clearly states, and I will quote verbatim,

"Both Obama and Ayers were members of the board of an anti-poverty group, the Woods Fund of Chicago, between 1999 and 2002. In addition, Ayers contributed $200 to Obama's re-election fund to the Illinois State Senate in April 2001, as reported here. They lived within a few blocks of each other in the trendy Hyde Park section of Chicago, and moved in the same liberal-progressive circles."

The magnitude of their connection may still be something that has not been determined but to state that their is no connection is simply false. In my original edit, I did not include any POV at all. Please refrain from omitting information that is relevant and documented in the press. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.7.46 (talk) 04:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A bug? Vandalism? A nested mess anyway

If you go to [3] and click on the Copy editing category, and then the category of pages with German terms needing copy editing, you will see a big nested mess. This might be a bug or a mistake or vandalism. Anyway I think it needs some attention.--Filll (talk) 13:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Mistake. Attended to. Thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lists of patents in articles

I'm trying to avoid an edit war between (primarily) a couple of editors who can't agree on whether articles should contain lists of patents. Example articles...

My question is: is there any guideline or policy that might help us resolve this matter without an edit war spreading across multiple articles? If not, can anyone recommend a place to discuss it? Thanks for your help. SHEFFIELDSTEELTALK 19:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:LIST would probably be appropriate here. Also, WP:NOT#DIRECTORY. Wisdom89 (T / C) 19:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Discussion at Talk:Telluric_current#List_of_patents - contributions welcome :-) SHEFFIELDSTEELTALK 20:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Allegations of racism for hardblocking what I believe to be an inappropriate username

This user claims it was racist of me to hardblock what I think is a clearly inappropriate username. Could I get some feedback from the community? Trying to do the right thing here... --Orange Mike | Talk 15:17, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I support the block. I think the reason is that "nigger" is used as an epithet and "nigga" is used as a term of endearment. Sceptre (talk) 15:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
I think a block of the username is appropriate. "Nigga" is an offensive username. I think the user should be allowed to create a new account. I think he/she saw this as playful: [4]? Darkspots (talk) 15:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Two things: should this thread be on WP:AN/I instead of here? And, I think that nigga = nigger for the purposes of deciding if this is an offensive username. It's not up to us to discern what word means what to whom. I know what each word means to me, but that's hardly relevant. Darkspots (talk) 15:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
There's no point in it going to AN/I unless there's something to discuss, which it appears there's not, since there is consensus here (and from me) that the block was well reasoned and the backlash unfortunate and unnecessary. If we assume good faith, we can see that the name owner might well be miffed, but s/he either will come around to understanding, or will not. Not very much we can do there except talk calmly to him/her. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I too support the block. Even though some communities have accepted the N word (including various spellings) this username qualifies under WP:IU as "Offensive". Note the policy defines this as:

* Offensive usernames make harmonious editing difficult or impossible.

This is not racism, it is respect for the sensitivities of others who still find the N word problematic. Even some members of the black community have spoken out against the use of the N word by blacks because the wounds that word caused are still open and sore. While the user may find the name harmless from his/her own cultural perspective, it could be very difficult for others to discuss articles with him/her since they could be quite uncomfortable typing the user's name. I suspect this user would have similar problems if some user here was named Yessir Massah Boss Sir. And since discussion is the key concensus building -- which is core to WP -- anything that disrupts discussions is inappropriate at best. I find this comparable to the controversy over the Confederate Flag. For some it is a symbol of pride, for others it is a symbol of past evils. Until the wounds heal it will remain controversial. WP:IU also states:

Usernames that are clearly unacceptable for use on Wikipedia, but have no obvious disruptive intent may be blocked indefinitely, but the block should affect only that account (disable autoblocks, and disable "prevent account creation"). If your account has been blocked for this reason, don't take it personally; it is intended to disable the username you chose, not to prevent you from contributing. Please read this page carefully and choose a more appropriate name.

This user needs to recognize that by participating in WP he/she voluntarily become part of a community with its own culture. At WP we all have to make some sacrifices for the good of the whole community. I for example have to strive hard not to choke the living $h!+ out of certain editors who would rather tag and delete than improve! All this user needs to do is "choose a more appropriate name." -- Low Sea (talk) 16:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

It should be noted that I withdrew the hardblock and switched to a softblock. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I support the block. Although I favor a lack of censorship, it seems more than acceptible to have minimum community standards for account naming conventions.—RJH (talk) 18:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help with Sticky Reference Cite error: Invalid

Resolved.

I just can't get the dang thing to work in J Street. Maybe too tired tonight to figure it out, if someone wants to take a peek. Thanks! Carol Moore 02:57, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}

Note: fixed by User:MantisEars.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] adding cats weirds things up

I tried to add categories to a previously uncategorised article (Hangover House) and ended up with this [[5]]. What the heck is going on? It dumped text from the category page onto the article, and landed me with subcategories (or supercategories?) I don't want. All it needs is Category:Modernist architecture and Category:Houses in California. Please explain this to me! BrainyBabe (talk) 08:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

You just had curly brackets round the category names instead of square brackets. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Something so simple! Thanks for the prompt help. BrainyBabe (talk) 11:44, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tag conflict

So, the great cross-tabbing is done and there is a list of 700 images at User:Betacommand/Sandbox 3 that show images classed as both free AND non-free. Obviously, an image can only be one of the two, so if editors could go through and correct the images, striking them out on the master list it would be great. Thanks. MBisanz talk 03:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Repeated WP:POV based vandalism

After you review Binksternet user page and look at the long list of his reversions his purpose in assuring that Wikipedia articles uphold his POV in defiance of WP:POV to the extent of constituting multiple violations of WP:VAN it is apparent that he may be in need of a little counseling so as to keep Wikipedia articles neutral and in compliance with WP:NPOV. Help with preventing him from reverting acceptable contributions which he is reverting simply becasue they do not uphold or chalenge his POV in violation of WP:POV are not acceptable and a little help in curtailing them would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. 71.100.0.75 (talk) 20:11, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Specifically, this anon IP editor (who appears under several IPs that start with 71.100.x.x, a series that originates from Brandon, Florida) has repeatedly been inserting a "how-to" link at Analog hole. What I have been doing is removing it simply because it is "how-to", no POV here. I also removed an external link to a software product that aims to help users use the analog hole. I am keeping WP from becoming a linkfarm. That's what search engines are for. Binksternet (talk) 20:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Furthermore, this anon IP user 71.100.x.x has yet to make use of the Analog hole Talk page where I invited discussion. Instead, this user has vandalized my user page] and threatened me on my Talk page. All I'm trying to do is keep Wikipedia articles on my watchlist trim and concise. I am not pushing a POV. Binksternet (talk) 20:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
BS, plain and simple. If the external links were excessive then trimming might be necessary but with only a few external links your "trimming" is specific and directed for the obvious purpose of curtaining demonstration, use and understanding of the analog hole. Looking at the multitude of your other reversions it is obvious as well that you want the Wikipedia to conform only to your way of thinking. 71.100.173.105 (talk) 22:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
If your intent was discussion then posting a request for discussion prior to taking action would have been the right thing. Instead you decided to shoot first and talk afterwards in case anyone was still alive. Bottom line is that the basis for not trimming is whether the trim will eliminate something which a reader might learn from or like to view versus who provided the link or where they are from. Since the Wikipedia is open to and viewable by the public versus being closed to all except an elitist membership your WP:POV is again quite clear. 71.100.173.105 (talk) 23:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
And as for "How-to" links... since the Wikipedia is not a "How-to" encyclopedia the only way to provide "How-to" information is through a link to Wikibooks or to some other "How-to" reference. Again doing so must be judged on the merits doing so provides for the viewer and not on the basis of a single user's POV. 71.100.173.105 (talk) 23:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Nobody can figure out how to search Google? o_O
You don't know me and you don't know my POV on this subject. The reason you don't know my POV is because I'm not pushing it. Let me tell you: I hate the inconvenience of DRM and I use the analog hole for my professional and personal benefit more than anybody else I know personally. All I'm doing here is just trying to maintain a trim Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 00:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Unnecessary, unhelpful or otherwise policy violating external links (see WP:External links) should always be removed. It doesn't matter whether there are too many external links or not. I'm not saying that the links you are adding should have been removed, I haven't looked into them, but if you are under the impression it's not necessary to remove bad external links when there are only a few, then you are mistaken. Also, it doesn't matter who started this. It is the responsibility of all people involved to use the talk page to resolve any disagreements. Coming here asking for help from others before you have tried to resolve this matter via discussion is simply poor form. BTW, you also should not accuse editors of POV pushing when you have not discussed the matter with them (see: WP:AGF) Nil Einne (talk) 17:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Comment 71.100.... has unfortunately been blocked for 3RR violations Nil Einne (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fix capitalization in a redirect page title

Could someone please change the name of the page 100 flowers to "100 Flowers", I can't seem to do this. Thanks.

Done.

[edit] Link acceptable in External Links section ?

Where can I ask if http://www.hulu.com/ is a good link for the External link section ? My problem is, the videos are not available outside of the United States. Thank you, have a nice day. Rosenknospe (talk) 15:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Seasteading

I've been editing this article, but it is probably full of errors because my english is bad. May be someone could remove my errors? Thanks. Joepnl (talk) 01:57, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Done - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 15:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Joepnl (talk) 20:24, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] remove ip address from history page

Resolved. Edit removed from history.

I accidentally made a change without logging in and would like to have my ip address removed. I found faq which states that websites log this anyhow, but that is different from having my name in one edit and my ip in the next. Can someone remove this for me? Deleting change is fine, it was minor anyhow.

thanks

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ammolite&action=history

Well until you posted this, the average (non-admin) user wouldn't have had any reason to believe that you and the IP were the same... --Rehcsif (talk) 04:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you look at the timing, typing style, and the similarity in types of changes, I suspect any user with an intellect comparable to that of a rutabaga might suspect. However, I have seen no figures on the mental capacity of the average user. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jahigginbotham (talk • contribs) 02:14, 20 April 2008

Wow, you must have figured out that the best way to request help from someone is to insult them. Perhaps any user with an intellect comparable to that of a rutabega would have mastered the concept of "signing in", if one was so protective if their IP address? Of course, one couldn't expect you to sign your posts if you haven't mastered signing in... --Rehcsif (talk) 18:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
P.S. Why are you so worried that people might find out you're from CIT? --Rehcsif (talk) 18:13, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Rehcsif, please respect the user's privacy. Jahigginbotham's response isn't necessarily insulting (I agree the IP is obviously theirs), but your response is. –Pomte 19:47, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm, well I said that it wasn't necessarily obvious that the IP and name were the same, and he replied that anyone with the intellect of a rutebega would have figured it out (implying, in my opinion, that I was below this threshold...) Anyway I shouldn't have lashed out. I would avise that if you're so worried about privacy, though, you should use a proxy as your IP address is logged every page you view on any website... --Rehcsif (talk) 01:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Done. In the future, you might get a faster response with less public commentary via Wikipedia:Requests for oversight. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:47, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Ilmari, thanks for the fix and the advice. My first edit. [to rehcsiF: yes, my reply to your comment was rude; however i was referring to the average user being able to figure things out and was not specifically referring to you. What I objected to was not the perceived by me sarcastic tone of your post (which is fine with me) but that in my opinion you made a sarcastic post without providing anything useful. Not everyone is a computer wiz.]

j a higginbotham

[edit] Preforming Math Operations

What is the syntax for preforming math operations on wiki pages?Melab-1 (talk) 22:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

If you mean you want to embed mathematical expressions in articles, see Help:Displaying a formula. Algebraist 23:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I mean having the wiki software carry out math operations like the templates thatare used for unit conversion.Melab-1 (talk) 23:57, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
meta:Help:ParserFunctions should help. x42bn6 Talk Mess 00:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Other languages?

I'm working on the Analytic Hierarchy Process article. At the end of it, people have inserted links (or something) to other languages. One of these is [[de:Analytic Hierarchy Process]]. What ARE these mysterious links? Lou Sander (talk) 12:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Quick answer: try one!
Longer answer: They are links to parallel articles in other language versions of Wikipedia. For instance, the link starting with "de:" is German. They appear in the left-hand margin of the article, under "languages". As of this moment, the article has links to articles in German, Korean, Italian and Japanese. PKT (talk) 12:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Coding assistance

What is the way to get wikipedia to recognise an end of line character or line feed without actually putting a hard return? semi-colon's don't work, neither do <br> which work in text. I'm looking to use the wikitable but put the data on the same line as the new row instruction '|-'. Likely some simple way, but have not found it yet. SunCreator (talk) 19:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that's possible, but here's one way
to have your data on the same line
as the table row introduction. –Pomte 19:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to have this line and the previous line together..... but perhaps it's not going to be possible.
I want copy from excel and it's time consuming to insert a new excel row
for every other line to be a new line for the wikitable row.		 SunCreator (talk) 20:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC))
In that case, search and replace can be done by regex so you don't have to change your Excel spreadsheet. You can paste from Excel to a userpage and someone such as me can come along to format it into a table. –Pomte 04:26, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Second attempt to delete a bogus word.

Hi members.

I am an expert on jade. I am 100% sure that JADEITITE is not a word. The confusion is spreading to the point that my request to have it removed was denied. The correct spelling is JADEITE. How do I pursue a second look at having this bogus word removed?JadeHunter (talk) 23:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

You lost this argument the last time, to people making good arguments backed up by reliable sources. Why do you think a second look would have different results? Algebraist 08:02, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

This is not a matter of winning or losing. Jadeitite is not a word or a mineral. Look in any dictionary and you will see. Look on the internet and you will find Sorenson made the mistake first in 2002 and everything is based on that. I know the world's top jade experts and carvers and they all agree that jadeitite is not a real word. Is ignorance really blissful?JadeHunter (talk) 23:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

You'll have to come up with substantial proof of your position. Even I can find independent evidence defining Jadeitite (Jadeite rock, according to this source). PKT (talk) 00:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your dignified response! As you know, is is nearly impossible to prove that something does not exist. Let us start with what does exist. If JADEITITE was a word it would be in the dictionary. Is that correct? Please list the dictionary (any one) that includes jadeitite as a word. Thanks again for not being rude! JadeHunter (talk) 01:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Is there anyone that is interested in answering my question? JadeHunter (talk) 01:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

It's already been answered. See the link above. Words are determined by much more then whether or not they are in the dictionary. Wrad (talk) 01:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
And besides that, Jadeite is in the dictionary. See this link to the Oxford English Dictionary. You will need a subscription to see it, though. It says "One of the two minerals commonly included under the name of JADE (q.v.), of which it is the hardest and most highly prized variety. Hence jadeitic (dedtk) a., approximating to jadeite in composition." Apparently, the word was first used in a scientific journal in 1865. Wrad (talk) 01:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course jadeite is a word. Nephrite and jadeite are collectively known as jade. JadeHunter (talk) 01:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

If you are trying to prove that there is no such thing as jadeitite when there are several scientific journals using the word to describe a specific type of rock, then you are going to fail. Whether or not it is in this or that dictionary will make no difference. Wrad (talk) 01:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

There has been six years of confusion caused by Sorensen and Wikipedia. This has confused some experts. I may not be able to help wikipedia correct this huge problem. No one has answered my question about whom to contact. JadeHunter (talk) 01:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Who is Soronsen? Wrad (talk) 01:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorensen wrote the articles that started this confusion. JadeHunter (talk) 02:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

At the very least, find another reliable source that says that Sorensen is wrong. It would run completely counter to the verifiability policy to just take someone's word for it that a reliable source made a mistake. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

This issue is ironic considering the original jade/jadeite issue that is well-known in philosophy of mind. Good luck in your endeavor. –Pomte 04:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Your claim that the word "jadeitite" derives from a mistake made in an article in 2002 is interesting, since it took me just a few minutes of googling to find an article from 1994 that uses the word in its title: Harlow, G.E. (1994), Jadeitites, albitites and related rocks from the Motagua Fault Zone, Guatemala, Journal of Metamorphic Geology 12 (1), 49–68. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

If you really want to correct the record... you could always try to get something published in a journal/magazine/newpaper that discusses the error of "Jadeitite" and the correctness of "Jadeite" ... then there would be a reliable source with which to challenge the article. Blueboar (talk) 19:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
This google search finds books with the Jadeitite word from 1934 onwards in English, and 1903 onwards in other languages (in a survey extending to the first 20 of 173 hits). --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
And as the Jadeitite word is not in the OED, I've written to them suggesting they consider adding it :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The standard for inclusion in wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. These statements "I am an expert on jade. I am 100% sure that JADEITITE is not a word." have not been verified. On the other hand, thanks to User:Tagishsimon and others, numerous reliable sources have been found using the word. I think it's time for User:JadeHunter to accept that , and move on, in the interests of harmonious editing. SHEFFIELDSTEELTALK 21:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Any dictionary? How about the Glossary of Geology published by they American Geological Institute? It lists jadeitite. I agree with Sheffield. This question should be closed. Aleta Sing 21:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spacing in "e" template.

The {{e}} template is widely used in scientific articles to display scientific notation. A discussion was held here regarding the fact that the template does not include spacing of the × symbol, but no consensus appeared to be reached. There was also a discussion held on the MoS talk page which has been archived somewhere (that I couldn't track down). So the template is still in violation of the MoS; I think that either the MoS should be changed or the template. The template was fixed at one point (by adding nbsp's) and then reverted. Is there any way this issue can be resolved? Thank you.—RJH (talk) 17:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

It seems we have editors on both sides accusing the other side of being a vocal minority, with most editors apparently preferring to abstain entirely. So perhaps a honest-to-god old fashioned poll may be in order. That said, I can't help but suspect that the problem may be exacerbated by a rendering issue. To me, the version without spaces looks clearly better, but some have said it looks "squashed up" or that the × could be "mistaken for another digit". Since those claims sound completely absurd based on what I can see on my screen, I'm forced to conclude that others may, in fact, be seeing something different. So, in the interests of clarity, here's what I see: absmiddle — and here's how your browser shows the same: (2×104 vs 2 × 104). Does it look the same? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 19:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] edits towards the article: Imperial Majesty (cruise line)

I've been noticing constant vandalism towards the page Imperial Majesty (cruise line). The article is not a very big article, and there have only been a few true edits.No constructive edits have been made since September 10, 2007. Since then, all but 1 edit was either an act of vandalism or a revert. Since September, there have been 5 cases of of nonconstructive and/or vandalizing edits. Out of these, all of them mentioned that the company is a rip-off and/or a scam, and placed ripoffreport.com links to the page. I believe they may be confusing Imperial Majesty Cruise Lines with another company similarly named, and/or another travel company using Imperial Majesty Cruise Lines as their main selling product. The edits usually mention Imperial Majesty Cruise Vacations and Ramada Plaza Resorts, which I found on another website. I strongly believe this page is not affiliated with Imperial Majesty Cruise Lines. Should the page be protected or is there a way that the article could mention on the top of the page that the name of the company is being confused with another one and only constructive edits should be made? WikiEK (talk) 22:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

My response has two parts; (1) regarding the vandalism on the article, I recommend that you add it to your watchlist and fix vandalism as it occurs. So far, the damage hasn't been done frequently, and if it does then you can ask that it be protected using WP:PROT. (2) I think the two companies are related, but not technically the same company. The contact details are indeed different, but the crown logo they both use is the same. A disambiguation note at the top of Imperial Majesty (cruise line) could be considered. PKT (talk) 12:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Help with a project

I want to make an example Wikipedia page on my profile where I can upload a couple of pictures, like an example of newsgroups and the like. Is there any way I could upload these pictures without having them deleted or messed with? (The project's being presented tomorrow, so after Thursday afternoon they'll be gone anyway. Craig3410 (talk) 13:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Without wishing to suggest that you game the system, but unable to resist answering, I'd suggest you add them with a fair use rationale. That at least might keep the bots at bay, and leave you merely at the mercy of humans, who are much more lazy & less likely to spot what you're up to. Just make sure you tag the images for deletion afterwards. Whereas wikipedia should arguably not be used as a vehicle for your own ends, what you want to do seems to me like good practice / training and therefore more or less compatible with the ends of Wikipedia. Good luck. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Downloading Wikipedia

At one time (2005) you were able to download the entire Wikipedia. Is this possible now or has the size grown to large for this to be possible? 71.100.7.78 (talk) 18:57, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Database download --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Where is the right place to discuss EB webshare?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28miscellaneous%29#Encyclop.C3.A6dia_Britannica_WebShare --Historiograf (talk) 13:00, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Probably village pump proposals. Wisdom89 (T / C) 20:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Slander?

I checked a user's contribs and saw that he recently accused an admin (whos been offline for a few days) who had deleted an image that had been reported as a "blatant copyright violation" of slander because of the quoted phrase (which is standard edit summary wording). According to the user, he had permission to use the image, though obviously this had not been made clear in the image description. Is this a violation of WP:LEGAL, or should we just hope that when the issue is explained to him he will calm down? He has mentioned "slander" on his talk page and the image talk page as well. I don't want to report this to ANI unless I know for sure, the editor in question is obviously already feeling pretty touchy. Katr67 (talk) 20:34, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest that taking it to ANI would probably inflame the situation. Hopefully once the situation is explained to the editor, he will understand that no offence was intended as "blatant copyright infringement" is a standard term for speedy deletion. Hopefully he will also appreciate that we respect copyright and that there are processes for copyright holders to use to allow us to use them. I'd hope that as long as the editor is shown openly how they can resolve the issue, there situation will calm down. Of course, if that does not work, there are always other options available. Gazimoff WriteRead 20:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Unfortunately the user has received numerous warnings about his photographs, which he has taken in the course of his work but on which he failed to put the proper license tag (I think we've all run into that problem), that are of various celebrities and are also posted on the website of his employer. Also, on the "slander" one, he didn't log in until about a month after he got the deletion notice. I'm not sure that he understands that the copyright policy is to protect wikipedia and the copyright holder, and that it's nothing personal, even after he's had the policy explained to him. I think he sees the various templates and image deletions as making him out to be a liar, unfortunately. But as long as its not a legal threat, I'll just keep an eye on the situation to make sure it doesn't escalate. Katr67 (talk) 21:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps instead of leaving templated warnings on the user page, it might be worth taking the time out to leave a more customised message explaining clearly why we're so firm on image copyright and why image licensing is important to us. Explaining to the user how he can license images that he has created for Wikipedia to use would be superb, as it means that we hopefully gain images that are available under a creative commons license. More good quality free use images can only benefit us Gazimoff WriteRead 21:41, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Technically, it'd be libel, as it's written. ;) However, there's nothing libelous here: the default assumption is copyright infringement unless the person re-publishing the work can document that they have the right to do so. As the others said, just explaining this to the user is best for now. If things escalate, it can go to AN. -- Kesh (talk) 21:51, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mass in Time of War Article Haydn needs a technical.

Resolved. Open HTML Tag removed.

Adding some expanded historical background on the article. However, somehow after saving the page, it cut the rest of the article off, which I did not edit at all so that the only section showing now is the background and the music and reference section is not showing at all except when you hit the edit button. Apologies, I am usually pretty computer literate. Please fix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Proctorjohn (talk • contribs) 16:40, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I've fixed it. You might want to check that the references are still correct; I had to delete part of one. SHEFFIELDSTEELTALK 18:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Special:SpecialPages changed

Special:SpecialPages seems to have changed, it looks neater but seems there is no talk page. Why isn't there a place to discuss it? SunCreator (talk) 12:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it's now at Wikipedia talk:Special:SpecialPages. Hope this helps, Gazimoff WriteRead 16:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Protecting discussion pages

Is there anything that can be done to prevent this? We've had pretty much non-stop vandalism to this article from a variety of IPs addresses. The vandalism is likely coming from only a few select individuals, however, as it's all pretty much the same vandalism. It's just getting to be annoying to constantly revert it, and it's somewhat complicated when SineBot fills in the vandal's signature -- it effectively covers the vandal's tracks when browsing an IP's edits or scanning my watchlist when bot edits are hidden. Cheers! --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 19:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to take a look at the page and see if maybe in requires page protection, but in the meantime, if Sinebot is really causing issues you can add {{NoAutosign}} to the talk page and sinebot will stop automatically signing comments. Hope that helps. Trusilver 20:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Multilingual support fail in Windows Vista IE7

My machine is running Windows Vista. When I browse with IE7, the default browser come with Vista, it can't render some languages even after I've installed a "recommended" font. I've found such failure in bug:, got: & my:. I've asked the same question in Help Talk:Multilingual support but nobody answered yet. Any idea? --Quest for Truth (talk) 04:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Miszabot seems to have stopped working

On the talk page of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, Miszabot seems to no longer be working. Can anyone help?--Filll (talk) 13:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Seems to be working now. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 18:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] An article needing urgent attention

It looks like this article: Tanjore Diary is totally disorganised or something - I don't know which word to describe it honestly. I Googled using "tanjore OR thanjavur" and that is when I realise there's already an article about this described place (Thanjavur). It's probably a whole chunk of redundance waiting for AfD/speedy, but it'd be better if someone more experience take a look at that :S — Yurei-eggtart 06:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

It looks like the only really useful material is associated with Thanjavur, and appears in that article already. I'm pretty sure it's AfD material, but I have a terrible track record with AfD noms myself, so take that with a grain of salt. Doc Tropics 07:11, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
I put a Prod tag on the article and a notice about it on the author's talkpage, so we'll see what happens next. Doc Tropics 07:19, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Information needed on titles for people

Just wondering where the gratuitous use of titles is covered in Wikipedia Policy. Someone tried to list a bunch of people with their titles in an article that was about an government entity (not about the people). Titles were placed: Dr., Mrs., LtCol, etc. We've been eliminating these when we encounter them, but I can't point now to a specific policy that suggests this.

Thanks.Student7 (talk) 11:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd have a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)#Names. It is specifically about how to write biographies, but it looks like it would be helpful to you. Darkspots (talk) 11:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Great! That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! Student7 (talk) 11:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Monkey-baiting

An editor named Sennen goroshi keeps deleting a cited information from the monkey-baiting article. I attempted to change the article to appease him, which did not work. I discussed the matter with him on his talk page and issued him a warning to stop, but the editor continues. Would someone please revert the monkey-baiting article back, so the editor realizes that they have to stop. Thank you. Chessy999 (talk) 12:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

If you read the talk-page of the article in question, you would realise that consensus is against having that section included. The section contains a statement, which is an opinion, not a proven fact, however the section displays the statement as if it were a fact. Wikipedia deals with facts, conclusions, summaries or whatever title you wish to give the section are not facts. Put the information as an unproven opinion, in quotation form, or leave it out of the article. Or just do what everyone else does, and follow consensus. Sennen goroshi (talk) 12:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
This discussion needs to be on Talk:Monkey-baiting, not in this forum. I've read the article, and this is primarily a content dispute. You should have taken it to the talk page before having a revert war, in my opinion. Darkspots (talk) 12:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
What we need is an administrator to discipline this editor. Chessy999 (talk) 12:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Not in the slightest. You need to present your case on the talk page in a coherent way. Saying that Sennen goroshi is a vandal is hurting your case, not helping it. The best thing would be for you to find a compromise with the editor. Darkspots (talk) 13:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Followup: Reading it all over a second time, it seemed to me like the section in question was redundant and covered adequately in the "Background" section, so I made a comment on the talk page and removed the disputed section. Darkspots (talk) 13:28, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Darkspots - thanks, it was nice to have an outside opinion on the matter.

Chessy, what is needed is not an admin, what is needed it for you to follow consensus and for you to stop accusing people of vandalism when they make an edit that you don't agree with. What also would have been nice, would have been for you not to revert me, without looking at my edit, if you looked at my last edit, you would have noticed that I made an obvious effort to come to some form of compromise with you, but you just accused me of vandalism again, and reverted me. Sennen goroshi (talk) 13:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Duplication/Disambiguation - Young Actors Theatre (Islington)/Anna Scher Theatre/Young Actors Theatre (Florida)

This is really two questions - a technical one and a policy one:

1. There are two "Young Actors Theatre" pages - one (the Young Actors Theatre) refers to a theatre school in Florida and the other (the Young Actors Theatre (Islington)) refers to another theatre school in London. I've created a Young Actors Theatre (disambiguation) but it is not called up when you type "Young Actors Theatre" into the WP search box. How can I activate this facility?

2. The name of the Anna Scher Theatre was changed to the Young Actors Theatre when the founder (Anna Scher) had a mental breakdown and was forced to leave. After she had recovered, Ms Scher tried to regain control of the organisation but the trustees felt that charity was being better served by the existing management and didn't reinstate her - all in accordance with British law as regulated by the Charity Commission. The two pages really ought to be merged and the content of Anna Scher Theatre be placed in the history section of Young Actors Theatre (Islington) but this will upset Ms Scher and her supporters (presumeably the creators of the Anna Scher Theatre page), who believe that the school has ceased to exist rather than simply renamed itself. I've made a couple of small changes to the Anna Scher Theatre page but the current article still falls far short of NPOV. How should we proceed without upsetting too many people and yet not having an extra misleading page?

As yet, I have not put much on either talk page.

Thanks Paul Laetoli (talk) 09:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The redirects just have to be broken, and all will be well. I think I understand what you are doing, so I'll try it. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I've renamed one article Young Actors Theatre (Tallahassee, Florida) and broke the redirects. The disamb page works. As, for the Anna Scher Theatre problem, I am putting up a merge request. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Skua (reservoir software)

Could people have a look at the above article. Could you please look at the original version as written and the current version. Although I am trying to AGF on the articles talk page something seems off and I'd value other peoples opinions on the matter. May not require administrator intervention yet but, I'm thinking another few pairs of eyes may be very useful. Thanks. Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:07, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Because wikilinking is broken today? Skua (reservoir software). --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
And the answer is, the article was almost certainly a cut and paste from a marketing document, and someone has sensibly removed all of the rah rah poop. Doubtless some of the words that were in there were interesting and somewhat to the point if describing reservoir software generally. But in the context of the article they amount to spam. I fully support the short-back & sides given to the article. At another time, the article would be offered for speedy deletion or AfD for notability, so it should think itself lucky. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Having read more, I've put a PROD notice on it with the reason "Software released in December 2007 is unlikely to have achieved notability by May 2008" BTW, I notive you rarely use edit summaries. Please consider doing so as a courtesy to other editors. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-protection

How or who do I contact to get a semi-protection on a page? SunCreator (talk) 16:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

IIRC, WP:AIV or Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. --Tagishsimon (talk)
Thank you. SunCreator (talk) 21:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Movie review - copyright violation?

See this change. The added text is a copy of a movie review widely available on the web. (See google search results.) However, I can't find an original version with copyright information. Is this a copyright violation? Thanks, -- Tcncv (talk) 03:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

If the copyright information is unknown, it does not belong on wikipedia. I would remove the text, explain in the summary why, and note it on the talk page. Wisdom89 (T / C) 03:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted edits

Hello. I am working on something on Wikinews and I need an administrator to e-mail me and look up some deleted edits/history. I am not really familiar a lot with WP so bare with me :-) Anyone who can help or can give me advice would be greatly appreciated. My e-mail is <email removed to reduce spam; user has email enabled on WP>. DragonFire1024 (talk) 17:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] collect a user's contributions?

Is there some sort of tool/script that can collect all of a user's talk-page (or other) edits on one page or save them to one file? - Merzbow (talk) 02:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

AWB has many ways of constructing and manipulating lists of articles, and saves the lists on your own computer in a format it can later display back for various purposes. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Just a little clarification, it does let you collect a user's entire contributions and filter out or filter for pages in specific namespaces or categories or very many other things. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll take a look at it. - Merzbow (talk) 02:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I can only figure out how to make a list of all of the page names that a user edited, and filter on those. I can't see how to actually collect the text (diffs) of the edits he made. - Merzbow (talk) 03:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I somehow misinterpreted your question. AWB will only generate lists of articles and not diffs, unless you're pretty good at C# and feel like reprogramming it. Else, you're stuck to simply viewing the contribs the normal way. But keep in mind you can manually up the number of contribs to list to 5000 in the url, and of course use the browser's search function for specific article names and filter by namespace. You want another tool? Using Popups, you can rapidly view a diff merely by scrolling your cursor over it, and if you see one you think should be saved, you can open it in a new window to save its url. And if you're familiar with javascript, you could create a button to simply add the diff to a page in your userspace and save you the trouble. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] S W A CABLES

Hello everyone can you tell me if S W A (steel armored ) cables are used in your country . In the uk they are used commonly for mains supplies. In the U S A they appear to use what looks like cables inside a coppex (corrugated tube) I know its a strange question but all replies are welcome

  thanks  marty  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marty48 (talk • contribs) 10:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I suggest you take this to the reference desk. Hut 8.5 13:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Category "Retro style automobiles" list column problem

Some code/setting causes the list of connected pages to split in the letter D section, no matter how big the length difference of the colums is (also described on the category's talk page).

As the category(-page) list is generated automatically, its entries being added just by the category name added on the referring pages, the category page's edit mode shows neither the entries nor any hint telling where this bug originates, so it takes someone rather skilled to fix it. -- 80.109.76.27 (talk) 03:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not certain, but from looking at a few category pages, I believe the software puts the same number of items in each column (as far as possible). Thus this category has 10 in the first column and 11 in each of the others. Unfortunately this doesn't take account of the size of the initial-letter headers, so all the Cs cause an imbalance. Algebraist 18:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

This may be what you think when you look at the page only right now. But the list developed during the last few weeks, and the split within the letter D's section always remained between the very same two entries. Before some C addings, the first column for a while contained about at least a third less entries than each of the two others, and it was optically/graphically remarkably shorter as well. -- 80.109.76.27 (talk) 01:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 72 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help.

P.S. - Sorry for posting this here, but I didn't want to post on everyone's individual talk page (I started to, but I felt like I was spamming everyone). Useight (talk) 03:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Is there something wrong with the response time at the help desk? Or at Editor assistance? Or when using the {{Helpme}} template? And if so, why not help out with there, rather than creating yet another place/method for editors to request assistance? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 02:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Summoning help to articles

Hi, would this be the correct place to ask for help with bigger articles, where talkpages and personal messages come in short? If not, what is? Scaller (talk) 20:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

It may be helpful to try a WikiProject talk page for the appropriate topic.—RJH (talk) 21:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bot to remove red links

Does anyone know of a general bot that removes red links from pages? I would hope not to have to manually request one for each article it is needed at but I am specifically interested in removing the red links from User:Ricky81682/Missing descriptions. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I don't know of a bot that currently does such a function. However, you might want to check with the users at WP:BAG. Wisdom89 (T / C) 23:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Or try Wikipedia:Bot requests --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
How would the bot determine what is a good red link - one that points to a subject that should have an article - versus bad red links - ones that point to subjects that should not have an article? Or are you proposing, for example, to do away with Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than a year? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 01:01, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
No, I'm not asking for a crazy bot to be doing that. I'm asking for a bot to do on that on a particular article I'm asking about. That list is of images missing a description (usually missing a license and source) and so, I'd like to manage it without having to do it by hand. If there's a bot in place where someone could request it being done (by asking the operator), that's all I wanted to know. If not, I'll request it. Also, it could be possible for the bot to take care of the request list by looking for blue links (again, it all depends on the intelligence of the people asking and the bot operator). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, reading too fast. So I'll try to be more constructive: I don't know, off-hand, of any bot that removes entries that link to non-existent pages, from a list. (I think that's what you want; the alternative is to remove the paired square brackets, turning the red link into black text.) WP:BOTREQ seems the right place; existing bot owners do check there for requests that they can fulfill. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 02:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Uploading pictures from Flickr

I can write articles but I have never sussed out a simple way to upload pics for articles without a bot removing them for unfair usage or whatever. I want to start an article on the Villa Garzoni in Tuscany and have found some fab pictures on Flickr, and they say 'this image is public' so I assume I can use them. Can anyone recommend a simple and direct way of doing this please? It will be a great article in my series on villas in Tuscany]]. See Villa Cetinale for my last effort (someone helped me with the pictures for this, by the way, before you ask). Thanks from the horse Hinnibilis (talk) 18:30, 7 May 2008 (UTC)


I strongly recommend (a) getting an account at Wikimedia Commons, and then (b) using this tool for uploads to the Commons. As long as the Flickr pictures are public domain - and that's different from "public" - "public" can mean simply "anyone can look at this", or some sort of Creative Commons license, I think they can be uploaded the Commons (and everything there, assuming they meet Commons rules, can be used in Wikipedia, of course). You might read this blog posting about how pictures on Flickr can be licensed, and look at this Flickr group, which is about moving pictures to Wikimedia Commons. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thank you very much Mr Broughton :-) I shall give it a try (though sounds a bit difficile). Hinnibilis (talk) 18:57, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I am trying to talk to an editor who keeps removing my revisions without proof

but whenever I click on the IP address it says he/she is an anonymous user. How can I contact the editor and express my side of the story? Please advise.

Aaronweinhaus (talk) 01:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Aaron Weinhaus

Talk to them here: User talk:76.100.210.208 or at Talk:Masiela Lusha. Or both. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
This may be a project for Wikipedia:Third opinion, where experienced editors try to informally resolve disputes between two editors. --Kevin Murray (talk) 19:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
  • after looking into this Aaron has a COI issue at that article, but other editors are acting strangely as well. All seems well in the end and the article looks about as good as it can for now. --Kevin Murray (talk) 23:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sponsors on the side?

--Ajw18 (talk) 04:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello, For some reason, today advertisments appeared on the side of the page of wikipedia and I can not get these sponsor adds to dissappear. Recently, I belief my computer was infected with spyware but this isnt happening on any other websites. If anyone has any idea what I'm talking about or can help me, please let me know.

Thank you, Ajw18

Seems like something that is a problem with your computer; I haven't seen anything of the sort all day. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry this reply is coming a few days after your question; maybe this has been resolved. Check the URL at the top of your screen to make sure you're really at Wikipedia, and not some other site that is showing you Wikipedia via Frames. Your browser can also display the page's HTML source code which may give you a clue as to where these ads are coming from. If you still have this problem, let us know which browser you are using, and what's happening with your spyware cleanup. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 15:09, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] where do I discuss problems with images used by the software (not articles)?

The "Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia" logo used on WP:EN has weird anti-aliasing (or weird a weird matte). Some other Wikis have a nicer image - the German wiki is darker but has no fringing. Where can I discuss this, and who would change it? Thanks. Dan Beale-Cocks 15:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

If you mean the main en.wikipedia logo in the upper-left corner of every page, that's a broad topic that should probably be discussed at village pumps... perhaps the proposals page (WP:VPR). The reason it has weird anti-aliasing is because it's superimposed in a way that prevents any other image from being placed on top of it via DIV code on a wiki page. I'm not sure if there's any way of fixing that, short of removing that preventative measure. But you could start a discussion on it and see if anyone comes up with an idea. Equazcion •✗/C • 15:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
You're right though, the German version of the logo does look a lot nicer (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hauptseite). You should bring this up at VPR, I'd be interested to see what people think. . Equazcion •✗/C • 15:24, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Where is the VfD history for a deleted page?

Hi. I have had a page deleted, and I can't find where to go for the discussion about its deletion. I suppose it's my fault for not logging in every day and looking at every page I have ever created. :-) Anyway, it was "Working family", giving a history and definition of a term used often during the 2007 Australian federal election, and since. So, where do I go to see the discussion about its demise? With thanks, - Peter Ellis - Talk 07:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

There was no deletion discussion for that page; it was deleted under the speedy deletion criterion A7, non-notability. The deletion was carried out by Orderinchaos (talk · contribs), so he'd be the one to ask about it. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. But, how do you (meaning, I) discover this for myself? Where are the breadcrumbs? - Peter Ellis - Talk 12:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
If you click on the red link, it should show a box stating that you are recreating a deleted page, along with the time stamp it was deleted, the admin who deleted it, and the reason he/she gave for the deletion. Parsecboy (talk) 12:53, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I don't know when that functionality came into existence, but I can't recall seeing it before. - Peter Ellis - Talk 22:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
It was always available under Special:Log/delete, but only sometime in the past year did it start being auto-displayed when trying to create a previously deleted page. Someguy1221 (talk) 23:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] An unfortunate page move

Someone moved the orders of magnitude page 1 E+4 m to 1 myriametre, and apart from probably being not a very good idea in the first case since myriametre is an obsolete term and there exists a uniform scheme already for these articles, the move also caused a large number of double redirects which the editor who effected this move didn't deal with. Now, I'm not an inexperienced editor, however, I was a bit unsure how to deal with this situation as it somehow demands admin intervention, yet at the same time I didn't quite feel that WP:AN was the right forum to address this situation (or perhaps it was?). Hopefully, I can get both an answer to what would be the best avenue of addressing such an issue as well as qualified assistance in rectifying the present unfortunate state. I did post a heads-up on the article's talk page, but then I realized that the issue was a little more urgent than that. __meco (talk) 16:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

You should be able to just move it back over the redirect. If it doesn't work for some reason, list it at Wikipedia:Requested moves. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I thought I couldn't do that since the target already existed, but apparently it worked. __meco (talk) 17:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
That's only the case when the targeted redirect has an edit history of more than one edit (i.e., the edit that created the redirect as part of the move). If it's been edited more than that (to fix a double redirect, for example), then an admin has to delete the page first. Parsecboy (talk) 23:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Can someone check out MotiveQuest?

User by the same name created the article. I'm currently unable to check the sources given by the article as I'm behind a corporate firewall, but fear it may be an advertisement article with fluff sources. 206.126.163.20 (talk) 01:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I checked the article in question, and I agree that it reads like an advertisement. I placed a WP:COI tag on the article as well. With regards to notability, there is a wall street journal article, so it may meet those requirements. I'll keep an eye on it. Wisdom89 (T / C) 02:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Retrieved"

Hello guys, I'm a new Wikipedian, and I'm just wondering how on pages it says in the reference/citation area e.g. "Retrieved on 10-5-2007" for example.

I looked into the source of the page but it doesn't say anywhere "Retrieved on XXX" - how do I get this to appear on one of my pages?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtn Goat (talk • contribs) 07:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The citation area draws from content placed between <ref></ref> tags elsewhere in the article (see WP:CITE for more info). The "retrieved on" portion comes from elements in the citation templates, which are placed between such tags. Someguy1221 (talk) 10:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
In some more detail, if I cite a website as a reference, I will add to the text of the reference "Retrieved on 10-5-2007", meaning, I retrieved the webpage I'm using as a reference on the 10-5-07. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] myspace shown - privacy issue

Article Hillary Rodham Clinton is undergoing a FA nomination and someone exposed my personal myspace page. I want my myspace link deleted and all pages showing it unviewable. I want some privacy and feel it had been invaded. Although the myspace link was on my user page I added it a long time ago and had meant to take it off but had forgotten about it. I don't want messages from people I don't know (I've already gotten some) and I don't want people snooping around. The myspace link is on the Hillary nomination pages and on a talk page the admin put it in. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 21:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

If you do not want your "privacy" invaded, I suggest you should not have a myspace web page.
If you want links to your page removed from talk pages & the FAC page, I suggest you remove them yourself. There is no chance whatsoever of the historical revisions of the page being deleted merely because you have a problem with a link to your page.
If you do not want your "privacy" invaded, that I suggest you should not have used your user page to promote your myspace page.
Given that you appear to have been a major cause of your current predicament, I should not if I was you expect much sympathy from readers of this page. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
And now that I've read the page in question, I have to doubt whether your request is in good faith. It does rather look as if you have been squarely busted for POV issues relating to Hilary and Obama. You get precisely & substantially less than zero sympathy for seeking to treat your fellow wikipedians as fools, and trying to game the FAC and VP-Assistance pages as you appear to me to be doing. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Here's an easy fix: make your myspace page private. Parsecboy (talk) 04:28, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help with Wikimarkup tables

I request help with making tables, which I feel is very cumbersome using pipes and braces of Wikipedia markup. Can't I somehow use a more WYSIWYG type table editor, like we do using MS word and MS Powerpoint? If such an editor or method is possible, please tell me how to get it and use it. Thanks. Cygnus_hansa (talk) 06:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Appropriate user sub-pages or not?

I have come across the following types of pages people have created:

1) list of favourite songs "at the current moment", such as User:Ya Boi Krakerz/Music (which has been updated 29 times in the past 5 days), and seems to be something you'd expect to find on personal webspace.

2) also quite a few people have "guestbooks" or "autograph books", which indeed don't seem to serve any purpose other than social networking. Rapido (talk) 15:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Is this a disk space issue? Otherwise I'm not clear why this is a problem, especially when user talk pages already serve (somewhat) the purpose of social networking.—RJH (talk) 17:26, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
One guideline that probably applies is WP:NOT#WEBHOST - we're not here to provide web space to users. Now, a certain amount of social networking is okay, particularly if it helps build a community of Wikipedia editors. However, if people are only networking and aren't building articles, then clearly the pages in question aren't helping Wikipedia. A list of favourite songs would seem to fall into the "unhelpful" category, to me at least. The best course of action is to discuss it with the editor in question, and if they are uninterested in discussion, you can always start one at WP:MFD. SHEFFIELDSTEELTALK 17:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
You might want to encourage him to instead create a list at User:Phaedriel/Soundtrack of Wikipedians, which is still trivial but at least interactive with the community. Otherwise, if you're really bothered by users trying to create a poor man's myspace, drop them a link to WP:NOTMYSPACE, start an MFD, and/or watch the page where their RFA would be so you won't miss the chance to oppose for not understanding the point of the site. - BanyanTree 03:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome Page

Hi!

I've only just registered and as soon as i DID, i got an extremely colourful, full-of-information page about what i can do on wikipedia as a new user etc...

i was reading it, then logged out and when i logged back in a bit later...it was gone.

it was not the same as the Wiki:Getting Started page or the Wiki:Contents page but DIFFERENT - i found it WAY more useful.

PLEASE...someone tell me where i can get to it again (it is not among my i-net history for some reason).

Thank you!

A.Aryadne (talk) 14:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

ps. What i mean is...it would be cool if THAT immediately-after-registration page could be made as a default page for EVERY time you log in (or at least if the user chooses it to be so...as i would...during my early Wiki carreer anyway!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aryadne (talk • contribs) 14:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

The page you see immediately after registering is MediaWiki:Welcomecreation. If you want to see that immediately after logging in, bookmark http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin&returnto=MediaWiki:Welcomecreation. Algebraist 14:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Just what I was looking for! A. Aryadne (talk) 15:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Per your question on my talk, these pages aren't easy to find, especially for new users. I went to Special:AllMessages and searched for 'welcome'. Algebraist 15:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I need someone to adopt me and create a wiki page with my info

see my profile and page request. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tracer2 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Replied on user's talk page & tagged his page with adoptme. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] please adopt me and post my request

see my profile with my request any quetions email. Thanks.Tracer2 01:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Replied on user's talk page & tagged his page with adoptme. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Leaving Wikipedia

In the past, I have seen users who have had their accounts deleted. I'd like to do that. Can anyone tell me how to have my account deleted? I've leaving wikipedia and never coming back.--Eva bd 16:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

It is impossible to delete accounts by any means other than developers directly modifying the database, which I believe has never happened. It is possible, however, to delete your userpage and talk page, to change your username (so your contributions are no longer in your original name), and (if you make the effort) to remove all references to your old username. How much of this you want to do is up to you, of course. See WP:VANISH for more information. Algebraist 18:09, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
^Correct, see Wikipedia:Account_deletion#Deleting_your_account. Equazcion •✗/C • 18:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fancy something different?

Hi everybody, I've just written an article called Introduction to genetics, which tries to explain the important concepts in DNA, genes and genetics in an absolutely non-technical way. I was wondering if any people with no background in science would have time to go through this article and find the places where it isn't quite clear enough or fails to explain things properly. Comments on its talkpage please. (Barnstars are available to particularly thorough and critical reviewers) Tim Vickers (talk) 18:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Need help with editing my userpage-userboxes

I need help editing my userpage. I currently added a whole lot of userboxes to the first two sections of my userpage. Now, it looks all disorganized. Please help clean it up a bit, yet keep everything still on the page plz. Maybe even add some text, to go along with it too. I don't spend a whole lot of time on Wikipedia, and currently my job is requiring me to work a lot more hours.User:Byankno1 Chris Batchelor(Byankno1) 01:59, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] fair use: use of a logo for critical purposes

This is a question mostly for the legal department, or anyone with such knowledge.

The texts dealing with the fair use rational give more detail regarding the specific use of material in Wikipedia for educational purposes. I'm currently launching a website with an orientation that's specifically critical, and not educational per se(bloodmoneyproject.com).

I'm considering using some logos from wikipedia articles on companies for this purpose, and I was looking for guidelines for a more critical use of logos. I know the general fair use law allows using material for critical purposes, but I'm not sure how this applies to logos.

could wikipedia's "Fair use rational" be altered from:

  1. low resolution image
  2. no non-copyright version available, by definition
  3. the logo is only being used for informational purposes;
  4. its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because it is the primary means of identifying the subject of this article.


to something along the lines of:

1. low resolution image

  2. no non-copyright version available, by definition
  3. the logo is only being used for critical purposes;
  4. its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because it is the primary means of identifying the subject of this article.

?

thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeav (talk • contribs) 12:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Restrictions such as this are made to comply with the law, and are not arbitrarily chosen or changeable. See: Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Legal issues --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 13:34, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia's fair use rational is something that fits Wikipedia's specific needs (as a site claiming neutrality, educationl etc). I'm asking hypothetically what would be a fair-use-rational for using a logo in a strictly critical context? is it possible to use a logo inside a critical text? when the guidelines say that the text next to a logo has to be neutral/informational, is that only a Wikipedia policy, or does the law stipulate in any case that you can't associate a logo with criticism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeav (talk • contribs) 00:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Non-scientists needed to evaluate readability

We have substantially revised Introduction_to_genetics to make it easier to understand and we need people who do not already know a lot about biology and genetics to tell us whether we have succeeded.

Please read it and tell us if it is easy or difficult to read, in Talk:Introduction_to_genetics#Reviews_and_comments.

For comparison, this is the old version, before we started editing it.

Under the guideline Wikipedia:Make technical articles accessible, this should be easy for the general public to understand.

Your comments would help us a lot and we would really appreciate it. Thanks. Nbauman (talk) 14:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I need a bit of help with formatting.

It's kind of hard to explain what I'm trying to do but... I'm trying to have it so that when you visit a page (my userpage, specifically) it will be different every time, like there will be random options for words.... I'm not sure how to achieve this.... I've seen on other wikia's where they have template:verb or template:noun or something like that, and they have it all formatted, and I would just steal the formatting from those pages but pretty much all other wikias are blocked on this computer :( anyways does anyone know how to make this work? let me know at my talk page please. -Guitarplayer001 —Preceding comment was added at 22:06, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help with Bill O'Reilly image

Another editor has added a good new image of Bill O'Reilly but is having trouble with the formatitng: the wiki markup keeps showing up on the page. I would fix it but I don't know enough about it myself. --21st Century Fox (talk) 13:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You mean Bill O'Reilly (commentator). I've fixed the formatting, but the image may have to be removed as it is probably copyrighted. Algebraist 14:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfC topic area for Taser/Taser controversy merge

What is the most appropriate RfC topic area for a suggested merge of Taser and Taser controversy? The most recent archived discussion is Talk:Taser#Suggested merge with Taser controversy again. Thanks. Flatscan (talk) 01:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Automatic Wikilink

Is there a bot or tool that will automatically wikilink all or some words which have a wiki article? In the Blue Note Records discography, I want to link up all the names and albums which have articles here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cosprings (talk • contribs)

I'm pretty sure there is no bot that does that, for various programming and practical reasons. Gary King (talk) 04:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I ran a quick script but a lot of the artists and albums don't exist, so it would make more sense to go through the list manually and linking those that you know exist, unless you want a page full of red links. Gary King (talk) 04:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
There is really no way for a bot to do this accurately, as they cannot comprehend context. There is a tool somewhere which helps with this. I cannot locate it at the moment. - Rjd0060 (talk) 00:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Here's the main problem, which is overlinking. This sentence here is linked to its full potential, so I can demonstrate how bad overlinking is. Soxred93 (u t) 02:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
That's the bluest sentence I've ever seen. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 11:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

It might also be reasonable to apply a script to turn the lists into sortable tables. The structure of each line is regular enough to be able to apply column breaks accurately. Sadly I'm an analyst, not a programmer ;) --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

You might want to take a look at User:Nickj/Can We Link It. Bovlb (talk) 16:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Audio prob.

Can somebody listen/watch this video clip for me please? It was added to the Alex O'Loughlin article as a source for his year of birth but since I'm hearing impaired there's not really anyway I can be 100% sure about what is on there if I watch it myself. Thanks. --ImmortalGoddezz (t/c) 19:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow. That video is grueling... The video was made in '08, and he says he's "31-32". I don't actually hear him mention a year, but I could be wrong. According to this it's 1976, so I'd say it's right. Matriak (talk) 04:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! There's really not any one good or reputable source for his year of birth so I guess it's still up in the air. Again, thank you for helping me out, it's very appreciated. --ImmortalGoddezz (t/c) 18:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Error on Benjamin Franklin High School (New Orleans, Louisiana) when clicking on citations

It's late and I think I'm losing my mind here. After I made this edit, the bottom of the page disappears whenever I click on a reference link in the second column. It was perfectly fine before. I keep looking to see if I made a mistake with the citations, but I can't find any. Any help would be greatly appreciated. --Jh12 (talk) 08:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not experiencing any such problem. I've fixed the only change you made that looks like it could cause trouble (you removed a <div> but not the corresponding </div>). What browser and operating system are you using? Algebraist 11:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm using Firefox 2.0.0.14 with Windows XP Pro (SP2). On a computer with Firefox 2.0.0.13 & Windows 2000 (SP4), nothing's wrong. A browser restart didn't work so I'll try again after restarting the computer. Thanks for checking --Jh12 (talk) 18:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
After randomly updating a reference, it's fine again. Though when I click on the older edit, it still gives me the strange error. Might be a random browser issue. I'll purge my browser cache and do a total restart. Either way, everything's working again so thanks a bunch! --Jh12 (talk) 18:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Approved merger at a standstill

Although the merger of Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (abbreviations) and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (abbreviations) has been approved since April, nothing has happened yet due to what looks like technical difficulties. Could some one look at it? Regards, Waltham, The Duke of 12:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Per the merge discussion you linked (as opposed to the direction of the merger tags), I merged Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (abbreviations) (after copyediting it) into Wikipedia:Manual of Style (abbreviations). All double redirects have been fixed, and an ambox has been left at the top of Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (abbreviations), informing of the merge, the discussion leading to it and directing people to the existence of the merged page's talk page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I am not sure the tags were wrong. The discussion was clearly in favour of merging the MOS page into the naming-conventions one. I do thank you very much for your trouble, and I believe that I am partly to blame for not giving you more specific instructions, but could you please finish the job according to consensus? The current situation is bound to annoy some people. Waltham, The Duke of 02:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
All right, perhaps not so clearly, but only the last two "merge"s were in favour of the other title. And the naming conventions trump the Manual of Style, so it should be policy. Waltham, The Duke of 02:28, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm. Reading over the discussion again, I even saw your comment as endorsing the direction I chose. You had said "...making the Manual of Style more compact is a necessity", implying that the manual of style page should be the end result. The naming conventions page by the way was listed as a {{Wikipedia subcat guideline}} (not policy). My question is, how are you going to deal with the fact that all MoS pages are names as MoS pages when this one won't be? I was actually thinking that the name should include "(abbreviations and acronyms)" based on the content as opposed to "(abbreviations)" so maybe you can move it to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (abbreviations and acronyms) which would avoid any move conflict (once I reverse the merger) between the merged page with its own edit history and the new. In any event, it was about as clear as mud:-). I don't have time right now to do it but I'll get to it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh, dear; it's been a while since the last time I appreciated the complexity of on-line communications. :-D In this case, my comment was more of the type "we want fewer Manual-of-Style pages, in order to reduce the sprawl". To be honest, there are several people more involved in this issue than I was; before you do anything further, another discussion might be in order. I'll make the arrangements. Waltham, The Duke of 16:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay. Just say the word and I'll revert and merge the other way. It might be better to drop a message on my talk. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Will do, thanks. Waltham, The Duke of 04:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Counting reversions

I think a friend showed me a tool that counts number of times an editor has been reverted. I have lost it now. Does it exist? Can anyone help me? Thanks.--Filll (talk | wpc) 17:19, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Djshryack and 71.28.91.243 - Same or different.

Hi. Can someone out there check to see if user Djshryack (talk · contribs) is the same as or different from anonymous user 71.28.91.243 (talk)? I'm not asserting any wrong doing. Just interested. Thanks, -- Tcncv (talk) 00:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The only certain method requires checkuser permission, which is not going to be used for your curiosity. Why not just ask? Algebraist 09:32, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I just reviewed the checkuser policy and see that this doesn't qualify. My interest involved a user involved in a neutrality dispute, but the issues involved are volatile enough that I don't need to stir the pot by questioning their identity. -- Tcncv (talk) 00:01, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Issue with documents as images

Resolved.

A user (User:Mifren) has uploaded several images of an Australian government document to a page. The page is Marble Hill, South Australia. The images are [[Image:Heads 1.jpg]], [[Image:Heads 2.jpg]], [[Image:Heads 3.jpg]], [[Image:Heads 4.jpg]] and [[Image:Heads 5.jpg]]. I deleted the images from the page as inappropriate use of images (this diff), but I'm not sure about the images themselves. Are these copyvios and should they therefore be deleted? Or are they covered by some document copyright I'm not aware of? Cheers, --Yeti Hunter (talk) 10:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

They'be been tagged as GFDL documents, but are almost certainly Ozzie Crown Copyright, and should either be retagged or more likely deleted. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
They have been deleted. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:03, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Preserving a translated page, finding equivalent to a template here

Hello! I am asking for help concerning a translated and allegedly protected page because of its translаtion(according to a template from Wikipedia).

The template is this one and the content is roughly: "This page is partially or thoroughly a translation of the ... in Wikipedia in ... /*language*/. The original article as well as this translation is protected by the free documentation licence of GNU" and so forth. I could not find the equivalent here, but I still hope that such one exists.

The article which I translated from Belarussian into Bulgarian is: this. The original article is here. In the Belarussian Wikipedia no one expresses any doubt concerning the relevance of the article, whereas on the 10th minute after I created it in the Bulgarian some user proposed its deletion allegedly "because of low importance/relevance". I beg the responsible persons, if they find some analogon to the template here, to intervene, so that the translations from one language to another really become protected as written in the template and not purely formally and permitting to some people such impertinent deletion attempts.

I firmly believe that the relevance of an article is unique for Wikipedia in all languages, provided that in one Wikipedia it is admitted to be so. And I look forward to your assistance and intervention in defending the translation against the peril of being devoured bz the obscurantism. Buecherwurm (talk) 19:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Perceptions of the notability of an article may vary from language to language; the decision of one community cannot be forced on another. You need to make your arguments for the translated article in the Bulgarian wikipedia. There is little or not help can be given from the English wikipedia, even did we have a sufficient grasp of Bulgarian to be able to argue a case. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
I am grateful for you expounding the possible discrepancy in judging what is notable in different Wikipedia. Thence my only hope is someone to find here the proper equivalent of the template stating that "translation is protected according to GNU licence" and to explain to me in what manner is it protected and whether protected concerns deletion. The possibility of trying to persuade the community of the bg. Wikipedia proved to be futile, since they are holding a vote on deleting the Belarus-related article based on Bulgarian stance on that and the result is "bellum omnium contra unum". Accordingly I am changing the caption. Buecherwurm (talk) 21:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Wikiproject Fancruft

Hello. After noticing alarming amounts of fancruft on Wikipedia, I decided to create Wikipedia:Wikiproject Fancruft, An effort to deal with fancruft and in-universe writing. I would appreciate assistance. Thanks. T.Neo (talk contribs review me ) 09:40, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The suggested process for creating new WikiProjects is going through Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. There you can learn if a sector is already covered by another project, if your project would be better off as a task force, and if there are other editors interested in joining. Waltham, The Duke of 04:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
I thought that cruftiness was not a valid criteria for deletion? Wikipedia:Fancruft—RJH (talk) 20:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] interwiki

Hi! I would like to edit Film, but it is semi-protected. I have made a request on the talk page to add link to the .fr FA and the .sv GA, but I am afraid there is nobody on this talk page... Could somebody please do it for me? Thanks a lot! Dodoïste (talk) 12:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Film has already been "interwiki'd" to the French and Swedish versions. Have I misunderstood your request? PKT (talk) 14:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes. But it is because of my horrible english: I am french (and contributing to WP.fr, as you can see on my user page).
This is about the quality of the articles in the interwiki. The french article film (Cinéma in french) is a "featured article" as you call them. We call them "article de qualité". So I ask you to add {{Link FA|fr}} in the article film. The swedish version is a "good article". Yours sincerly, Dodoïste (talk) 15:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Y Done Mon plaisir. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks a lot ;) The swedish article is a good article too. But not FA, only good article, as film was before (as written in film's talk page). Thank you for help! Dodoïste (talk) 16:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
GAs are fine, but we only highlight interwikis if the article is of FA-quality. Not 100% sure why, but I'd imagine it'd be more difficult to keep track of everything. *shrug* EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:33, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Lack of GA implementation is explained here. I don't agree with the conclusion reached, but there you go. I take it we're shrugging because of the French interest in this matter? *shrug* --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
The only French matter here is the French FA, which has already been addressed. Personally, I find that discussion to be fairly solid; we don't visibly tag our GA articles, just our FA ones, and it does strike me as odd to place a greater emphasis on "someone else's" GAs than "our own". A site-wide shift in attitude would be more productive here than a recreated template. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok. While most of others wikipedias highlight GAs, I thought you would do the same. I know that it is changing often, so I understant you choice to no highlight theses. Thanks again for help ;) Dodoïste (talk) 01:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Invalid image tagging

I'm sure there must be a noticeboard for this, but I couldn't find it, so I apologize if this is the wrong place. Image:NASAemblem.JPG is listed as "used only for wikipedia articles", which is clearly an improper license, but I don't know what steps to take to resolve this. Could somebody please edify me? Thank you. Corvus cornixtalk 23:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

It appears to pass fair use, so you could change it to that. Or wait for the article to get deleted and IfD it as useless. Algebraist 23:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Accused of vandalism

I had an edit reverted for 'vandalism', which it wasn't, [1]is there someway to report the person ? Gazh (talk) 20:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Berwick-upon-Tweed&diff=216249767&oldid=216249118/
Don't worry about it. The user might have been using an automated tool to revert your edit, as a result of which the edit summary says "identified as vandalism" when in fact the user meant something else. (Remember that users can't go back and modify their edit summary if they realize they make a mistake, except by undoing and redoing.) What you might want to do is explain your edits either on the article talk page, or if you have already done so there, then also on the talk page of the user who reverted your edits. If they really believe you are vandalizing the article, then the next step is informal dispute resolution. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 02:03, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, the first step is to point out the edit to the reverting user and ask why they thought it was vandalism. In my experience, in 9 out of ten cases, the reverting user, when given the chance, will either offer a credible (even if mistaken) explanation, which may the foundation of a wording or clarification that improves the article, or apologize and revert themselves. - BanyanTree 04:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, it's always a good idea to leave an edit summary so that other editors know why you did what you did. To a vandal patroller, an unexplained removal of text will almost always seem to be vandalism. (Indeed, I would say a majority of vandalism is unexplained removal of content.) Thingg⊕⊗ 04:52, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism?

A series of newly-registered users and IP addresses have been attempting to delete the picture Image:Long-haired-cat-hairball.jpg from Bezoar ever since it was added to the page in February, at first as being "irrelevant" and more recently as an unexplained "copyvio" (the image is tagged as being self-released into the public domain.) I noticed that many of the users are suspected sockpuppets of General Tojo, suggesting that this is subtle vandalism by the sockpuppeteer in question - probably to attack administrator Chris 73 who added the picture to the article, since many of the sockpuppet names seem inspired by his.

Is there any action that should be taken against this? WP:AIV doesn't seem appropriate, but would the administrator's noticeboard be? I don't want to needlessly escalate an issue that is manageable, if annoying, and may already be being dealt with to the best of the administrators' ability (so far as keeping General Tojo out of Wikipedia is concerned.) -Seventh Holy Scripture (talk) 14:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wanted Subject's Name Redirects and incorrectly links to wrong subject.

At issue Roy Nelson. There is Roy Nelson the cartoonist and Roy Nelson the MMA fighter.

Unfortunately all of the links in every MMA category using Roy Nelson is redirected here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Nelson

I am not sure what to do? Would it help to specifiy the cartoonists name as: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Nelson(cartoonist)?

MPA 23:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't seem to have an article on the fighter Roy Nelson yet. I've changed all the relevant links to point to Roy Nelson (martial artist), so that's the place to create the article if you intend to do so. Feel free to change all those links if there's a better title (Roy Nelson (fighter), maybe), but it's probably a good idea if they all point at the same place. Algebraist 00:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] IP blocked on Simple English Wikipedia

I've just unified my accounts and wanted to log into the Simple English Wikipedia (where I don't yet have an account) but I got this message:

"Account creation from this IP address (89.243.111.9) has been blocked by Creol.

The reason given by Creol is Abusing multiple accounts: Benniguy

Return to Main Page."

I'm not sure who Benniguy is and have only ever logged in as It Is Me Here and I couldn't post anything on simple:User Talk:Creol as I'm banned from the Simple English Wikipedia. Please help! It Is Me Here (talk) 13:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I asked Creol for help: [6]. It seems like you're probably caught by an autoblock over there. Hope this helps, Darkspots (talk) 13:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The entire range has been soft-blocked due to mass disruption and puppettry. Benniguy is User:Iamandrewrice (see his unblock request on WP:AN for more details). I have temporarily unblocked it so the account can be created. Due to the literally hundreds of sock, the soft-block will have to be reinstated shortly though. Creol (talk) 14:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
OK, thanks guys! It Is Me Here (talk) 14:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Graphics help

I'm looking to have a few "ranked" awards for WikiProject Christianity established, maybe something along the lines of those at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Awards, but using instead of the chevrons they use a similar graphic showing pairs of wings, as number of wings is one of the ways in differentiating between types of angels and I'm personally unable to come up with any better ideas. If anyone could come up with a few reasonably appealing graphics for use for such awards, I would be greatly appreciative. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 21:21, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Need help with infobox

Hello, I'm working on redeveloping the article Glass-Steagall Act, and I've discovered that Template: Infobox U.S. legislation requires certain information that isn't available on the act (mostly the legislative history portion, especially when it passed each body and so forth). I've tried to edit the infobox but I'm not very good at it (I keep messing things up). Can someone make the legislative history section on this infobox an optional display? You can see my problem here User:Poroubalous/Sandbox. Thanks! poroubalous (talk) 23:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)