Line 568: | Line 568: | ||
So, I can't find instructions on how to add a comment or question to an article discussion. I will keep looking, but if there is a link you could give me, thank you very much. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Mtwd|Mtwd]] ([[User talk:Mtwd|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Mtwd|contribs]]) 21:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
So, I can't find instructions on how to add a comment or question to an article discussion. I will keep looking, but if there is a link you could give me, thank you very much. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Mtwd|Mtwd]] ([[User talk:Mtwd|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Mtwd|contribs]]) 21:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
: |
:I formatted your comment for you, see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/New_Testament_as_political_satire&diff=338622699&oldid=338619324 this edit]. I have to say though that [[WP:ILIKEIT|"It's brilliant"]] isn't going to hold much sway in a deletion discussion. You need to focus on the reasons why the article has been sent for discussion, which in this case appears to be because it is [[WP:OR|orginal research]]. – [[User:Ukexpat|ukexpat]] ([[User talk:Ukexpat|talk]]) 21:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC) |
||
== eminem == |
== eminem == |
||
Revision as of 21:27, 18 January 2010
- For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
- Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
- Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
- For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
- New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners.
January 15
renaming a title
The wiki entry title for Wills Eye Hospital is incorrect. The name was changed recently to Wills Eye Institute. I'm having difficulty making the change.
roger baronePhotosfromphilly (talk) 00:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'm afraid your article [1] had much bigger problems than the name. It was an advertisement clearly written by the subject against Wikipedia rules such as Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, so I redirected Wills Eye Hospital to the old target Thomas Jefferson University. See Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
.mw-tag-markers
In common.css, there is a .mw-tag-markers that styles tags. I put that in my common.css on my wiki and it is not getting styled like wikipedia's styleing. How do I get it styled? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Btilm (talk • contribs) 01:13, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- This page is for help with the English Wikipedia. You want mw:Project:Support desk. Algebraist 13:57, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
crew listing of battleships during second world war
to who it may concern i have been looking for a relitive who was on a battleship during WW2,what i get is listing of battleships nothing of the crew!this making it rough on trying to find him on weather he survied or was kia.the familey historin has passed on without putting any thing down on paper or recording it voice recorder.please help thank you 01:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Birdmanmacaw1 (talk • contribs)
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and complete crew listings of ships are beyond our scope.
Have you tried the Humanities section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: . I hope this helps. They will have to know at least the name of the person to search for information. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- For more details please visit WP:NOT. South Bay (talk) 04:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I changed an article in poor condition, but something is wrong.
I am new to editing Wikipedia articles, but I have no reason to make games of it. I only change for what I truely know, and recently I've changed an article of the novel Betrayed by P.C. Cast and Kristin Cast. I read the headline above the sypnosis of the book and it stated that it needed an editor to change how it was written, tone-wise. Unfortunately, the article was in way worse condition than that, as such it did not describe the novel in a correct mannor. I have read this book many times, including all of the others in the House of Night series. If I ever edit anything else having to do with this series, I am completely informed of what these novels have to do with. Anyways, I expanded and edited the article. Feeling proud of myself for not being someone who changed articles on Wikipedia for the worse, I clicked "Save Page". Something went wrong. Everything is elongated, even though I'd meant it to be seen like this:
Zoey Redbird, a 16-year-old third former("freshman") vampyre fledgling, had succeeded in settling herself in the Tulsa House of Night, or the vampyre finnishing school. She accepts the elemental gifts her Goddess of Night personified, Nyx, had given her, and she earned a new tattoo going from her neck down to her back. Zoey finally feels like she belongs - with her friends: Damien Maslin,Shaunee Cole,Erin Bates(the two before mentioned stated to be "Twins") and her roommate and best friend Stevie Rae Johnson, beside her. She also has two boyfriends, Erik Night, a fifth-former("junior")vampyre fledgling, and Heath Luck, her human ex-boyfriend with whom she has Imprinted.
Soon after, killings of human teenagers take place, with all evidence pointing to the House of Night. As humans associated with Zoey from her unMarked passed life become endangered, it comes to light that her amazing powers threaten those close to her. In her most urgent time of need, her best friend Stevie Rae rejects the Change from human to vampyre and dies in her arms. Shaken by this, she is shoked to find that Heath is the next of the string of kidnapped, soon to be killings of human teens. Using her Imprint with him to track down where exactly he is, she rides on horseback( with the help of her equestrian studies teacher Professor Lenobia) to where she finds him to be in an old abandoned depot on the edge of town. Using the directions she got from Heath, she finds old Prohibition era tunnels underground. She finds Heath and a big surpise - Stevie Rae is alive. But she isn't how she used to be. She's lost most of her humanity and is the true stereotype of vampyres - red eyed,cruel,and blood thirsty. There were others like her, others that died and undied. She recalls seeing two of them along a wall of her school, believing them to be ghosts. She is forced to kill one of them with her affinity, or connection with fire trying to attack Heath, as they find human blood enticing. Zoey still finds a bit of the old Stevie Rae inside her, the Okie twanged country music and Roper jeans lover that she was, and obviously trusting Zoey, she says that Neferet (the vampyre High Pristess of her school, and her mentor as well) did it to them. Neferet comes and makes Zoey and Heath forget all that happened in the tunnels. She uses her power with the elements air,fire,water,earth, and spirit to clear the mind block from herself. She doesn't speak of the other fledglings, only saying that a crazy man took Heath, to her friends. In the end she makes a vow to come back for Stevie Rae.
Could you please fix this? I'd never meant for this to happen, and I am very confused for why it is so. And for some reason, this happens in the Help desk as well.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.153.98.39 (talk • contribs) 05:43, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Don't start lines with a blank space. To indicate a paragaraph, use blank lines, like this:
Paragraph 1.
Paragraph 2.
--Jc3s5h (talk) 05:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hello, I've fixed the article for you, so don't worry about that, the problem was that you had (as Jc3s5h notes above) opened the paragraph with a space, its easily fixed and causes no harm. Thank you very much for your contribution, its greatly appreciated. Kindest regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 07:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Other language to English Wikipedia or Commons
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
Hi Help desk! So another editor asked me and now I am asking you guys. We are tying to grab a handful of images from the Hebrew Wikipeida for use on the English Wikipeida. I thought that throwing them on commons would be best. I could have sworn I did this before but maybe not. Is there a tool to drag them into commons or should I download them to my machine and then upload them? Thanks for any pointers.Cptnono (talk) 07:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you have a TUSC account you can use CommonsHelper or CommonsHelper2. Other methods are on Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons. Nanonic (talk) 07:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sweet. Thanks!Cptnono (talk) 07:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Push for Commons is useful too, because it searches for images on the source Wikipedia which have the correct licensing for Commons. Note that a lot of images on the various Wikipedias have screwed up descriptions or licensing which sometimes messes up the tools. --Teratornis (talk) 04:54, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sweet. Thanks!Cptnono (talk) 07:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I had created a page on Strategy Execution but when I type in Strategy Execution, the article did not appear.
I had created a page on Strategy Execution but when I type in Strategy Execution, the article did not appear. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Speculand/Strategy_execution
what should I do next to make it go "live"?
07:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tongkat Ali (talk • contribs)
- The page you created wss called Strategy implementation but User:cquan then changed the page to a redirect to Strategic planning: Cquan's edit comment was "essay/OR, redirecting", indicating that your article was an essay and/or original research, neither of which is acceptable in Wikipedia articles. --ColinFine (talk) 08:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Problem editing page for Tower Hamlets College
Problem editing page for Tower Hamlets College - says it has changed, then I look next day and reverts to old text! I hvae tried doing it from a 'logged in' account, and also not as a 'logged in' account and this seems to make no difference. Any ideas? Needs to be changed as there are both grammatical and factual errors in the current version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.120.102 (talk) 08:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you click on the "Page history" tab at the top of Tower Hamlets College you can see all the previous edits, including your own [2]. Your previous edits have been reverted by other editors because they are (a) taken verbatim from the college's website, which is a copyright violation, and (b) not encyclopaedic in tone - they sound like an advertisement and are full of peacock terms. Your help to improve the article is greatly appreciated , but contributions need to be neutral in tone and written in your own words, not cut and pasted from another website. They should also be verifiable; that is, they should be supported by a reliable source with citations wherever possible. Karenjc 11:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia Day
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/Wikipedia_birthday_coin.png/100px-Wikipedia_birthday_coin.png)
Happy Wikipedia Day guys! Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 12:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Auit Machine covers
We are a small commerical Georgia state bank. We use the SHARP Electronic Audit Machines, Model BE2510L as Teller Machines. We appreciate and enjoy these 'Teller Machines" for there ease of use and reliability. Our problem is that all the covers for these machines are falling apart.
We would like to order at least five covers for these machines. Could someone at this Internet address provide us with ordering instructions.
My phone number is <blanke>, our Internet address is <blanked>, our mailing address is <blanked>.
Your assistance will be most appreciated,
Richard Skates
CEO —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.178.249.166 (talk) 13:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our roughly three million articles, and thought that we were directly affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. TNXMan 15:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
A request please....
Hey, I use wikipedia a lot. But... There's a huge irritating problem that i face. That is removing all the hyperlinks along with numbers like [1], [2] and so on Please.... I need a shortcut....???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amarrocks (talk • contribs) 15:25, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I guess it was you who posted at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2010 January 9#A request please... The numbers are references and are meant to be included. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- They could also be links to external site such as this [3]... – ukexpat (talk) 16:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I assume from what you say that you're cutting and pasting Wikipedia content into other documents, and don't want the citation numbers. Reusing Wikipedia content is absolutely fine, provided you follow the rules, but bear in mind that teachers or lecturers won't be impressed with anything cut-and-pasted from the site. Better to rewrite in your own words, and follow the citation links for confirmation or more info - it's what they're there for. Karenjc 17:38, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- You can do a plain copy without links by using Printable version in the left toolbar. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 16:31, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
External Links
I work with a library/archive and we have a project that we have been working on and were hoping to post links on the appropriate pages on wikipedia to it. However, after doing a few in a row I receive messages stating that I am "spamming" the site which I am not doing at all. Is there a way that wikipedia can know who I am so I will be allowed to post these links as we think they are useful, educational links for wikipedia users to have without being told that I may be kicked off the site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amanda.nelson12 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with the comment by User:DuncanHill on your talk page. I think the warning was a little hasty and bitey. I suggest that you seek further advice by asking your question at the external links noticeboard. – ukexpat (talk) 16:26, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- (ec) Amanda, I agree, the links are not spam, but the action you are doing is regarded 'spamming' here on Wikipedia. There seems to be some opposition to adding those links into the external links section, and I do say, I do agree with that part. I do believe that these links can be used in a better way than 'just an external link'. Please read the suggestions on your talkpage, and see if you can help improving the articles, instead of just adding links. I'd suggest you have a look at the external links guideline, the spam guideline, the conflict of interest guideline, and the advice for the cultural sector.
- In the meantime, just stop and engage in discussion and see if you can work it out with others (just continuing with what you were doing may indeed result in you being blocked). If you have further questions, don't hesitate to ask me. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- There is, unfortunately, very strong resistance from some on Wikipedia to links to archives held by libraries, universities and other repositories of learning. I believe that this undermines Wikipedia by depriving editors and readers of access to material which can be used to improve the encyclopaedia. DuncanHill (talk) 16:32, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- One other suggestion -- you may want to consider donating your materials to Wikipedia. – ukexpat (talk) 16:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I doubt that is an option, as all the archive material carried the warning: "This transcript may not be quoted, reproduced or redistributed in whole or in part by any means except with the written permission of the American Institute of Physics." --Taelus (talk) 16:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- May the user at least post relevant links on the article talk pages, and then allow the Wikipedia community to decide what to do with each? Policy for such cultural groups tells them to: Start editing now! Don't be afraid of making a mistake; anything that you do can be undone., and there can be little issue with placing them on talk pages. Personally I think it would be a shame if Wikipedia were to reject good content as "spam" like this. --Taelus (talk) 16:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I suggested to contact Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography and donate the list, and see if there are people willing to use the material, in stead of only linking to it. By the way, it is not the content that is rejected, it is the way of linking which is/may be/could be 'problematic'. Another by the way, it is the American Institute of Physics who is editing here, they could give their written permission, so they would be able to donate. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:57, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- It will be of more use to editors and readers on the article pages than hidden away on WP:BIO (who in their right mind would go there for resources on a physicist they were reading about?) DuncanHill (talk) 17:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
We cannot donate the material to wikipedia. Over the past few years, we have had to gain permission from each of the 500 physicists or their heirs to be allowed to post the articles online because the original copyright agreements did not entail the internet as many of the interviews were conducted before the internet was invented. So sadly this is not an option. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amanda.nelson12 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have posted a notification to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics#External links discussion. Maybe editors there will chime in. The resource looks good to me and Wikipedia could consider making a specific source template for better uniform formatting like other templates in Category:Specific-source templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Amanda.nelson12 has given the link to the archive index here [4], and indicated that Wikipedia has lost the chance of future offers of help. I don't blame her one jot. DuncanHill (talk) 20:10, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- 500 links?! Thank you but no, this is clear linkspamming. I know its hard to turn down good-faith offers of help like this, but the behaviour would have been disruptive and would have overly-represented that site on Wikipedia, and also would have created a cleanup headache. If you want to spread encyclopedic knowledge, next time please directly write the relevant content into the articles and link the interview transcripts as references, as they are reliable first-party sources. I note that the transcripts are not unavailable to any other interested editors who may want to cite them appropriately. ThemFromSpace 21:32, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- The links to AIP oral history of physicists are valuable and should be retained. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC).
- @Themfromspace: 500 "oral history transcripts with prominent physicists and astronomers of the 20th century" created by the American Institute of Physics. How does a resource like this differ from repositories like PubMed or Rubicon Foundation, which provide sources for many times that number of wikipedia articles? Is anyone in any doubt that this is a reliable and distinguished source?
- Yes, of course, the content would be best used as a source for article text, as an inline reference, but we cannot expect a new user to begin editing with full expertise in editing, citing, etc. This encyclopedia is a collaborative effort, and the job of senior editors is to help new editors with these sort of difficulties, not snub them. If new editors provide a good source as an external link, what is better: To remove that link, so other editors never see it and have no chance of subsequently making better use of it? Or spend that time working the source into the text? Or even simply leave it alone, in the certain knowledge that someone will come along and incorporate it eventually? Where's the rush. --RexxS (talk) 00:23, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- The problem with adding even legitimate links to the External links sections of articles is that it encourages other editors to mimic what they see by adding their progressively less useful links. See WP:SPAMHOLE. It's much better to introduce sources as footnote citations, but that is way too complicated for a new user to figure out quickly. Too many people try to edit on Wikipedia without reading the friendly manuals, which is understandable because the manuals are extensive. The result is that Wikipedia often seems like an incredibly hostile place to someone who approaches it with some arbitrary goal in mind, which may be an achievable goal, but only if they manage to avoid all the pitfalls and figure out just the right way to do it. For almost any task more complex than correcting typos, Wikipedia is only usable by people who are willing to commit a lot of time to learning how things work here. That is unfortunate because it seems a majority of new users guess wrong about something, get frustrated, and leave before they contribute much. Only a low percentage of our 47,698,702 registered user accounts have stuck around long enough to get over the initial hurdles and make substantial contributions. I don't know whether this is good or bad, but clearly this is a natural consequence of the way we (the persistent users) have constructed Wikipedia to be. Making Wikipedia a lot friendlier to new users sounds like a good idea, but it's hard to know what the effects would be since Wikipedia has never been anything like that. Look at Deletionpedia which displays over 60,000 of our deleted articles. That's only a fraction of the articles we have deleted. Deleting articles seems very important to the Wikipedia community, much more important than caring about the people whose contributions we somehow encourage, and then obliterate. The main problem is that Wikipedia is very easy for people to misunderstand. The software gives a user incredible freedom, and then only after hours or days does the user get any feedback from other human users about whether their work was acceptable. I don't know any way to fix this. It obviously doesn't matter how many warnings the software displays. New users may see the warnings about how their contributions will be "mercilessly edited", but it often doesn't register until it happens to them. --Teratornis (talk) 04:41, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
re articles about Dovestones Revervoir, Greenfield.
The correct title for this reservoir is Dove Stone Reservoir. It was named Dove Stone Reservoir in the Act of Parliament which gave permisson for its construction. The brown tourist signs to the reservoir are correct but the OS map and the sailing club name are incorrect. How can this error be corrected? The engineer ,MTB Whitson who oversaw the construction of this reservoir ,was concerned that there was a tendancy for the Dove Stone titled to be altered. He asked me ,when I became the Water Supply Engineer for the areaa, to ensure that the correct name was used.
- Thanks you for your suggestions for improving the Dovestones Reservoir article. This error can indeed be corrected, if there are reliable sources which show it to be properly named as Dove Stone rather than Dovestone. The Peak District National Park Authority refers to it as Dovestone Reservoir as do Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council, the Planning Inspectorate and National Parks. I found a few instances of "Dove Stone Reservoir" being used, all at the Peak District National Park Authority - but not at any other gov.uk sites (all of these are official Governmental sites - either Local or Central Government). I could not find enough evidence to indicate that "Dove Stone" is the correct title. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 18:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- In any case, a redirect from 'Dove Stone Reservoir' is possible. --ColinFine (talk) 23:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Nested reference syntax
I need to add a cite to a footnote, but I can't seem to get rid of the big red cite error. Here's the tag I'm using: <ref>While some authors use the terms DDS and NCO interchangeably <ref name="latticeSC"/>, by convention an NCO refers to the digital (discrete-time, discrete amplitude) portion of a DDS.</ref>. Of course I'll need to add a cite to the last part as well once I figure out how. Can you help me with the syntax? Thanks. JPatterson (talk) 17:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Of course you're getting an error, you're using a named ref without having defined it. This has nothing to do with nested refs. Algebraist 17:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Take it easy. I'm new, still trying to figure this stuff out. JPatterson (talk) 18:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I see the problem is fixed now at Direct digital synthesizer. You're doing good work on that article. I hope you don't mind me reminding you that it's easier for others to assist if you provide a link to the article when requesting help. Happy editing. --RexxS (talk) 00:40, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Take it easy. I'm new, still trying to figure this stuff out. JPatterson (talk) 18:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Logging in
Why do some pages say there is no contributor called ~~ when I log in with this name and my correct password ~~? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mentorsmentor (talk • contribs) 17:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe it is at another site. What is the url when you try to log in and this happens? Do you enter Mentorsmentor as username with that capitalization and no space? What exactly does the error message say? I suspect ~~ in your post is a misplaced half signature and not part of the message. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Edit within A Template
I am trying to add references to the "Transtheoretical Model" entry. I am unable to do so. Please advise.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philciaccio (talk • contribs) 20:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Are you having technical problems using the references tags and templates? See Wikipedia:Footnotes for information on using the <ref> tags, and Wikipedia:Citation templates for information on using the preformatted citation templates. --Jayron32 20:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you can't figure out the manuals, or don't have time, you can leave your references on the talk page for the article (Talk:Transtheoretical Model) and ask another editor to add them to the article. But when you say "edit within a template", are you trying to put footnotes within a template such as an infobox or a navbox? Sometimes a citation template may interact badly with a containing template such as an infobox. I have found in such cases that it may work better to put the citation template into the body text of the article somewhere (usually the body text will repeat everything in the infobox, so you can find a duplicate location), and use a named reference tag in the infobox. If that's not what you were trying to do, what I wrote may not make sense. Another trick is to create a user sandbox page (such as User:Philciaccio/Sandbox) and experiment with templates there. That way you don't have to worry about temporarily destroying the article with a template mistake. --Teratornis (talk) 08:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Signature help
Here it is currently Accdude92 (talk to me!) (sign) I want there to be something with this link [[5]] and saying post here if you joined cfpmedia. Accdude92 (talk to me!) (sign) ([click here if you joind cfpmedia ]) 20:25, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- This strikes me as a form of spam and I suspect you will end up being blocked if you pursue this. --Jc3s5h (talk) 20:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- External links in signatures are explicitly forbidden. You know well that Wikipedia is not MySpace, and you're dancing on the proverbial line with regard to unconstructive behaivour if you choose to go on with this. (Not helping this, of course, is the fact the majority of your edits are still questions on the reference desk, and that - as far as I can tell - you still haven't made any effort to edit an article.) Xenon54 / talk / 20:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you clicked it you would see that it isnt an external link. Its a link to a page ON wikipedia.Accdude92 (talk to me!) 20:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- That is not a completely truthful statement. It is a link to a page on Wikipedia that exists for the sole reason to link to an external site. -- kainaw™ 21:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Actually it is, i never once stated that it was "a link to a page on Wikipedia that exists for the sole reason to link to an external site"Accdude92 (talk to me!) 21:10, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- If your signature contained a link to User talk:Accdude92/Post which contains an external link, it wouldn't be violating the letter of the rule at Wikipedia:Signatures#External links, but it would be violating the spirit of the rule, and you would be asked to change it quickly. Instead, just put the link on your user page if you want. --Mysdaao talk 22:12, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I assume you comprehend that the purpose of sigs is not to direct traffic to an external website. Therefore, there is a rule that you cannot link to an external website with your sig. You are blatantly attempting to subvert that rule by making a sig that links to a page that contains nothing more than a link to en external website - which makes the purpose of your sig nothing more than an attempt to direct traffic to an external website. If it is too difficult to understand why what you are attempting to do is not allowed, simply accept that it is not allowed and move on with other constructive work here. -- kainaw™ 22:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Actually it is, i never once stated that it was "a link to a page on Wikipedia that exists for the sole reason to link to an external site"Accdude92 (talk to me!) 21:10, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- That is not a completely truthful statement. It is a link to a page on Wikipedia that exists for the sole reason to link to an external site. -- kainaw™ 21:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you clicked it you would see that it isnt an external link. Its a link to a page ON wikipedia.Accdude92 (talk to me!) 20:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- External links in signatures are explicitly forbidden. You know well that Wikipedia is not MySpace, and you're dancing on the proverbial line with regard to unconstructive behaivour if you choose to go on with this. (Not helping this, of course, is the fact the majority of your edits are still questions on the reference desk, and that - as far as I can tell - you still haven't made any effort to edit an article.) Xenon54 / talk / 20:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I just reverted the deletion of this thread. Please do not delete threads under discussion. When they are resolved they will be archived. – ukexpat (talk) 20:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Wrong Link
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
I noticed in the article "History of the petroleum industry in Canada (frontier exploration and development)," which can be found at this URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_petroleum_industry_in_Canada_(frontier_exploration_and_development), has a wrong link. On the second line of Section 1.1, it mentions Sir Alexander MacKenzie. When you click the link on his name, it in fact takes you to a page for Alexander MacKenzie, but the WRONG Alexander MacKenzie. This is the incorrect page that the link currently points to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Mackenzie. The correct link should be for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_MacKenzie. I didn't even think that URLs were case sensitive, but in this situation, they seem to be. If my copied and pasted urls do not help you, the correct Alexander Mackenzie is referenced in the article "Norman Wells, Northwest Territories" on the first line of Chapter 2, History. 140.98.210.243 (talk) 21:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Done fixed in this edit. Next time, please be bold and make the fix yourself! – ukexpat (talk) 21:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Mathematical derivations
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
If we do a mathematical derivation in an article, must it be sourced? Isn't mathematics considered a source to itself? I.e. would I have to source the statement 1+1=2? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpat34721 (talk • contribs)
- Normally we don't do mathematical derivations, we just present the final result, which comes from a reliable source. Simple arithmetic (such as converting units) is allowed. --Jc3s5h (talk) 22:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- See also Wikipedia:No original research#Routine calculations. I don't know whether you have something specific in mind but if you think you discovered a new result then don't add it to an article just because you think the proof is simple. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'm still a bit confused. Take this article for example. They seem to be deriving results from first principles. It's verifiable in the sense that the equations can be worked through by anybody who understands this stuff (not me). Are they breaking the rules or is this ok? Thanks JPatterson (talk) 00:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Ideally, any non-trivial result would be cited to a specific on-line source or a particular page in a book. These are known as in-line citations The article you mention has general citations, but few in-line citations. This might be just barely acceptable if the material can be found by consulting the index or table-of-contents of the general references, but is unacceptable otherwise. --Jc3s5h (talk) 00:34, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- If it the article is written correctly, similar material will appear in the sources listed in #References, given at the bottom. That article appears to use the style of simply citing a few well-respected general texts instead of using in-line sourcing; fiber bundles are pretty well established as a mathematical concept, so I think this is acceptable if less than ideal. Also, if you have not found it yet WP:MATH details the syntax for writing mathematical formulae; if you are familiar with LaTeX it is pretty easy to pick up. - 2/0 (cont.) 00:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Got it. Thanks! JPatterson (talk) 01:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- If it the article is written correctly, similar material will appear in the sources listed in #References, given at the bottom. That article appears to use the style of simply citing a few well-respected general texts instead of using in-line sourcing; fiber bundles are pretty well established as a mathematical concept, so I think this is acceptable if less than ideal. Also, if you have not found it yet WP:MATH details the syntax for writing mathematical formulae; if you are familiar with LaTeX it is pretty easy to pick up. - 2/0 (cont.) 00:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Advertisement / Notability Distinction
After editing an article marked with "This article is written like an advertisement." and "This article may not meet the general notability guideline." distinctions how long does it take to have the new content reviewed and indicators removed?
Beatportmikel (talk) 23:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- There is no formal process for reviewing. Depending on how confident you feel, you could:
- remove the tags yourself, if you think the article meets the criteria (somebody else might disagree and put them back)
- look in the page history to see who added the tags, and leave them a message on their talk page asking them to review it
- list the article on WP:RFF
- --ColinFine (talk) 23:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt assistance.
Beatportmikel (talk) 00:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
January 16
Where to go, how to get there, how to fill in the question, and where to go and how do I get the answer for the question.
I am a beginner and I am very frustrated by web sites that can't answer a simple question and I wonder why it is that no one can create a web page that can explain to beginners how the place works. All I am looking for is information on virtual machines/computers,how to set one up, how to operate it, what I do and don't need. When I first signed up your instructions seem to be clear enough but when I go to one of your sites to ask a question I can't because I need someone who can answer the question for me. I don't know how to maneuver around your web site because there is nothing on your web site that tells me how to do so that, which just raises the level of frustration because all I want to do is ask a simple question. So can you tell me where on your web site can I go to to ask this question, how do I get there, how do I fill it in so I don't have any surprises that tell me that I have to do something to finish it but I don't know what it is, and where do I go to get the answer? I may sound angry I'm not just very frustrated by not being able to ask a simple question, I had a very frustrating experience with Microsoft trying just to ask a simple question about a problem with IE8. I spent a month trying to get an answer because there is no information that helps me to understand where to go and what to do when I get there.Thank you for whatever help you can provide.Interesting 333 (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Have you tried the Computing section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: . I hope this helps.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 00:25, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Since you have signed up for a userid (which is a splendid idea), you do know that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and is not affiliated with any particular software company, right? Virtual machines seem to have been invented by IBM in 1972, and there have been many kinds of virtual machines produced by many companies since then. Your best bet is to go the Reference Desk, as suggested above, and be sure to explain what brand of virtual machine you would like to set up, what operating system you are using, and what kind of computer you are using. --Jc3s5h (talk) 00:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Also note that Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. You can find general information about virtual machines here, but if you need a step-by-step procedure to set up the type of virtual machine you have in mind (which you did not specify), you will have to look elsewhere. For example, there is a Wikibooks:Parrot Virtual Machine, although there is no way to guess whether that is anything like what you need. For general advice on how to ask for help online and get answers, read How to Ask Questions the Smart Way - if you have been frustrated trying to get answers, you must read that document. Be aware that asking answerable questions sometimes requires a lot of skill, particularly if you have a question that only a few people in the world could answer. Finally, be sure you are not {{astray}}. Maybe you arrived on Wikipedia from a Web search, and you are mistaking us for someone else, such as a particular software vendor. When people think they are looking at something else when they are looking at Wikipedia, they tend to get confused in a hurry, because little on Wikipedia works the way some other arbitrary Web site probably would. --Teratornis (talk) 04:11, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Since you have signed up for a userid (which is a splendid idea), you do know that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and is not affiliated with any particular software company, right? Virtual machines seem to have been invented by IBM in 1972, and there have been many kinds of virtual machines produced by many companies since then. Your best bet is to go the Reference Desk, as suggested above, and be sure to explain what brand of virtual machine you would like to set up, what operating system you are using, and what kind of computer you are using. --Jc3s5h (talk) 00:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
HELP, PLS : IT HAS TO BE LINK TO DAUGHTER OF NICHOLAS the first instead
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
At this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Marie_Alexandra_of_Baden there is wrong link ( to daughter of Nicholas second), IT HAS TO BE LINK TO DAUGHTER OF NICHOLAS the first Highlighted words Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna (1819–76),should take to this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Duchess_Maria_Nikolaevna_of_Russia_(1819%E2%80%931876) Can someone CHANGE, PLEASE THANK YOU LUDMILA <e-mail redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlanj (talk • contribs) 00:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- If I read your post correctly (all the capital letters really make it difficult), then you want the link from Princess Marie Alexandra of Baden to Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna of Russia (1899-1918) to be changed to point to Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna of Russia (1819-1876).
- Now, I have a question for you: Do you have a reliable source to prove that Princess Marie Alexandra's mother was indeed the elder Duchess, who died thirty years before the princess was born? Xenon54 / talk / 01:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have made the requested correction.[6] Xenon54, I'm afraid you read both the request and the article wrong and confused the article subject Princess Marie Alexandra of Baden (1902–1944) with her paternal grandmother Princess Maria of Leuchtenberg (1841–1914) whose mother is Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna (1819–76) and not Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna of Russia (1899–1918) as the piped link said before the correction. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks PrimeHunter. I (incorrectly) assumed that all the text in the article was directly about the article's subject. Xenon54 / talk / 01:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have made the requested correction.[6] Xenon54, I'm afraid you read both the request and the article wrong and confused the article subject Princess Marie Alexandra of Baden (1902–1944) with her paternal grandmother Princess Maria of Leuchtenberg (1841–1914) whose mother is Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna (1819–76) and not Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna of Russia (1899–1918) as the piped link said before the correction. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Drafting, initialising, outlining... what is good practice?
What is the policy/feeling regarding making the initial inroads to a deep subject? - given that the concepts 'draft' and 'final' are at best hazy in here. For example, is it reasonable to initiate a certain structure for an article one day, and come back on another to flesh it out? Or would this be considered too 'ugly' a state to leave an article in? I would imagine that it would be okay (least of all because it might inspire others to cover a certain area of the subject); but I have been in the position in the past where 'interim' edits have been misunderstood. Similar regarding things like citations; 'I know I will get them, but it will have to be tomorrow.' How do more experienced contributors approach it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tubusy (talk • contribs) 02:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- How pretty or ugly an article looks matters relatively little, since anyone can help format it correctly; what does matter is making sure that the article, in whatever state you leave it in, satisfies any notability concerns. The best way to do that is to leave references to at least 2-3 independent sources that discuss article's subject. If the article establishes notablity, you can take your time developing it. However, you may prefer to create a userspace draft instead; there, you can work on it in a deletion-free environment until you feel it is ready to be made public. Then you can simply move the article to namespace. Liqudluck✽talk 02:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Also consider the subject. You did not tell us what you want to write about. Some topics have a high probability of "sticking" and can safely remain as stubs without exciting the deletionists too much. For example, we have articles like Wind power in the United States, Wind power in Germany, Wind power in Italy, but no Wind power in Japan yet. Clearly, the top 20 or 30 or 50 countries will have pretty much automatic notability for their wind power articles, and for many other kinds of "topic in country" articles, so there is little worry about needing to "defend" the next new article in such a series. In contrast, if you want to write about a garage band, those kinds of articles are blood in the water for the deletionist. If a subject raises any questions about notability, then having sloppy, unwikified formatting would probably draw even more negative scrutiny. Even though they shouldn't, other editors will probably look harder for reasons to delete a sloppy article than a neat one. In general, your safest bet is to find a featured article or good article closely related to your subject, and then pattern your article after the article of known quality. Whatever you do, don't scrimp on footnote citations. Citations are how you demonstrate to other editors that your article belongs. If you can't cite it, don't write it. --Teratornis (talk) 08:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- You could also draft it in user space. For example, if the subject was King Fred II of Wikipedia, you could create User:Tubusy/King Fred II of Wikipedia. That way, you could work on the article without the threat of deletion (unless you put copyrighted material, libellous material, etc). To create the draft, in the 'search' box type
User:Tubusy/Article-name
- you will get a message saying that the page does not exist — just click on Start the User:Tubusy/Article-name page and edit away! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:29, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Redirecting to a Specific Article
Hello,
I'm hoping that you can help me. I'm fairly confused.
I've created an article entitled Jim McCormick (American Speaker). People who would be searching the article would probably simply search on Jim McCormick. Right now that takes you to a page entitled Jim McCormick. That page has a couple of lines of redirect text that refer you to other articles (i.e, Jim McCormick (infielder) or jim McCormick (American football). I see that I can simply add anther redirect here, but i there another way to do this so that the user can go directly to the correct page?
Any help you can provide would be appreciated. I've been wading through everything I can find, but either I've not found the appropriate directions or I'm not understanding what I'm reading.
Thank you.
Jabailey1 (talk) 03:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- The articles could be moved to different titles so the one on the speaker is named "Jim McCormick", but I'd say that's not the right solution here. If one of the articles on Jim McCormick were a primary topic that is expected to be searched for much more than the others, then that would be moved to be named only "Jim McCormick". In this case, I don't think any of the three articles on people named Jim McCormick are much more well known than the others, so the solution to this is a disambiguation page, which is a page that contains only links to the other three articles. Move Jim McCormick to Jim McCormick (baseball), and follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) to change Jim McCormick from a redirect to a disambiguation page that links to Jim McCormick (baseball), Jim McCormick (American football), and Jim McCormick (American Speaker). --Mysdaao talk 06:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have moved Jim McCormick (American Speaker) to Jim McCormick (speaker), moved the former "Jim McCormick" article to Jim McCormick (pitcher), redirected Jim McCormick to the disambiguation page James McCormick, and added an entry for Jim McCormick (speaker) to the latter. Now I just have to clean up some links. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:40, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia images don't show up in browser
Wikipedia images don't show up in my computer. I tried Internet Explorer and Firefox. There are no pictures showing up either I login or logout. I have no problems viewing pictures on other website except Wikipedia. I used to be able to view all pictures in Wikipedia. But all of sudden, they all disappeared a couple of weeks ago. Eminslw (talk) 04:35, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- It may be a blocked domain. Most images are from upload.wikimedia.org. Can you see http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a9/Example.jpg? Some interface images are from en.wikipedia.org. Can you see http://en.wikipedia.org/images/wikimedia-button.png? PrimeHunter (talk) 11:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Government of India policy
There was a discussion at User talk:MuffledThud#Kondapalli toys over whether works of the Govt of India are in public domain or not.
The Caveats section of this article seems to suggest that Indian Govt works are copyrighted. It also cites a source. But I think that this is misleading because the source provided only states that the Govt of Maharashtra doesnot allow work to be published without permission being taken. This doesnot apply to the Govt of India.
I strongly believe that Govt of India works are in public domain. And I request that these articles - Kondapalli toys, Orissa Ikat, Thanjavur art plate be stripped of their CSD statuses. Admins please advise. Sasank Sleeper (talk) 12:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- According to the Handbook of Copyright Law in the Dept. of Higher Education website, "[the] government shall, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, be the first owner of the copyright therein". So, no; Indian government works are not in the public domain. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 12:47, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Check [7]. It says “It is not denied that under section 2(k) of the Copyright Act, a work which is made or published under the direction or control of any Court, tribunal or other judicial authority in India is a Government work. Under section 52(q), the reproduction or publication of any judgment or order of a court, tribunal or other judicial authority shall not constitute infringement of copyright of the government in these works. It is thus clear that it is open to everybody to reproduce and publish the government work including the judgment/ order of a court. ......”. Sasank Sleeper (talk) 12:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)Most .gov.in websites clearly show a copyright notice. In the case of the sources for the 3 quoted articles
- iips.gov.in clearly says "© Copyright 2005-2009 Institute of Intellectual Property Studies; All Rights Reserved"
- ipindia.nic.in has no clear indication of the copyright status of items on their website, so the default would be that it is under copyright, unless you can provide evidence to the contrary. It is your responsibility to prove that the contents on that site are in the Public Domain.
- Again, it's ipiondia.nic.in. Please note that although the documents are "available to the public", this is not the same as the right to reproduce them online - merely that the public have the right to see them.
- In summary, without specific indications that the contents of the website are either PD or under a license which is compatible with Wikipedia's, it is generally assumed that the copyright of all the contents of the website belong to the website owner. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 12:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Replying to your second comment: that is only about reproducing the findings of a court or equivalent - not IP offices or other Governmental departments. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 12:54, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Then why does it say "It is thus clear that it is open to everybody to reproduce and publish the government work including the judgment/ order of a court." It could have just said "to reproduce and publish the judgement/order" if you were correct. Why did it have to include government work ? Sasank Sleeper (talk) 13:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- I would like to point out that the first website is not iips.gov.in. It is iips.ac.in. It is not a government website. It is an educational institution. Check page 85 of that [8]. It says "Reproduced from pages 32-40 from the Geographical Indications Journal August 1st 2006". He did not say anything about "reproduced with permission". So I think it is in public domain.
- {{ec} Read what you quoted earlier: "reproduction or publication of any judgment or order of a court, tribunal or other judicial authority". The articles you mentioned have nothing to do with court orders or judgements, do they? They are not in public domain. Here's the entire copyright law if you need it: http://copyright.gov.in/Documents/CopyrightRules1957.pdf ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:06, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- It could have just said "to reproduce and publish the judgement/order" if you were correct. Also, where in copyright law is reproduction forbidden ? Please quote. I donot disagree with government work being copyrighted by govt. What I am saying is that its in public domain. Sasank Sleeper (talk) 13:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I have pointed out to you a government website that clearly says government work is copyrighted (as well as the copyright law itself). Are you suggesting that they are wrong? If so, I'm afraid that is something you must settle with the Indian government and not us. We have to work with the information we have, and that information is that Indian government work is not in the public domain. As for the passage you're quoting from here, that entire section is only about the copyrights of court orders. What it says is that government works that are court orders (or government works that contain court orders) are not copyrighted. The way they have worded it makes it confusing, I believe. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Please check page 38, 39 of [9]. It says "If any published Government Document/Report is being reproduced on any website, whether as excerpts or in full, the source of the same i.e. Full Title of the Report/Document along with the name of the concerned Department and year of publication MUST be provided."
- That's not the same as being in public domain. Look, it's not something you have to pick up from some vague sentence in a document and think "this must mean it's in the public domain." If the government releases it's work to the public domain, it will be clearly mentioned. They have clearly mentioned that their work is copyrighted (which means it's not in public domain). ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:33, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- From [10]
sec 52. Certain acts not to be infringement of copyright
...
(q) the reproduction or publication of-
(i) any matter which has been published in any Official Gazette except an Act of a Legislature;
(ii) any Act of a Legislature subject to the condition that such Act is reproduced or published together with any commentary thereon or any other original matter;
(iii) the report of any committee, commission, council, board or other like body appointed by the Government if such report has been laid on the Table of the Legislature, unless the reproduction or publication of such report is prohibited by the Government;
(iv) any judgement or order of a court, tribunal or other judicial authority, unless the reproduction or publication of such judgment or order is prohibited by the court, the tribunal or other judicial authority, as the case may be;
- This says that in India, the following are in the public domain: the contents of Official Gazettes; Acts of a Legislature; reports of committees, commissions, councils, or boards; judgements or orders of a court, tribunal or other judicial authority. Other government works are copyrighted, as sec 52 is an exception to a general rule that all works are copyrighted. See Indian copyright law where this passage is quoted. Nothing that i have been able to find says or in any way clearly imnplies that ALL works of the GoI are exempt from copyright. IANAL but at this point the burden is I think on you to find a clear-cut source for your claim. DES (talk) 19:59, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- IANAL, but I think you'll find that granting permission to reproduce or publish without infringement of copyright is not the same as placing a work in the public domain. The former act grants permissions while retaining copyright; the latter abandons the copyright. Our policy of licensing as CC-BY-SA is somewhat similar to the former, since the author retains the copyright when granting the licence. --RexxS (talk) 20:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- The problem of official images from India is a recurring theme, the main problem is the Indian Right to Information Act gives free access to government data but nothing in the act says it can then be re-used for anything for example commercial activities. Confusingly sometimes the phrase in the public domain is used for these images but that just means it is available to the public but not to do with what they want. Images quoting this act on Wikipedia have required fair use statements. MilborneOne (talk) 20:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Differences in degrees
what is the difference beyween Bachalor of Engineering and Bachalor of Technology —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.11.123 (talk) 12:38, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
You might find what you are looking for in the articles about Bachelor of Engineering or Bachelor of Technology. If you cannot find the answer there, you can try asking your question at Wikipedia's Reference Desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except about how to use Wikipedia, which is what this help desk is for). I hope this helps. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 12:41, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
User page masquerading as a Wikipedia article
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
Last fall, an article was placed on Wikipedia about a company called Dubli. In fairly short order, it was identified as non-notable, went through the process of deletion, and was removed from Wikipedia. Exactly the way Wikipedia is supposed to work.
However, the user (Textellent) that set up the original article originally placed the content of the Dubli Wikipedia page on their User page[[11]]. And it's still there. And if you search Dubli Wikipedia in Google, that's what comes up -- even though if you type Dubli into Wikipedia itself, you don't see anything.
Is this use of a User page appropriate? I've refrained from making any edits to the page because I'm not sure what's appropriate, and I'm not sure who to ask. So I'm trying here. Suggestions?--64.201.38.62 (talk) 14:40, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Have aread of Wikipedia:User page in paticular WP:FAKEARTICLE. Basically Wikipedia is not meant to act as a free web host as outlined here and long term devlopment of an article in a user sub page would be discouraged. It appears this page has been in limbo for over 6 months..It is also discouraged to not have a deleted article as a sub page (Im assuming faith here that the article was deleted) and the page can potentially be deleted. I would ask the user his/her intention with the article and assume good faith that She/he'll shortly be fixing this page and launched as a real page so proper discussions of notablility can occur. If not It could be moninated for deletion as per my understanding of wp:userpage. Any other thoughts out there? Ottawa4ever (talk) 16:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'd be tempted to take this to Miscellany for deletion (MfD). Leave a message on the user's talk page, as suggested by Ottawa4ever. If there is no reply, or a dismissive one, then list it at MfD - if you want help with this, drop me a line on my talk page. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:05, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Looks to me like obvious spam - the user hasn't edited it since last August, so I doubt it's a work in progress. I have tagged it for speedy deletion as spam. – ukexpat (talk) 22:37, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Sockpuppet?
Hello
When logging into my account, it said "An editor thinks you are a sockpuppet" - after reading about it i am still none the wiser. I think this might be a result of my conversations with the editor of the "Apple Cider Vinegar" page. I made an addition to the page, as the page is full of inacuracies and claims. After he removed my edits I contacted him and asked about it. I then contacted him to point out the problems with the page and the fact that it looked like he was using the page, aswell as the "Vinegar" page to promote a number of other websites containing many unproven claims.
I think he was annoyed that I suggested this and he has slapped this 'sock puppet' thing to be difficult. Can anyone help with this?
Regards
Seth —Preceding unsigned comment added by SethCRKOne (talk • contribs) 15:33, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- A sockpuppet is a user editing from several different accounts deceptively to create false consensus or to avoid blocks or topic bans - see WP:SOCK. Kintetsubuffalo is suggesting that your pattern of editing gives him cause to think that you are the same editor as 212.159.138.27 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Regardless of the merits of his suspicions, we would expect a report to have been made at WP:Sockpuppet investigations before a tag was placed on your page. I've removed the tag and requested Kintetsubuffalo to file a report at WP:SPI before tagging user pages. --RexxS (talk) 16:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Are we even allowed to tag a registered user as a sock of an IP? The Checkuser policy prohibits checking suspected sockpuppets this way. I once tried to file a report of suspected sockpuppets for two IPs but the report was dismissed and no action taken as the editors were IPs. ~AH1(TCU) 03:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- It should also be noted that forgetting to log in does not make one a sockpuppet. See WP:AGF. If a user forgets to log in, we shouldn't take that as de facto abusive sockpuppetry unless it is clear they are logging out specifically to avoid a block or to deceive others. --Jayron32 05:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Mailing lists
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
According to the Wikipedia:Contact us page, reports of vandalism can be sent to info-en-v, is this a public/private mailing list or an account managed by the Wikimedia foundation? Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 16:22, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- It's an email account that feeds into WP:OTRS. Nanonic (talk) 16:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Aha, thank you. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 16:33, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Does this article-name make sense?
I am going to translate a part of German Wiki-article, which is about educational attainment of different ethnic groups in Germany and I am wondering what might be an adequate name. The German name is "Immigration-background and scholastic success" would that be an adequate name or should it be called "Educational Attainment of different ethnic groups in Germany", which would sound better to an englishpeaker? -- Greatgreenwhale (talk) 17:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- "Immigration-background and scholastic success" would not quite be adequate for what your are proposing, since the topic is specifically placed in Germany. In addition, since "ethic groups" is not synonymous with "immigrants", I am left unsure about the precise topic. Perhaps you could provide a link to the German wiki article, so that other German-speakers could give you more detailed advice. Is it de:Migrationshintergrund#Migrationshintergrund und schulische Erfolge? --RexxS (talk) 18:22, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Yes. It is "Migrationshintergrund und schulische Erfolge". *deleted confusing stuff* (talk) 18:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Okay. I think what I wrote is confusing. What I really wanted to say: A person, who has at least one vietnamese parent will have a "vietnamese immigration background", no matter if he was born in Germany, Vietnam or another country and no matter if he has the German citizenship. So a person may be German (=have the German citizenship), but still have an immigration background and he will be called "vietnamese-German" or "German with vietnamese immigration background" in that case and the article now talks about people from different immigration backgrounds, so people who have different ancestry or ethnic group. It does not talk about place of birth or citizenship. How would I translate that?-- Greatgreenwhale (talk) 19:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Here I found a paper that translates "Migrationshintergrund" with ethnic group, so would you agree "Differences in Educational Attainment by Ethnic Group" would make sense? -- Greatgreenwhale (talk) 19:19, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- "Hintergrund" is best translated as "background", so "Migrationshintergrund" is literally translated as "migration background" or "foreign background". However, the best translation for English speakers - and the most politically correct term - would be "ethnic group" or "ancestry". I would title the section "Ethnicity and School Achievement In Germany".
- For those Help Desk regulars who are trying to read the tables in question, it compares ethnicity to achievement in several classes ("Fächer"). Grades ("Noten") in German schools go from 1 to 6, 1 being "sehr gut" ("very good") and 6 being "ungenügend" ("unsatisfactory"). The first column lists the grades, then the ethnicities, in order, are "Turkish", "Italian", "ex-Yugoslavian", "Aussiedler" (ethnic Germans whose families left the country, and the person has now returned), and "Indigenous German". The first table is grades in German class, the second in maths classes, and the third is what percentage of students went on to Hauptschule, Realschule, or Gymnasium. Xenon54 / talk / 19:37, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Here I found a paper that translates "Migrationshintergrund" with ethnic group, so would you agree "Differences in Educational Attainment by Ethnic Group" would make sense? -- Greatgreenwhale (talk) 19:19, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- (ec) It's a fascinating article, even with my limited German. It seems to me that the article contrasts academic achievement between several groups: native Germans, ethic groups, and immigrants-by-country-of-origin. It's difficult for me to be certain, but it seems in places to examine differences between the members of an ethic group born in Germany and those born outside who subsequently immigrated. I think the answer to your last question is that in English, we might refer to "second generation immigrants". As an example, a person born in Germany with one or more parents who immigrated from Vietnam, would be understood as "second generation Vietnamese" in English. Returning to your original question, may I tentatively suggest the title "Academic achievement among different groups in Germany", which should be broad enough to allow you to discuss groups differentiated by ethnicity, or by immigration status, or by place of birth. I see the article also comments on differences on the impact of immigration on academic success between the areas of the former Bundesrepublik and the former DDR – so I'd advise using as broad and as neutral a title as you can. Nevertheless, the title isn't set in stone. At a later date, if someone thinks of a better title, the article can be moved to that, so don't worry too much about getting the perfect title first time. Good luck with your efforts! --RexxS (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you:) I will call it like that. Yes, you are right it examines different attainment in first and second generation immigrants and also examines differences between eastern and western Germany. If you want me to, I will inform you when I am ready, so that you do not have to read it in German.-- Greatgreenwhale (talk) 19:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
(ec again) "Migrationshintergrund" has a precise meaning in Germany, as it's used as a classification in population statistics. "Immigration background" is probably as literal a translation as I can make, and I'm quite sure that "persons with an immigration background" is not quite the same as an ethnic group, although the article discusses both – see the table with headings 'Herkunft der Familie' & 'Migrationsstatus' for example. Whatever title you chose, please read WP:NAME and make sure you only capitalise the first word and any proper nouns in the title. I shall be delighted to read the article when you've completed it. --RexxS (talk) 19:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Robert Mitchum
My contribution as follows to the Robert Mitchum page has been deleted:
'According to Tony Curtis, Mitchum was the director's first choice to star in 1958's The Defiant Ones, but Mitchum refused to work with a black man. Sidney Poitier would become the first male black actor to be nominated for a competitive Academy Award for his role in the film. Curtis is also on record as saying he had approval of Poitier as his co-star. Curtis made both these comments during an interview in 1999 on TCM's Private Screenings[7] with host Robert Osborne.[8]'
I have personally seen the interview on Turner Classic Movies, Private Screenings. Curtis has made the statement. It is there for all to view when the program periodically airs on TCM. No one is either verifying or denying the validity of the statement. It is simply Curtis making the statement to Robert Osborne during a discussion of the movie The Defiant Ones.
Can you pls advise why this has been deleted from the website page.
Thank you
18:56, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Digby scallops (talk) 18:56, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Another editor says that Curtis later recanted that statement. So even if he made the statement at one time, if he recanted then it's no longer operative and shouldn't be in the article. Your best bet would be to go talk to that editor and ask him what his source for the recantation is. Meanwhile, err on the side of caution. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:03, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Bear with me here please. With respect, should it not be encumbant upon the editor who says Curtis recanted the statement to cite his sources? Mine are, as you say, out in the public domain.
Also, on another point, I see the Tiger Woods page cannot be edited. I also see references to the date, fine, Florida Hwy Patrol etc re: the MVA seem to have been deleted. Can you pls advise why information not in dispute appears to have been removed?
Thank you for the clarification. 19:33, 16 January 2010 (UTC)~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Digby scallops (talk • contribs)
- Digby,
- Both of these questions are better asked on the talk pages of the respective articles. wrt Tiger Woods, read the talk page before you ask, as I'm guessing the question has already been asked and answered already. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
vitae bene
what am i doing wrong i can't find this name, phrase in any language or place i have seen it used a name for a boat i have search multiple languages words serperate and together i need the english translation/ meaning/ name sorry for the trouble have a good day thank you for your help 19:33, 16 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavina1 (talk • contribs)
- The word "vitae" is several forms of the Latin noun "vīta", meaning "life". "bene" is an adverb meaning "good". So I would hazard a guess at translating it as "good life" - although the owner of the boat may have gotten his grammar wrong! In the future, please take factual questions to the Reference desk, as this page is only intended to answer questions about Wikipedia. Xenon54 / talk / 19:45, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) That sounds like Latin. Wikipedia is not a dictionary, so you should try Wiktionary instead. From Wiktionary definitions, bene in Latin generally means good or well, and vita generally means life, so vitae bene probably means "good life". If you can't find what you're looking for there, ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk, which is the place to ask general knowledge questions. --Mysdaao talk 19:46, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
The email confirmation message is not coming
I've been waiting for around a month for the confirmation/verification email to arrive and it still hasn't. When I try to login using the username I've provided in the application, it says that the user does not exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.54.32 (talk) 19:38, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Head to Special:UserLogin/signup and try again. Did you get an error the first time you tried? Did you get an error this time? The software doesn't allow you to register a name that it deems to be too similar to an existing name. Also, did you enter a valid e-mail address? The e-mail should come pretty quickly - usually within 5 minutes, and 15 at the most. If all else fails, the folks at Request an account can help you. Thanks for volunteering to help out Wikipedia! Please consider reading the introduction when you get your account created, and please don't hesitate to come back here if you have further questions when you begin to edit. Xenon54 / talk / 19:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- What is the username and where did you make an application? You can immediately log in to an account when you create it at Special:UserLogin/signup. Registered users don't have to get a confirmation email or give an email address unless they want to use email features. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:20, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Editing a template
Hi! I'm trying to edit Template:Hemingway so that the short story collection Nick Adams Stories links to the article about the book, and not to the article about the character Nick Adams (character) as it does currently. I'm not having much success, so am requesting help. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- I've done it. The problem was that [[The Nick Adams Stories]] was redirecting to [[Nick Adams (character)]], but I've changed the redirect to as it makes more sense to point to the stories. Although, if the name is actually The Nick Adams Stories, it should be moved there. I'll leave that up to you.--BelovedFreak 21:41, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I just created [[The Nick Adams Stories]] yesterday. I wonder it got a redirect? Anyway, thanks for figuring it out.I see what you've done. That's correct, and the article should be Nick Adams Stories without "The". Thanks again. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:45, 16 January 2010 (UTC)- You're welcome. It looks like the version with "The" in the title was created as a redirect to the character back in 2005 which made sense as there was no article then about the stories. --BelovedFreak 22:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I know this is marked resolved, but I've run into another problem. I'm trying to get [[:Category:Books by Ernest Hemingway|Posthumous]] to show up as a category to add to the relevant articles. I added the category to the template yesterday, but seem to have missed a step. Do I have to add a category as well? If so, how and where. Still need help. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:46, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Is this what you wanted? I've added the category, without the colon, underneath the main contents of the template but before the noinclude tags. I was worried about the category showing up on works that were not books, but those that I checked do not seem to have the template anyway. ~AH1(TCU) 03:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, not right yet. I'm trying to add this category so it doesn't show up as a redlink as it does here. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 05:51, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- You have the category syntax wrong.
[[:Category:Books by Ernest Hemingway|Posthumous]]
does not create a "Posthumous" subcat, nor make the cat link show up with the text "Posthumous" (as a piped link does on a normal wikilink) it makes the page sort under "Posthumous" in the category. Category:Posthumous books by Ernest Hemingway is a red link because no one has created the category page. it also currently has only one member and I doubt it will ever have enough members to eb a useful category -- how many such books are there anyway. I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to do. DES (talk) 06:54, 17 January 2010 (UTC)- Since Hemingway's death 8 books have been published, and one of the eight has recently been re-edited and republished. Once the category is established I'd add those to it. The syntax in the template (which I didn't create) is identical for other categories: i.e [[:Category:Books by Ernest Hemingway|Non-fiction]]. I guess my question is this: do I have to add a new sub-category called "Posthumous books by Ernest Hemingway" and how exactly is that done? I'd like it to live under the main category of Works by Ernest Hemingway. If this is the wrong place to ask, please point me elsewhere. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- You have the category syntax wrong.
- Sorry, not right yet. I'm trying to add this category so it doesn't show up as a redlink as it does here. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 05:51, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Thalidomide
Hi there,
I am from Australia and my mother was one of the people who suffers from the effects of Thalidomide.....I was wondering who to contact in relation to the pachage support for survivors...
many thanks Leanne Stork —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.230.127.241 (talk) 22:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. – ukexpat (talk) 22:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- However, remember to keep in mind that Wikipedia does not provide medical advice. ~AH1(TCU) 03:09, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- I think the poster is asking about the recently announced compensation scheme in the UK. – ukexpat (talk) 03:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- However, remember to keep in mind that Wikipedia does not provide medical advice. ~AH1(TCU) 03:09, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
January 17
Do we allow stolen pictures
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
Being discussed at WP:ANI##Stop user from stealing photos and putting them on Wikipedia. Please continue the discussion there. – ukexpat (talk) 01:56, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Maurice_Clemmons.jpeg
This photo is stolen. No permission was given to use it. Is Wikipedia a gang of thieves. Stop this. Goldamania (talk) 00:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Why are you forum shopping this? ArcAngel (talk) (review) 00:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- That image indicates that permission was logged via the OTRS system. If you think this was done in error post at meta:OTRS/review, listing the TicketID: 4140787. DES (talk) 00:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Two Questions On Editing
1)when someone edits and/or deletes a submission you have made, are they required to explain the reason why it was done?
2) If so, can you pls tell me where you can find the person who edited & the reason given?
Thank you
Digby scallops (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Optimally a person should explain each edit in the "Edit Summary". If you click the "History" tab at the top of the article you've been editing, you'll see the history of all edits to the article with the name of each editor, and hopefully with an edit summary. Hope this helpful. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you but here is a follow up question. I see the name of the person who deleted my submission. It says Curtis recanted it, but gives no source. How do i correspond with this person to learn the source & why is he/she permitted to delete a submission "which has a source cited" when none may be available from them to refute it?
24.85.210.208 (talk) 06:18, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- When you're looking at the history of that article, there should be a link that says "talk" next to each user name and IP address that edited the article. This is how you should communicate with that user, by hitting the talk link and posting a message on their talk page. You have a talk page as well where people can contact you. Your talk page is at User talk:Digby scallops. Dismas|(talk) 06:53, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Citation help desk
Please can someone tell me what is the "citation help desk" I created 3 links to the Buddy Ryan article but 1 of the 3 does not work. Thanks in advance. Johndoeemail (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- If clicking on the link produces an error such as "this page cannot be found", it's probably a dead link. ~AH1(TCU) 03:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- There is nothing called the "citation help desk" but here at Wikipedia's help desk you can ask questions about everyting related to Wikipedia, including citations. Where is the link? Your account has no other edits since 2008 so I'm not sure what you refer to. A week ago an IP address made a large number of edits to Buddy Ryan and added many links but I haven't checked them all. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Y2.01K bug?
Hi. Does anyone have any idea how this occurred? I saved the edit only once, but I pressed Save page several times, although that usually results in an edit conflict with myself but did not that time. Also, I added the first edit at 00:01, but the time shown is 00:00, so that appears to be another bug. Thanks. ~AH1(TCU) 02:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- This page is only for questions about using Wikipedia, not for general knowledge questions. South Bay (talk) 07:29, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Try asking at WP:VPT, thats where the techy people hang out. Nanonic (talk) 12:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
What exactly should decade history pages show?
I would think that decade pages would at least give a brief summary of whatever is described in the individual year pages. I can understand some decades have too much happening, but some I've seen don't include anything for a particular year (and that year was somewhat important). Is it an oversight or done on purpose? Tiailds (talk) 03:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you see something obvious which is missing, feel free to add it yourself. If someone objects or removes it, invite them to the article talk page to discuss the matter. See Wikipedia:Be Bold and Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle for policies and guidelines on editing Wikipedia. Basically, the two principles are "If you see a problem, fix it" and "Don't fight with other users". If you can abide by these two rules, you will do well at Wikipedia. --Jayron32 04:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Question
Why my edit were changed? I have no comments on my edits, no message... do you can explain me why were deleted? Then I can make better contributions [[12]] Mexicanchencho (talk) 10:30, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, your edit was removed because you added commentary within an article's body, if you'd like to discuss improvements to articles the best place to post is the articles talk page by clicking on the "discussion" tab at the top of the article page, but please be aware however, this is not a place to post personal opinions but a place for editors to collaborate and discuss improvements to articles. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 11:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Your home page is not clear on how to submit a comment. This is the first page that I can find to make a comment. re your article on GLORIA VANDERBILT -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Vanderbilt I have just read the book written by her. In your article, you say that she inherited her fortune from her father. In the book, she does not say this. She says when her father died, he was penniless -- he had spent all his trust money. One of her great-grandfathers had come into contact with a feminist of the day who had inspired him and he had opened trust funds in all his descendants names. So, the trust fund she inherited when she was 21 was a trust set up many years before and she did not inherit her father's money. Sorry, I don't have the book on hand, but your people should be able to get it. It is a book on her life from age seventeen to thirty. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.246.152.87 (talk) 10:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- to suggest improvements, click on the "discussion" tab at the top of the article page – that leads to Talk:Gloria_Vanderbilt, which is the article's talk page. click on "new section" at the top of the talk page to start a new topic, or click on one of the "edit" links to add a comment to an existing thread. Sssoul (talk) 12:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
How does one report a vandal?
Correcting a vandalism lead me to check out the log for 96.48.226.38 (talk) and it is clear that this IP has a history of vandalism. How would this normally be reported, if at all? draeath (talk) 11:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- WP:AIV is where currently-active vandals can be reported after sufficient warnings on their talk pages. this user has only two warnings, from 2009, so you if you found more recent stuff, you might choose to leave a template warning on their talk page. you can find the warning templates here. and when you leave new messages/warnings on someone's talk page, please put them at the bottom. hope that helps Sssoul (talk) 12:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- But also bear in mind that IP addresses can changed and may be shared by different users, so we can't be sure that previous vandalism was done by the same person. In this case it would be inappropriate to report this IP address as there's only been one instance of vandalism in the past 9 days or so — it may be that person's first edit.--BelovedFreak 14:28, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Watchlist no longer showing articles
I was pruning my watchlist, pruned too much and had to do a copy and paste back into my watchlist to get the articles back (I was pruning talk pages but managed to delete everything above what I was pruning. It looks ok but doesn't show any articles or of course article talk pages. Any idea what I did wrong? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 12:28, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- I don't know what you've done wrong and can't be of much help, but have you checked the individual articles to see if they saw "watch" on the top tab, or "unwatch"? Sorry I can't be more helpful... --BelovedFreak 14:30, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Doesn't look as though they do. But they are on my raw watchlist even if now marked unwatched. And are counted in the total number of articles displayed on my watchlist page. Dougweller (talk) 14:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- You've inspired me. I looked at it again and it read 'articlename' {talk} {talk} because what I copied had (one) {talk} in it already - when you edit your watchlist you are shown what pages you've removed, and that shows that you've removed the talk page, ie it says 'article name {talk}, so adding that back to the raw list ended up with all the article names ending in {talk}, which the watchlist treated as the full name. Fixed now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 14:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Doesn't look as though they do. But they are on my raw watchlist even if now marked unwatched. And are counted in the total number of articles displayed on my watchlist page. Dougweller (talk) 14:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Biographical information
I would like to enter biographical information about a movie director who has worked both in the US and Finland. HOw do I do it? I find the Wikipedia instructions very daunting: in theory, all I need to to is to copy and paste the information! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.247.215.31 (talk) 15:13, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
A Wizard is available to walk you through these steps. See the Article Wizard.
Thank you.
- You will need to first register an account, which has many benefits, including the ability to create articles. Once you have registered, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.
- Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.
- If you still think an article is appropriate, see Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. An Article Wizard is available to walk you through creating an article, but you will need to create an account to use it. if you don't wish to do so, you can submit a proposal for an article at Articles for Creation. – ukexpat (talk) 16:56, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- If the page is already created, you can edit the page without creating an account, but creating an account has many benefits. Make sure that when you are adding your information, you include a citation like
<ref>Citation here</ref>
. More on citing sources here. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 19:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- If the page is already created, you can edit the page without creating an account, but creating an account has many benefits. Make sure that when you are adding your information, you include a citation like
- It is almost certainly not true that all you need to do is copy and paste the information: copyright material is not allowed on Wikipedia except under certain very restricted conditions, and almost everything on the web is copyright. Even if you did find some relevant material which was explicitly stated to be released to the public domain, you are not recommended to copy and paste it, because it is unlikely to be written in a suitably neutral and encyclopaedic way. --ColinFine (talk) 21:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Comparing edit counts
I think I remember there being a toolserver tool that lets you compare another user's edits to your own (to see pages you've edited in common, etc.). Does anyone recall where it's located? rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 16:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Wikistalk and Intersect Contribs both do that, although I believe there's at least one more? -- Vary | (Talk) 16:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! Those are what I was looking for; not sure what the third one looks like. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 16:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
My article is cited as having 11 issues; in reality it has five as some one has duplicated them. Would you please change this situation because it doesn't reflect the truth of my article assessment. Also I rewrote the article and when I sent it, it was earased! Does someone not want this article accepted?????????????????? I am printing this for my recordsWhitelightening (talk) 17:12, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- It is not an encyclopedic article. At best it is a comment for a talk page. I have copied it to Talk:Clan_Sinclair#Origin_of_the_clan for you. Kittybrewster ☎ 17:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Chings Secret Soya sauce
The Chings Secret Soya sauce that i bought (In India) has in its label that it has CARAMEL COLOUR.
So does it mean that it was made from hydrolised soy protein? and Does consuming the sauce has health risks of Carcinogens?
Aruna G —Preceding unsigned comment added by G arunaa (talk • contribs) 18:09, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Have you tried the Reference desk? They may be able to help you. This page is just about editing and using Wikipedia. Regards, --BelovedFreak 18:11, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Also have a look at out article on Caramel color, apparently there are some nutters out there who think it's carcinogenic but no-one's ever come up with any proof (and if they did, coca-cola would go out of business very soon). Nanonic (talk) 18:24, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
My name (page) is already being used by someone esle. What do I do?
My name, Michael Gier, is already a page but for a different Michael Gier who is an Olympic champion. I am an entertianer. Do I add my information to the page already created? That means that both of us will be on the Michael Gier page correct?
What is the best way to do this to be respectful of the other Michael Gier?
Mcgier (talk) 20:28, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- You must first prove that you are indeed notable, or the article will be sent to WP:AFD. If you are notable, and can prove that with reliable sources, create a page called Michael Gier (entertainer) (or something similar), and add a {{for}} template to Michael Gier like so:
{{for|the entertainer|Michael Gier (entertainer)}}
. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 20:35, 17 January 2010 (UTC)- (e/c) You would use hatnotes to disambiuguate the two of you. However... you are strongly discouraged from creating pages about yourself. See Wikipedia:Autobiographies. Xenon54 / talk / 20:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- This policy also applies I believe. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 21:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- (e/c) You would use hatnotes to disambiuguate the two of you. However... you are strongly discouraged from creating pages about yourself. See Wikipedia:Autobiographies. Xenon54 / talk / 20:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'm assuming that you are the Michael Gier with this CV? Looking at the articles Wikipedia has about the films you appeared in, none of them mention you (Torrance Rises (not Torrnace Dancers as shown on your CV), Lay It Down, Time Changer, Geronimo and Tap) and none of them appear to have your name on the posters shown in those articles. IMDB doesn't show you on the cast list for either Geronimo or Tap, incidently. I am also not sure that you meet Wikipedia's criteria for the notability of entertainers. If you can show (using independent, reliable sources) that you do indeed meet those criteria (and the Wikipedia General Notability criteria, then you could perhaps request that an article be written. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Linking to Articles
... sorry: I think I don't get it. How do I link related articles to an "orphan" one? I printed the cheat-sheet, but it doesn't seem to tell me anything. Elke Huttoncorner (talk) 21:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- An orphan is an article with few incoming links (see What is an orphan?) so the way to fix it is to use the search function to find articles in which the title of the article appears and then edit those articles to create a link to the orphan. So, for example, if the article Joe Bloggs is an orphan, you would search for articles that contained "Joe Bloggs" and, assuming that those references are to the same Joe Bloggs as the orphan article, create links using this code: [[Joe Bloggs]]. Hope this helps. – ukexpat (talk) 21:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Rollback Request Requirements
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
I was wondering if anyone could tell me what the minimum requirements are to become a Rollbacker. I currently have:
- Total edits (including deleted): 731
- Deleted edits: 41
- Live edits: 690
My active status can be seen here
Would it be worth me adding a request now or waiting a couple of months. Thanks Paul2387 12:28, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- As long as you have a stable edit history (as you appear to have), it couldn't hurt to ask. :) I've seen editors with lesser stats be granted rollback rights. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 21:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- I've granted your request. Go forth and use your new powers wisely (for obvious vandalism only), for they can be removed as quickly as they have been given. TNXMan 21:47, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
What happened to all the thumbnails?
I've recently noticed that all animated GIFs are now completely broken. MediaWiki used to render smaller resampled versions of all images, and this was particularly good for animated GIFs. But all of sudden, the site is giving a direct link to the full size images, which are several times larger than the thumbs, and has to be rescaled by the browser. I have interpolation disabled in Opera, and it looks absolutely awful. What happened here? Are you guys trying to save space instead of bandwidth? — Kieff | Talk 22:30, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- A post four days ago at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Animated gif bug? said: "Werdna just disabled GIF scaling again, because no one who understands that code has time to fix it right now." PrimeHunter (talk) 23:13, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- See also Bug 22041. Nanonic (talk) 23:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Breach of name suppression order
I have found a breach of a name suppression order on Wikipedia. A New Zealand court has given a certain defendant name suppression. This defendant's page on Wikipedia has the information buried in the history/discussion area. If I tell anyone which page it is, I will be revealing who the defendant is. A New Zealand blogger is currently before the court for allegedly publishing the name but I don't think anyone has noticed that the information is also on Wikipedia. My ISP doesn't seem to be interested. What should I do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.44.30 (talk) 22:54, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Send an email with the details as described at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight. Algebraist 22:56, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
January 18
keuffel and esser co also called k&esser co have ther model rule six sided 1631w
IT WAS NEW IN 1969 TEMPLE UNIV . NEED TO UNDERSTAND WRITING OF NUMBERS TO SCALE CAN YOU HELP ???? THANK YOU bill zuschlag ------------ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.88.160.1 (talk) 00:46, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- This question belongs on the Reference Desk, but as I have one, I'll answer. In short, the "10" scale has 10 divisions per inch, the "50" scale has 50 divisions per inch, etc. LeadSongDog come howl 03:36, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
API
Is there an API to allow me to pull data from wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gtmurff (talk • contribs) 01:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Yes. (the documentation isn't very good, though) Algebraist 01:44, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Picture in post won't show
I have uploaded a picture to Wiki commons to show on the Russell, Manitoba page (Russellmainstreet.jpg). This picture is not copyright protected. I don't understand why it doesn't show up on the page. I followed all the Wikipedia Instructions to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chanebaum (talk • contribs) 03:23, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- That is because the file is called File:Russellmainstreet.JPG not File:Russellmainstreet.jpg. Case is significant in wiki links. I considered changing the link, but I think it would be better to get the file renamed. --ColinFine (talk) 08:04, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Contributing, not thru research, but personal experience.
I have 35 years experience with Native American ceremony, Sundance, sweatlodge, et al. When I taught a seminar at Yale on the subject, the Committee on Teaching all but turned it down, saying I was a "practicioner, not an observer." I am not a member of the scientific community. Therefore, I am hesitant to edit any of the subjects in Wikipedia of which I have intimate personal knowledge. Please advise me. >>>> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hankernst (talk • contribs) 03:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
could I get complete information sent to me <address and email redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.29.231.45 (talk) 03:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Your expertise is welcome on Wikipedia: we do not reject anybody's contributions as long as they are written in a neutral tone, supported by reliable sources, not original research, (and not disruptive in nature). Please see the five pillars of Wikipedia.
Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you want them to be permanently removed from the page history, please email oversight-l
lists.wikimedia.org. --ColinFine (talk) 08:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Question Concerning Permission to Use Photographs
Hello,
I would like to request your assistance in determining how best to establish the proper permissions to use photographs for an article.
I recently completed an article called Jim McCormick (speaker). I uploaded two of the photographs under "fair use" as they were photographs from public events. The third is a headshot from the subjects web page.
Evidently, I did not understand "fair use" properly as the photographs have both been removed. I've received notification that the headshot will also be deleted unless I clear this up. So, I've been doing some research.....
From what I gathered, it seems clear that a creative common license would probably be in order, except for one thing - although I have established that Mr. McCormick owns the copyright to the photographs in question he is, obviously of course, not their creator (i.e., the photographer).
Given that this is the case, is the best way to proceed to request that he submit the photographs to Wikipedia using the text you suggest or will a request on my part for permission be sufficient - the text of this section doesn't seem to cover someone who holds the copyright but is not the creator (in this case, photographer)?
Thank you very much for your assistance.
Jabailey1 (talk) 05:39, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- I don't know exactly how the permission should be submitted, but I'll comment on part of your question. Sometimes, for brevity, people will say the creator owns the copyright, but this is not necessarily true. The creator might have signed a contract, in advance, that gives the copyright to someone else; this is a work-for-hire. Or, after creating it, the creator might have sold or given the copyright to someone else. So if the subject of the photo somehow acquired all the rights, then he could give permission to Wikipedia. It is also possible the subject might have been given limited rights, in which case it gets really complicated. --Jc3s5h (talk) 05:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
i see that I asked the question above in the incorrect place. i will correct that and repost the question to the media copyright questions page.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Jabailey1 (talk) 05:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
I wrote the message to say I would repost, before I saw your response.
Jabailey1 (talk) 05:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Userbox construction
This is my first time designing my own. I've got:
"" | User minimalist. |
I don't want the quotes showing on the left, but if I just leave "id =" blank, it doesn't display the left sub box. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:37, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you just want an otherwise blank gray box on the left, you can simply use a null character in the id, such as <br>. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. Looks good and laconic. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Editing
I accidently deleted something from a table. How do I put it back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Klltr (talk • contribs) 08:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- You could revert yourself. Which article are you referring to? Dismas|(talk) 08:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have reverted the changes you made to List of RealD films per your request here and on User talk:Klltr#Urgent Help Needed. In future, if you go to history, you can click on undo. Incidently, there is nothing wrong with leaving some red links in articles (as long as the number is not excessive) - it shows new articles which could be created. In the case of the redlinks on that page, they are all recently released films, so it might be that articles will be (or could be) created in the near future. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:37, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Uploading a photo from family archives for an existing Wikipedia file/page (of our deceased son Andrei Toncu).
Please help us because we don't know how to do it.
Elena Toncu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.244.105 (talk) 11:13, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- On the left side of the screen is a series of boxes, one of which is the Search box. Below that is a hyperlink for "Upload file". Click on it and follow the instructions. Then insert a link from the article to the uploaded picture. You might consider uploading it to wikicommons instead. Kittybrewster ☎ 12:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you want to add an existing image to an article, add
[[Image:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]]
to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacingFile name.jpg
with the actual file name of the image, andCaption text
with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information. - If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must find out what the proper license of the image is. If you know the image is licensed under a free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure what license the image takes, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy. I hope this helps. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 12:33, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
uploaded an article?
i have uploaded one article" Dhvani Desai" who is a prominent animator-filmmaker in India. along with some external links....for verification. but its still not uploaded. how do i know its finally put up? or else do let me know if gets put up. this is the first time i have put up an article, hence this query. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupendrafest (talk • contribs) 13:43, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- The article is at User:59.183.178.77/Dhvani Desai. It needs to be moved to article space, which you cannot do at the moment as your account isn't old enough (you need to have had an account for 4 days and have at least 10 edits: you meet the edits criteria though). I will move it to Dhvani Desai - it will need tidying up a bit though so I'll do some quick tidy up first! I'll leave a message when I've moved it. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 13:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have moved it to Dhvani Desai. It still needs more cleaning up, which I will try to get done later today when I get a chance to do it properly. If anyone else wants to, feel free! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 14:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Control table of contents?
How can I control the table of contents box that appears when you have four or more sections in an article? In particular, I don't want it to appear at all. My sections are small and the appearance of the Contents box is an unneeded distraction. thanks GloverEpp (talk) 13:56, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Are you referring to La Renaissance (barge)? If so, as a reader I don't find the ToC distracting. However, if you read WP:TOC that explains how to turn off the table of contents. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 14:04, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- The question wasn't about La Renaissance (barge) in particular. I was just curious about how to do it and had failed in searching through HELP on my own. thanks for your reply. GloverEpp (talk) 14:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Add the code __NOTOC__ at the top of the article. I should warn you that unless you have very good reasons for suppressing the TOC, if you add the code to an article it will almost certainly be reverted. If the ToC is distracting to you, click on the "hide" link to collapse it. – ukexpat (talk) 15:17, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Help neeed with strange edits
Hi
Another editor insists on making these edits to the article ZZ Top. I have already reverted them twice, for the reasons I have explained at Talk:ZZ_Top#Second_removal_of_edits, but they keep reappearing. I am not sure if the edits are intended to be constructive, if they are the product of a confused/misguided editor, or what. Could an experienced editor please take a look? Thanks. 86.147.160.11 (talk) 14:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC).
- I would assume good faith if the edits were a little more innocent, but this user is removing whole paragraphs, going against Wikipedia guidelines (e.g. removing pronunciation), adding unsourced statements, and making edits that are outright vandalism (e.g. changing the record label in several instances from RCA to BMG). I would slap 'em with a {{uw-vandalism2}} because the edits are unconstructive enough to make it really hard to issue a {{uw-vandalism1}} (the normal "misguided editor" template) but they aren't necessarily bad enough to warrant a {{uw-vandalism3}} (which assumes bad faith). {{uw-vandalism2}} is a nice middle ground because it doesn't make a faith assumption. Along with the warning add a link to your post on Talk:ZZ Top. After warning, I would watch and see how they react; usually one warning is enough to stop most new vandals, but if they continue (especially if they don't respond on either talkpage) it's definitely time to assume the user is not acting in good faith. Xenon54 / talk / 15:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Missing article
There is no article for h which is Planks constant, and important constant in science, at least I did not see it.
Your article on the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle contains h bar which is h/(2Pi), but the article never gives a numerical value for h. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.197.184.36 (talk) 15:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- There is an article on Planck's constant. Xenon54 / talk / 15:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- In addition the H (disambiguation) page contains a link.--SPhilbrickT 19:26, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Mr Don Ratzlaff
Dear Don, Remember me, we moved to OK to be closer to one of our daughters in our older age. Remember I had you dear sister Aileen in first grade at the Canada Dist. 60 school, back in the late 50's. She is one of my success stories after teaching 35 years in the county schools, 27 in the Marion # 408 schools.
To get to the point. I do miss the Free Press and really wish I was on your mailing list, but I know I am from out of state and your guidelines do not include this area. I would subscribe but our budget is limited so my brother, Paul Meysing, saves me his issues that I get when we get back to visit him about every 2 or 3 months, old news is better than no Free Press.
Again, I want to put an article for a card shower in recognition of my sister-in-law's 80th birthday (Mrs. Paul Meysing) and wonder if there is a charge for that service. It seems I have heard that you now charge for some of those services, or did I dream this. Please let me know so I can get you the info for the Feb. 3 issue. Thank you, If I had your phone number I could call you and save all of your time by reading this. It seems to be a deep secret as I couldn't find it on your web site. I'm sure there is a reason.
Direct to Don Ratzlaff/ Not for publication —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.213.113.213 (talk) 15:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our roughly three million articles, and thought that we were directly affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:56, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you wish for them to be permanently removed from the page history, email this address. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:56, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Your contact details have been permanently removed from the page history by an oversighter (Happy-melon to be precise), as I wasn't sure if you would see my message, so I contacted them on your behalf. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Article Creation Check?
I'd like to view which articles specific users have created, how can I do this? I only know how to see all of their contribution.Thanks. DegenFarang (talk) 16:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- If you go to
Escaladix's List Articles, this will show you all new articles created by a specific user (redirects/non-redirects/all) -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:59, 18 January 2010 (UTC)- Oops, wrong one - that one's not working at the moment. Try SoxRed93's utility here instead. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- There's also a direct link to the articles created by someone at the bottom of the User's contributions page. This is the same tool as above, but a direct link for the user you're looking at.--BelovedFreak 17:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! DegenFarang (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, Belovedfreak! I've never noticed that one. By the way, the direct link to the tool also allows you to look at new articles created on other WMF projects (Wikipedia, Wiktionary, etc - and different languages, such as en, fr, de, ...) and different name spaces (Articles, User, User Talk, etc). -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- There's also a direct link to the articles created by someone at the bottom of the User's contributions page. This is the same tool as above, but a direct link for the user you're looking at.--BelovedFreak 17:06, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oops, wrong one - that one's not working at the moment. Try SoxRed93's utility here instead. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
How to correctly post a question or comment in an article discussion
Hello,
Thanks for Wikipedia, I use it very often more and more.
I wanted to add a comment to an article discussion, and I saw that everyone else's comment appeared different from the one I entered, so I think I must not have entered mine correctly, but it did show up.
So, I can't find instructions on how to add a comment or question to an article discussion. I will keep looking, but if there is a link you could give me, thank you very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtwd (talk • contribs) 21:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- I formatted your comment for you, see this edit. I have to say though that "It's brilliant" isn't going to hold much sway in a deletion discussion. You need to focus on the reasons why the article has been sent for discussion, which in this case appears to be because it is orginal research. – ukexpat (talk) 21:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
eminem
Hi i was wondering if you could list the singles for eminems album titled "infinite" you list singles for every eminem album but that one. That would be great if you could do that.
thanks have a nice day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.203.103.234 (talk) 21:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC)