Select Page history and then choose (click on) the version of your choice. From there you can go back or forward one iteration at a time or start over from a different version. --hydnjotalk01:07, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The same question was asked on October 30. The answer was that that the software used to supply page statistics, but it was removed because of performance problems (The servers get somewhere around 5,000 requests per second at peak times). You can see the original answers here. --GraemeL(talk)01:21, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
While reading the article about Starships, I found a link for the SDF-1 from Macross. When I clicked on it, I went to SDF-1 as it relates to the immune system (I think). I do not know where the SDF-1: Macross link should go. How do I find out who to contact regarding fixing this? I can't do it myself since I don't know where it's suppose to go.
Hello :)...I used to have an older version of your google toolbar installed which had a built in language translator for when visiting foreign websites it translated the whole page at once....upon installing your new toolbar I can only find an option for mouse hovering one word at a time translation...is there a way to get back the old version with the full translator installed or as a separate download add on?
I noticed User:Knowledge4all is going through everything pretty much alphabetically and adding external links to the online Columbia Encyclopedia. I'm not going to go through and check every one, but some spot-checking suggested that the articles from the CE are frequently very inferior to their Wikipedia counterparts. Is there any official policy on this sort of thing? Or a better place for me to ask this question? —HorsePunchKid→龜05:36, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Unless the wikipedia article takes from CE, an article shouldn't link to to it. perhaps he's doing a bit of advertising eh? --Ballchef23:14, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Why have various articles on ancient history such as Cholas, Hunas and Indo-Sassanian shown up at CAT:CSD, as candidates for speedy deletion? There's no speedy delete tag on them, and no category link at the bottom. I can't find anything in the edit history that would add them to the category. Is this a MediaWiki bug? — JIP | Talk06:21, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
HI! For lack of any other place to do this (I searched throughout your site!) I wish to submit an addition to your material on the subject individual. Under "places named after" I submit the more recent info as follows:
HMCS Quadra - a Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Summer Training Centre located in Comox British Columbia, Canada. Named for the Spanish explorer Quadra and commissioned in 1956 as a training base in Canada. Still operating as same to this day. reference: www.quadraalumni.ca More info available at http://www.cadets.net/pac/seacad/summer/cstc_e.asp
Regards,
D. Yates
e-mail removed
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. If you wish to submit new material, simply click the "edit this page" tab at the top of the page or an "[Edit]" link at a section, add the changes you need, and click on Save page. — JIP | Talk09:03, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The longitude between 180° W to 180°E is true on the earth, and perhaps be true on the sun and the moon, but it is not true on other planets and moons. Some planets have a longitude range from 0° E to 360° E, so I suggest to modify the geographical coordinate site to allow a much wide longitude range from -360 to +360. See the last paragraph in Timekeeping_on_Mars#Keeping_track_of_time_of_day for details about geographical coordinate used on Mars. — Yaohua200012:30, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently kvaleberg.com (the map sources page) and I both are ignorant of the fact that +-180 degrees just applies to the Earth. We should probably inform them (since they support different globes) that they have to modify their error checking. — Sverdrup13:09, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
All today I have been having difficulties - my computer has been saying "The operation timed out when attempting to connect to rr.knams.wikimedia.org". This happens on all browsers with a message of similar meaning. It is only now that stuff is back to normal. Can anyone help? --[[User:4836.03|User:4836.03 Oh yeah! i am cool!]] 12:32, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Whenever something like that happens to me, I usually go to Wikipedia status to see if the problem is on my end or Wikipedia's. It appears, scrolling down to the bottom of the page, that there was some issues with timeouts earlier. Akamad13:01, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Good morning. A young man want to know if you have movies and other informations in DVD. Thank you.
I am unsure if this is a test edit or not (I added the sub heading, but not the "Bold text" part), but either way, Wikipedia certainly does have information on movies and DVDs, just search what ever movie you are looking for in the seach box. I assume that's what you meant by your question. If you mean: does Wikipedia sell movies/DVDs? The answer is no. Akamad14:31, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How do I link from a Wikipedia page to my own private wiki space?
Hi. Our group would like to be able to link back to a Wikipedia page from our own private wiki page. Is that possible? If so, could you explain to us how to do it? Thanks so much. SHH
Try Wikipedia:External link. The title of your question says linking to your wiki, the question is about linking from your wiki. Please note that unless it's from your personal userpage it's quite likely linking to a personal wiki from Wikipedia is considered SPAM. Read the link to find out what is considered acceptable. Linking to Wikipedia has no restrictions. - Mgm|(talk)19:56, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Still being something of a wikinoob, I'm hoping someone might offer some insight. While I've browsed through a great many pages that talk about templates, and have even read through the complete list of templates, there is one concept that I'm still confused on. Namely, templates that are prefixed by 'User_'. As best I can gather, these are templates that are created as a subpage of a user page (if I am using the terminology correctly, "in the user namespace")? How can one search through these templates? For example, I would like to find a userbox template that identifies nationality that I've seen in some people's "babel" box. Any advice is most appreciated.
It's actually possible to include any page on Wikipedia in another page as a type of template; the process is called 'transclusion'. To transclude a page from the template namespace, just enclose the page's name in double braces. The following code would transclude (insert) the content of the page Template:Foo.
{{Foo}}
For pages outside the Template: namespace, you have to include the namespace and a leading colon. If User:Johnsmith created a subpage called Foo which he wanted to transclude, (User:Johnsmith/Foo), he would use
I think there was some discussion somewhere about POV links being used as sources. Can you use a POV website for a source? Does it then make the article POV? Can POV links be deleted? Can someone point me in the direction of this discussion. I have looked around, but with no success. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. --LV(Dark Mark)21:46, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If a POV link is being used to indicvate what people whith a particualr PoV think or say, then it can be included -- indeed in some cases WP:NPOVrequires that cited examples of multiple points of view be included, adn POV links can be a good way to do this. The title and/or placement of the link should indicate that it is going to a PoV site, if the PoV is extreme. But in any case sites outside of wikipedia are not in geenral commited to the NPOV policy, and we can't link to any site, or reference any book, without there being a sizable chance that the work refernced has a specific PoV, often a strong and biased one. DES(talk)22:14, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Note that WP:NPOV says, in part: Where we might want to state an opinion, we convert that opinion into a fact by attributing the opinion to someone. So, rather than asserting, "The Beatles were the greatest rock band," we can say, "Most music listeners believe that the Beatles were the greatest rock band of the Sixties," which is a fact verifiable by survey results, or "The Beatles had more Billboard #1 hits than any other rock band," which is also a fact. In the first instance we assert an opinion; in the second and third instances we "convert" that opinion into fact by attributing it to someone. It's important to note this formulation is substantially different from the "some people believe ..." formulation popular in political debates. The reference requires an identifiable and subjectively quantifiable population or, better still, a name. Including a link to a well identified PoV site can be a good way to do that. Note that a PoV site that fails to identify its PoV, and even who is responsible for the site, and that tries to present it's Pov as widely accepted and unquestioned fact, may not be a good site to link to unless the link clearly identifies the person or group responsible fo the site, adn perhaps the PoV of that person or group. DES(talk)22:14, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I´m really fascinated by wikipedia, but some times its very slow to translate any article. Could you tell me, how could I and my friends help to translate articles to Czech language and place these translations to wikipedia for others, please? Thank you.
{{Potd/{{CURRENTYEAR}}-{{CURRENTMONTH}}-{{CURRENTDAY}}_(en)}} should work provided you can find someone who can get the code to prepend a tag to refer to the commons correctly. If I try, it puts another template tag in from of that. - 131.211.210.1512:00, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hello my name is Candyce Frichtel
My e-mail address is <removed>
I`am a first year med student and my instructor is saying that HoH and H2o are the same meaning (or component) is this a true statement or not: the reason for my question and curiosity are : i looked up the definition of both and they dont seem to fall in the same category ; although they both have water as a basis for their chemical make-up. i would like a response to my question so that i can be clear about whether HoH and H2o are the same chemical make-up or do they differ.
Websters collegiate dictionary The concise Columbia encyclopedia HoH and H2o web pages
It's HOH and H2O with a capital O (oh, not zero). What I remember is that you write two H's if you have to separate hydrogen atoms but H2 if they have combined with a molecular bond. — JIP | Talk07:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The H2 notation simply says the total number in the molecule, or the proportion, in the case of an ionic crystal. The H-0-H form shows the actual structure (except that they are not in a straight line - if they were, the world would be a less interesting place, probably with no liquid water). All of them are, of course, to some extent, simplifications. --David Woolley13:37, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Normally when you click a picture, it takes you to the picture. How do you link a page to it so that when you click the picture it takes you to that page instead of the picture?
I'm not sure, but I think it's important that it go to the image page in every case. That's because people need an easy way to check the copyright status or other information about the picture. Also, consistent behaviour seems a good thing. Notinasnaid08:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What about on a user page? I would like an image to go to another page so that I can remove the frame and caption, is it possible? --Ballchef11:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I wish to use the image in a forthcoming book but would like to get access to the best quality original possible. Do you know where or how this can be obtained?
Thanking you in anticipation.
George English
This image apparently is taken from the "albums de croÿ" (note spelling) of Charles de Croÿ. No idea where to get a better scan. There seems to be (or have been) an exposition on these albums at the Chateau de Flers in Villeneuve-d'Ascq in France [1]. Lupo09:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, it is often the case that you have to buy or license a high quality image. Just because something is in the public domain doesn't mean it is freely available. What you do obtain, you may use in any way (unless you obtained it under a license). 17:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
A side note, high quality images of PD work may not be copyrightable in the US because of their lack of originality. See [2]. Of course that doesn't mean you will succeed in demanding the museum send you an 8000x6000 TIFF file of their painting. Tempshill21:10, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
On the Tekken (2006 film) article we have a user (User:81.218.200.189, he seems to change IP's every day he comes to edit FWIW) consistently adding unverifiable (WP:V) information (specifically a non-existent cast list). He then goes to each of the individual actor's pages and adds "Tekken" to the actors filmography. I've done the test/test2/test3/test4 template bit, hoping this might at least get the guy to talk (since this could be a content dispute), but so far no response. There's discussion on Talk:Tekken (2006 film), but this user hasn't participated or is unwilling to participate. What's worse, the incorrect info on this page is being used as source on other sites, so I'd really like it if this guy would knock it off. So my question is: is this vandalism? A content dispute? How can I resolve it given that the individual won't respond? -Locke Cole11:50, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If it can't be verified and the user is not prepared to listen to reason, then -yes- I would consider it vandalism. Since he regularly changes IPs, I'd suggest you ask for protection of the Tekken article, rather than a block, because they are likely going to try and evade it. - Mgm|(talk)13:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
dear sir, please i would like to know how much castor seed can be collected per hectar? thanx. mekonnen gebabaw. my e mail address, <deleted - see instructions> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mekonnen (talk • contribs)
Dear Concerned!
I'm a student of electrical engineering and wants to ask some information on;
1) Backplane buses (ISA, EISA, AGP, PCI).(Complete article)
2) Advantages and Limitations
3) Which one is faster?What is the data transfer rate?
Please email me these things on this email address:
<deleted - see instructions>
Regards,
Tehseen Aslam
(A student at University of Engg. & Tech., Lahore, Pakistan.)
As the instructions at the head of the page indicate, this is not a page for factual questions. You need the Wikipedia:Reference desk, specifically the science part. This page is to ask questions about the use of the Wikipedia itself. --bodnotbod18:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone please look at and remove the stupid comments from the Bruce Lee page. I love this site and use it all the time, but don't know how to do something like this myself and the help pages are too complex. Thank you.
When uploading a screenshot, the option bar notes that one screenshot per article can be used, but I can't seem to find any other times when this restriction is stated in the usage policy files. I'd just like confirmation that there is a one screenshot per article restriction.
Whilst there is no explicit restriction (there's cases where several can be justified), we try to encourage keeping the use of fair use images to a minimum - the legal validity of having multiple images is often pretty shaky. A one-fair-use-image maximum is, if possible, a good rule of thumb to stick to. (Free images are even better, but understandably hard to get for films!) Shimgray | talk | 02:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm writing an article of an item with multiple parts (the First Tsurugi article), and would like to include screenshots of each part to supplement my probably insufficient written descriptions, then might taking shots of each part and posting them be excessive? KLSymph02:41, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mmmmuuh... I dunno, frankly. I'd encourage you to only use one, but I can see how you could argue for half a dozen (and, god knows, enough articles on films do) - you're using them alongside an explicit discussion of the thing portrayed, some critical and informed commentary, &c. Hrm. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fair use is a good place to leave this sort of query. Shimgray | talk | 03:29, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Someone stated that the song "Caught Up" by Usher is about masturbation, however the song is clearly about a women that the man is "caught up" with. Can wikipedia change this, because it is highly insufficient, and I am hoping that the author of that page was not doing it out of spite.
Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs changing, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit any article by simply following the Edit this page link. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to...) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use out the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. Shimgray | talk | 03:19, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the rules on the non-use of original research before doing so, as "clearly about" sounds like your opinion, rather than a statement that there are other documents that you can reference to support that view. Conversely, if no source is given for the current view, that may be original research and should be challenged on the article's talk page, or with the original author, and, if necessary, and after searching to confirm no supporting material, removed. --David Woolley07:57, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a way to find out recent changes in the articles that are linked to one particular article. For example, I want to see changes in pages that are linked to India. Please advise -- Ganeshk07:27, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That is recent changes in links present in the India article (outbound links). What I am looking for is recent changes in all the articles that link to the India article (inbound links). Hope that clarifies. - Ganeshk09:37, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know there is no automated way to do precisely what you're asking for. You might be interested in List of India-related topics (there are fairly many "list of x-related topics" pages), which exists at least partly to allow the "related changes" operation. You could also create a subpage of your user page containing links to whatever set of articles you're interested in, and view recent changes for that specific set of articles using "related changes". Note the "list of" articles (or your user subpage) are manually updated and many have not been kept up to date since categories were introduced a little more than a year ago. "Related changes" does not seem to work for categories. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:21, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
When I click the link to Argentinian national anthem mp3 (the second link in the page), instead of a download page, it "warps" into a Spanish-Argentinian site about education in Buenos Aires(educacion=education, right?) with tons of another links. I have no idea what to do, since I have no knowledge about Spanish language at all. So, could you make a more-specific link that can lead straight to the mp3 file, please? Thank you.
Ooooh.... Then please, someone, make it "back to live" ! Thank you.
The problem is that it's an external link - we have no control over whether it's dead or not. I'm afraid to get it back you'd have to contact that site specifically. I'll remove the link from the page for now, though, since it's of no use. Shimgray | talk | 12:42, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Noooo....! To anyone understands Spanish and accidentally sets his eyes onto this section, please, do so!
There seems to be an edit war about the transliteration of an arabic word. It's certainly not vandalism, but I would have thought that the transliterations were somewhat arbitrary, and therefore it was unreasonable to claim a mistransliteration. It looks to me that the requests for comment process is needed here, not a blocking. --David Woolley12:50, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting articles without checking the authenticity
A quick question, to ask why splash (AN ADMINISTRATOR) had the power to delete an updated page on "Damn Skippy". I updated the page to display information on my band of the same name. All information was correct and could have easily been verified by going to the specified websites. I am wondering why the update was denoted as "Nonsense/Loser", this is unfair.
An apology would be kindly accepted.
Many thanks.
Wikipedia is not the place for self promotion. I've just listed the article you re-created as an article to be considered for deletion. This isn't to say that your band isn't great, or that you will not be notable enough for inclusion someday in the future. However, Wikipedia cannot be a promotional site for non-notable bands, non-notable people, etc., etc. Imagine what Wikipedia would be like if every Joe Schmoe had an article?. It would be unruley, unencyclopedic, unmanagable... in short, chaos. As for the admin calling you a "loser" -- that's not fair, I agree. However, due to the quirky song names of your band, he or she probably thought you were being a vandal playing a hoax on wikipedia. --Quasipalm15:03, 9 November 2005 (UTC) p.s. I've added your other albums, along with Damn Skippy to the AfD, including Live From The Haunted Candle Shop, Hip To The Javabean, Clown Circus.[reply]
Creating a new page with the same title as an existing page
How do I create a new page whose title is identical to that of an existing page? Specifically, I would like to create a page for a person whose name already exists in Wikipedia. Will this involve creating disambiguation and redirects? Does the existing page need to be edited in any way?
I'm sure there are many ways to approach this. Would appreciate your input.
The general process involves disambiguation by adding a parenthetical distinguisher after the main article name, e.g. "suit (cards)" if you want to write a "suit" article and want to distinguish it from clothing. — Extreme Unction19:22, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I see some folks on this page and others have their signatures in different colors, superscript, subscript, and so forth. I know how to use HTML, so my questions are basically:
1. Are these signatures saved somewhere, and accessed via some combination of keystrokes similar to ~~~~? Or are they just saved locally on the poster's computer and cut-and-pasted as necessary?
The modified signatures are set up in Preferences. Basically to change your signature, put something in the box marked "Nickname" and check the box marked "Raw Signatures". This will prevent the Wiki from automaticaly linking your name to your user page. You can make your own wiki links in the Nickname box (try testing it in the Sandbox first). Enter ~~~~ in talk pages to display the signature you created, with timestamp. ~~~ displays your signature but no timestamp, or ~~~~~ for timestamp alone.
Mine looks like this -=# [[User:AmosWolfe|Amos E Wolfe]] <sup>[[User talk:AmosWolfe|talk]]</sup> #=-
Note that an overly ornate signature can be perceived as attention-seeking or annoying; such signatures also eat more bandwidth than they deserve. Feel free to add a splash of uniqueness, but don't go overboard. If someone suggests that your signature might be a bit too dramatic, take heed. To produce a signature, use three tildes: ~~~. For a signature and timestamp, use four tildes (~~~~) and for a timestamp alone, use five: ~~~~~. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:01, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've just added a babel box on my user page. I noticed however there are various "user templates" for additional languages like C programming language, HTML and such.
Is it "really right" to put those languages in babel boxes? After all, they're not "real world" languages. Maybe I've not got the point in babel boxes?
Thank you, MaxDZ820:17, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
People do it also because they think it's neat and cute or whatever. They're having a little fun with their user page. Where's the harm? Dismas|(talk)21:34, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed they are not "real world" languages, but listing them is still useful. The Babel box was made to encourage user classification by the languages they have mastered. Whether they are spoken in the real world is irrelevant in that case. - Mgm|(talk)22:50, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll think about it. I see above there's a question about generic div boxes. I believe I'll play a little with them. Thank you for your feedback. MaxDZ811:27, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Earlier today I added merge tags to Scottish term days and Quarter days, these were reverted by User:Mais oui! without discussion. I readded them and added an entry to the articles talk page. Mais oui since has changed them to mergedisputed tags and we've had a good bit of to-and-fro on reverts about it.
In my opinion the merge is not disputed. I added the tags because I thought the articles would be better if merged. I added the tags to see if anyone else thought so too, or if they thought it was a bad idea. The tags are there to point folk toward a discussion on the subject, if most people don't think a merge is a good idea then of course i'll not merge the articles. A disputed merge is one where i just go in and do a merge and someone thinks "whoa, that's a bad idea". Or if at the end of the merge discussion I do a merge regardless - that is a disputed merge. Am I completely off the ball here? I have discussed on the user's talk page without much success...
I'd rather discuss the merge, rather have someone play silly beggers with the politics of it - going on about 3RR and "no personal attacks" when I'm the one trying to be constructive, discuss things and have made no personal attacks at all...
It is a bit votish, but a discussion seems to be ongoing on Talk:Quarter days right now. I think was Mais Oui tried to say is that it would've been a good idea if you had explained why you wanted them merged on the talk page in the first place, but I do agree with you that that's not really mandatory. - Mgm|(talk)22:46, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, don't know where that layout came from, but it was there when I added my comments so... Anyway, that's my point - it is a discussion, so why the need for the dispute tags etc? Thanks/wangi22:56, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Why can't we not having a traditional Chinese character pages? It will serve likely more than those only familiar with the simplified characters. Thanks and I appreciate some response.
Is that the simplified Chinese Wikipedia? Or the traditional Chinese Wikipedia? Maybe there is only one, which would lead to the question. Notinasnaid10:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Howdy. I'm new at this and I'm not sure I understand an issue about the sandbox. Going through the tutorial Wikipedia:Tutorial (Wikipedia links), and at the bottom, it says "Try it! Here's the sandbox for this page." But when I click on the link, it just goes to the regular sandbox (Welcome to the Wikipedia Sandbox! This page allows you to carry out experiments. To edit,...). Same thing happens for Wikipedia:Tutorial (Related site links). Am I supposed to cut and paste everything into the sandbox and then play? I looked through the editing FAQs but maybe I need a little bit more on how the sandbox works. Hope this isn't too stoopid a question.
Not a stupid question at all! What you're seeing when you hit the link for the tutorial sandbox is actually a template, which is basically a chunk of wiki markup that is included (transcluded, as they say) into another page. The main sandbox just so happens to use the same template as this other sandbox, but the pages themselves are actually stored separately. So do go ahead and just edit the sandbox linked from the tutorial; it won't affect the main sandbox, though you're certainly welcome to experiment there, too. Hope that wasn't too confusing. Good luck, welcome to Wikipedia, and let me know if you need any further help! —HorsePunchKid→龜06:46, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm wondering, does it constitute as fair use to use small sound clips directly out of an anime series or film? We're talking about 2-3 second clips, for name pronunciation. -- Ynhockey || Talk11:59, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use is tricky. As noted above, we like to avoid it. The important thing here, is to remember that fair use depends on the context. If you write about an anime series, you can illustrate the article with a poster as fair use, since it's directly and closely related to the subject. Pronunciation of names of anime figures is not central or essensial illustration of the article, and may not be valid fair use, depending on standpoint. On the far end, if you cut sounds from an anime episode, to illustrate something completely different (like pronunciation of a name, in an article about, say Mao), fair use doesn't apply because you are just ripping off someone's value without association. — Sverdrup13:02, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What is wikipedia?
Yesterday when I came here everything was stupid! Someone had changed Wikipedia to Wikipaedia with an e. Is this vandalism or official? Wikip(a)edia rocks!
If you are talking about the template, perhaps you can point me to the template you are working on, so I can have a go at fixing it. - Mgm|(talk)16:30, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to list it for AfD, but the "Link to this article's deletion page" or whatever takes me to a pre-existing archive from the last time it was up for a vote. (There apparently was no consensus.) So I removed the AfD and came here.
1. Is there an official or acceptable length of time to wait before re-nominating a page for deletion? The previous AfD vote was 2 months ago.
2. Assuming that it's kosher to re-nominate the page, how do I link to a new deletion page? The current deletion page offers up DIRE WARNINGS against altering the discussion archive, so I want to avoid doing that, if possible.
To renominate you use the tag {{subst:afdx|2nd}}. Read through the original AFD debate first and decide if it is likely that a renomination won't just lead to the same result. See WP:GD for further details. Sjakkalle(Check!)13:21, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
At the Dopethrone page, I'm editing track listings, and this happens every time I want to put the three parts of a song on a different line:
1. Song
2. Song
3. Song
I. Part One II. Part Two III. Part Three
Is there any way I can not have the text in the box? I've tried fiddling around with it, but it seems to go automatically. I presume it's something to do with having a Roman numerals list?
It's because you're putting a space at the beginning of the line:
I'm pretty sure it's a mis-spelling even in British English - phosphorus is the element, phosphorous is an adjective meaning containing phosphorus Nicola7910:31, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Accounts cannot be deleted. This is in order to comply with the GFDL license, which requires keeping track of individual contributions. If you no longer plan to use your account, then you can just leave it there and never log in again. Johntex\talk22:19, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How do I add a new link to the 1995 births Category page? Clicking the "edit" tab doesn't display the content that is actually shown on the page.
Categories are generated automatically from article text. To add an article to a category, add the text [[Category:1995 births|Smith, John]] (or whatever is appropriate) to the article. The text after the bar is used to put the name in order; the text displayed is always the name of the aricle. Susvolans⇔17:27, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The heading for the article on the America's cup incorrectly identifies the final matches of the America's Cup as the Louis Vuitton Cup. The Louis Vuitton Cup is the cup awarded to the winner of the challenger series. The winner of the Louis Vuitton Cup is the boat that sails against the defender of the America's Cup in the 9-series race for the America's Cup. This is a common misconception, but I couldn't find it misstated anywhere in the editable portions of the article. If the header is assembled by Wikipedia editors, I'd like to request that they update their information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.64.195.30 (talk • contribs)
I'm using MSWin MSIE6; would someone who knows such things check whether the scripts in my monobook.js should work with it, please? —msh210 15:48, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
For some reason which escapes me, the font with which I see wikipedia has changed(to a font that is downright horrendous). I cannot find the setting in my preferences, if there is one. And no one else seems to have commented on it, so I'm assuming it wasn't a wikipedia-wide change (that is, it's only affecting me, so far as I can tell). I don't believe it's something in my browser because all other pages outside of wikipedia look the same. Can someone point me to the setting? Thanks. --2tothe421:39, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have not seen any change in my fonts. There are various settings in your browser that can change default fonts, as well as problems that can occur in your operating system's settings. If you're sure neither of these is the problem, try checking out your CSS file, User:2tothe4/monobook.css. You can force Wikipedia to use a specific font with that; I can provide more details if necessary. Hope that helps!
On a marginally related note, did anyone else notice that for about five minutes a day or two ago, the default justification of paragraphs was set to "justified" (instead of "left justified", which it has always been)? Was someone fiddling with the main monobook.css? —HorsePunchKid→龜07:20, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
With most editors having tens/hundreds/ or even thousands of pages on their watchlist, this would be a very rarely used feature. Probably, I'm guessing, not enough to justify having it. Dismas|(talk)01:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
On the wikipedia page for Joey Waronker, all links are cross-referenced BLUE, except for the link to Walt Mink, which is RED. The reason for this, if I understand correctly, is that there is no wikipedia entry for Walt Mink.
However, there is a wikipedia entry for Walt Mink. The FAQ tells me I can link the two by authoring a Walt Mink entry -- but I already have.
What I can't seem to figure out (since I'm apparently dense) is how to--how do I put this--hip the Joey W. page to the existence of the Walt Mink page without recreating my entry on Walt Mink.
Why is it that any random person can come and edit your pages? Some random person can come around and make all correct things wrong, therefore messing up other's work. I have been doing research papers for school, finding out only recently that you can edit pages. I am worried that anyone looking for correct information could be picking up false information, therefore getting the wrong idea about something. This is just my opinion on this subject, but i would feel much more comfortable if you could maybe prevent anyone from editing the pages. Thankyou very much for listening. unsigned question by anon 24.211.103.120
As anyone can edit any article, it is of course possible for biased, out of date, or incorrect information to be posted. However, because there are so many other people reading the articles and monitoring contributions using the Recent Changes page, incorrect information is usually corrected quickly. Thus, the overall accuracy of the encyclopedia is improving all the time as it attracts more and more contributors. You are encouraged to help by correcting articles and passing on your own point of view.
But on the other hand, where do you think Wikipedia came from? There wasn't a huge accurate encyclopedia, suddenly opened up for vandalism; there was nothing at all, and all of these million articles and more exist because anyone can edit. And the job isn't finished yet. Notinasnaid16:59, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I added some content to an existent page. I see that all the Wikipedia pages have links embedded in thgeir content but all I did was add to content, I did not create any links. Does a human editor come along at some point and annotate content added by users?
I think he may be asking how you actually create links. The way it is done is to put the name of the article in double square brackets, like [[Wikipedia]] (Wikipedia). There are some subtleties which are explained in Wikipedia:How to edit a page. The most important are that the first letter may be either upper or lower case, but all others must be exactly as in the article title. The second is that you can put a vertical bar after the article title, and follow it with what you want to appear in blue, for the link, e.g. [[Wikipedia|this encyclopedia]] (this encyclopedia). There are various short cuts and special cases which can speed the process, but, for most articles, the above rules will get you started.
In many cases, you will need do no more than add the double square brackets to the text you have written, but you should always test each link, by previewing the edit and, for example, using right-click open in new window to make sure that it is what you expected. If it is not, you will have to find the right article and put its title and a vertical bar ("|") before your text (or change your text to match).
I'm familiar with RfC (for user disputes), AfD (for content deletion), but where exactly would one make a proposal to, in this case, ban all anonymous contributions from AOL IP addresses? --Locke Cole02:05, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'd figured it'd been discussed before, that's why I didn't want to try reinventing the wheel first. Thanks for the pointer to the older discussion! --Locke Cole16:41, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What is the location(address) of this organ builder? The date? The historic sinificance? [email removed] thank you linda shearin
Please read the instructions at the top of this page. Sharing your email address is likely going to leave you with a lot of spam and questions like yours should be directed at the reference desk. Good luck. - 131.211.210.1108:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen some discussion regarding templates in signatures (e.g. at Wikipedia:Template substitution). I assumed templates in signatures were not allowed, but now I suspect otherwise. So first I'd like to know for sure that they are allowed. Secondly, assuming they are allowed, I would like to subst mine (seems friendlier to the servers), but this seems to be forbidden (at least according to my tests in my sandbox). Is this actually the case? (See also Wikipedia:Help desk#Time in signature.) Thanks for any help! —HorsePunchKid→龜07:12, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In geernal templtes in signatatures are strongly discouraged, but there is no actual policy against them (although some people have suggested one from time to time), substituted templates avoid many of the problems and are IMO better than trascluded templates. But I think it is better yet to have a signature simple enough that no tempaltes are needed. DES(talk)16:37, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comments, though I am still confused. First, I'm certainly not a fan of excessively large signatures, but anything but the most trivial signature is impossible to edit effectively in the preferences. Second, my main point here, which I did not make clear, is that subst in signatures fails; the wiki markup for the template remains unprocessed. Is this a bug or a feature? —HorsePunchKid→龜19:14, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Broken global stylesheet, or where to report minor bugs?
There are two problems with the global stylesheet that should be fixed ASAP. First, the filter statement on line 225 should simply be removed: It is nonstandard and produces errors messages in Firefox. Secondly, the line-height property on line 208 has no units (should be 1.5em, I'm sure), which is invalid and also causes error messages.
These are trivially fixed, but I'm not sure this is the sort of thing a bug report should be filed for. If so, I'm happy to do so, but in that case, what sort of timeframe might I expect on the fix? (Not that I'm that worried about it getting fixed quickly; I'm just trying to debug some custom monobook stuff, and it's a tad annoying.) Much thanks! —HorsePunchKid→龜07:47, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Error messages in Firefox? I have no such problems. Are you sure the problem wasn't temporary? Anyway, it would help if you shared the error it produces. - 131.211.210.1108:28, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No need, really. The errors are pretty blatant and fixable, as I described. Look at the link I supplied and the line numbers, and you'll see them. I should clarify, though, that I'm not getting popup errors or anything; it's just dumping stuff into my Javascript console, which is rather annoying when one is trying to debug one's own code. :)—HorsePunchKid→龜19:01, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I found a page on Andrzej Maksymilian Fredro while surfing through Wikipedia recently, and I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better of in the Polish language area. The reason being that the article is pretty incomprehensible to any non-Polish speaking readers. In general, how do you nominate a page for review? (besides deletion)
Wahming08:38, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
{{cleanup}} or {{expansion}} usually works, as the article would then be placed into their corresponding category (Cleanup by month or Articles needing expansion) and someone who sees it could help expand it with info. NSLE(讨论) \<extra>09:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If a page on the en wikipedia is actually writen in a langauge other than english, you cn put the {{notenglish}} tag on it, and follow the directiosn that appear to list it as a page in need of translation. DES(talk)16:33, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There seem to be a lot of pages about wikipedia that have titles wikipedia:something_else
For example, there is wikipedia:relative size, here is wikipedia:help desk there is wikipedia:long articles
How can I get a list of all of the wikipedia colon subpages?
What I am curious about is just a dump of all of the subpages for the category wikipedia and if it is possible to find one for other categories with subcategories I would like to figure that out too.
Wikipedia:community portal has several links to different subpages, but not all of the subpages.
Apparently you've got your terminology mixed up. Categories are the links at the bottom of an article. "Wikipedia:" is what is called a namespace, so what you are really asking for is a list of pages in that namespace. Subpages are writing using "/" not ":". See Wikipedia:Glossary. - Mgm|(talk)11:56, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure I have seen a template that puts the containing article into a category, without showing up in that category itself. How is this done? — PhilHibbs | talk11:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think you actually want to use <includeonly> for what you are trying to do. <noiclude> will put the template in the category, but not any articles you add the template to. <includeonly> will not add the template to the category, but will add any articles the template is added to into the category. --GraemeL(talk)13:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
1. Is there an easy way to find out how many contributions a particular user has made? (Me, for example?)
2. Likewise, is there a way to find out a given user's IP address, in order to identify sock puppets?
3. I see folks voting on AfD with stuff like "Strong Delete" or "Strong Keep". What is the purpose of these extra emphatic votes for purposes of whether or not the article is kept or deleted? Do "Strong" votes count twice or something? Or maybe it's an inside reference to Demi Moore's "strenuous" objection in A Few Good Men? Or is it just meaningless internet posturing? Or what? Inquiring minds wanna know.
Yes, but not available to anyone other than a very restricted set of users for privacy reasons
Not really. AFD is not a vote; it's an attempt to gain consensus. One thing that helps in gaining consensus is some idea how strongly people feel about it, so often people will vote "weak delete" ("delete as is, but could change with improvement" or "I don't feel too strongly about this") or the like; "strong delete" ("please god, kill it now!") is the obvious corrolary. Shimgray | talk | 13:19, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I want to translate some articles from English to Greek.How can i do this?
A dictionary and a grammar might help.
More seriously, you may translate any article you wish, as all articles are available under the GFDL. If you wish to put them onto the greek wikipedia, you should ask them about their procedures, but usually the translator posts the translated article, with a note on its talk page that it was translated from a particular article on the en wikipedia, and the date. It is probably a good idea to register a user name on the greek wikipedia and log in when posting the traslation. DES(talk)16:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have done this once before, and the last time someone fixed it for me without explaining what they did. So here I've gone and done it again, and have no clue how to fix it myself.
The issue: I tried to add a page for AfD nomination in reverse, sorta. The entry is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octodecillion. I first tried to add the {{subst:afd3|pg=}} entry to the AfD log, and then I was going to go back and edit the specific entry page.
Additionally, the entry for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octodecillion shows up in the editable list of pages when you use the "add entry to AfD" link, but does not show up on the table of contents.
So I'd like all of this fixed. But, more importantly, I'd like to know how to fix it myself. (I know that following proper procedures will avoid all of this, but that doesn't help me now.)
I have fixed this. What I did was edit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octodecillion and add the missing section header. Using {{afd2}} inserts that header automatically, but you can always do it manually. the code is ===[[Octodecillion]]=== on the first line of the afd page.
Then i edited the AfD log for today, to make sure that the line {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octodecillion}} was properly in place. (it was, if it hadn't been I would have added it. This is what {{afd3}} does, but when i do an afd nomination i fand it easier to do this part manually.) Then i purged the cache on that page, so that the edit to the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octodecillion page was proeprly reflectd on the combined page. I hope tht helps. DES(talk)16:21, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm leaving a note on a user's talk page about some copyrighted material he submitted to Wikipedia. I'm clear on what most of the contents should say (from Template:Nothanks-sd). But I was hoping to link to a page that explained how you rewrite material to avoid copyright problems. Is there a page like this anywhere in the Wikipedia: namespace? I'm basically looking for an explanation of how much you have to change before you're allowed to use the material, written from a user's perspective. It seems like an obvious piece of documentation, but I had trouble finding links to anything about it. -- Creidieki17:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Briefly, you might want to shy away from looking at it as 'changing' the original to a non-copyvio—really the process is one of writing from scratch. You can transfer facts across, but not phrases. Sometimes it's a good idea to start by taking notes on the topic–sketch out a point-form version of what you want to write on a temporary page. It helps if you have more than one source to work from, too. Give it a day or two before you come back to write the final version; this will tend to cut down on any subconscious copying. Cite sources for any facts, and include relevant source pages in the external link list. Direct quotes can be used sparingly where appropriate, as long as they are marked as such and properly sourced. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:32, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
After edit conflict)
I'm not aware of any specifc page on this subject, but you could try reading Copyright and Wikipedia:copyright for soem guidance. If the page is basically factual, a rtewrite that simply states the same facts, or an appropriate subset of them, in significantly differnet words, and removes any rhetorical florishes will probably do. this is the usual method I adopt for dealing with cut&paste biography articles, for eaxmple. Be sure that the origianl version is cited as a source. Often such a re-write can be combined with changes to make the text neutral and encyclopedic in tone, and to follow the MoS in format. A link to teh MoS might be a good idea in your msg. If multiple sources can be found, and some content used from each, and each appropriately cited, that would probably be better.
Such a page as you suggest would probably be a good idea. Feel free to write it, adn then link to it. there is no specifiv standard for "how much" change to introduce, but it is better IMO if few if any sentnces are exactly copied.
Hey, has anyone seen a complete spidered version of Wikipedia for download (probably using BitTorrent)? I think it'd be handy to have a local copy (text only) of Wikipedia since the servers are buckling under the pressure of being popular. I was thinking about doing it myself, but I won't if someone else already has. I figure after a spidered copy is more or less complete, people could download it via BitTorrent since it'd be such a large file. This would have the added benefit that if something ever happened and knocked Wikipedia offline -- there would be lots and lots of redundant copies of it around the world. Does anything like this exist out there? I didn't see anything on Google. --Quasipalm19:47, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am an expert in an area of technology for which there is already a very short (a few sentences)description in Wikipedia. I would like to contribute a more adequate article (~ 2 pages) but I do not understand how this can be done. Am I supposed to delete the original page or just add to it? If I just add to it, there would be a redundancy in the introduction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NedRasor (talk • contribs)
The biggest problem for an expert is citing sources. You need to write the article so that someone without detailed knowledge in the specific field can verify its contents without asking you. --David Woolley22:35, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
After many failed attempts, I finally uploaded a corrected RembrandtNightwatch.jpg. It showed up right away in the file history. Since the lighting was still awful (I thought), I uploaded another, lighter one. I didn't realize that the image would take so long to show up. Well the first one (20:59, Nov 2005) was the right one. Would someone delete 23:00, Nov 2005? —Preceding unsigned comment added by NancyS (talk • contribs)
Whilst that image does have two, apparently identical, older versions, and a larger, newer, version, none were uploaded in 2005 and none match the time of day (minutes even) quoted. NancyS has never uploaded any images. --David Woolley22:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
So this gets to another area of Wiki that I don't get. Isn't Wikimedia supposed to have pictures linked to all the different wikis? The image came from Wikimedia Commons: Images for cleanup [[3]]. NancyS00:55, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Why does someone keep erasing my edits? I don't think I violated any copyrights and I didn't shout nor used offensive language. I checked my sources and they were correct, so I don't see any reason for anybody to erase my editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.14.168 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 11 November 2005
You need to ask this question on the talk page (see Discussion choice on the article page). The person who erased it will see your question and if courteous will respond and you can make your case for including your points. alteripse23:21, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the History tab at the top of the article will show all of the changes, including your own, and the ones which removed them. Look for the comments (and be sure to fill in accurate comments when you make your own changes). You do seem to have done some strange things (if it was you). For example, the article "Sonic the hedgehog" which used to be a redirect to Sonic The Hedgehog (upper case), was turned into a separate article. Notinasnaid09:09, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I was just curious about how much storage space is required to store all of Wikipedia, is there any place I can find this info? Thanks - Akamad00:08, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
His user name "seems" okay because he has it set up to display the way he wants it via his preferences. If you click on his user name you'll see that it's actually "dannyyee". Dismas|(talk)02:23, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The ability to change usernames, given only to bureaucrats is currently disabled, and there are no plans on turning it back on again in the foreseeable future, so sadly, no. Titoxd(?!?)02:14, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a template for marking articles which are hard to understand/too technical? (the specific article I have in mind is CD36) --Wulf02:22, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Appropriately, it's {{technical}}. If you do add it, though, please leave some notes on the talk page (or, at least, in the edit summary) explaining why you added it - it's often difficult for a specialist to realise what's confusing for someone else, since it's all obvious to them... Shimgray | talk | 02:26, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this subject was recently discussed on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), in relation to a different article. Also note that the rules require that articles not be dumbed down, so what you should expect is a layman's overview, followed by the technical detail. It's unreasonable to expect every article to stand on its own, especially in a hyprtext medium. --David Woolley15:21, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm. This article is pretty bad, though - I read it and would have been convinced it was something to do with malaria, were it not for the external link... Shimgray | talk | 15:25, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I had been wondering where to find out more on image metadata (specifically, the link to 'Canon' should point to the company, not the disambig), and a user at Talk:Metadata was also wondering about it. The only page I could find was a Wikimedia one on general metadata. Anyone know if there's a page on it? Deltabeignet04:45, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I was wondering if there is an escape character for Wikipedia. So for example, if i wanted to put two sets of square brackets (such as a wikilink) but didn't want the link turning up, instead actually wanted the square brackets to be on the page, is there any way to do that? Thanks Akamad09:25, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You want to put "nowiki" tags. For example, put whatever it is like so: <nowiki>[text]</nowiki> (I had to use two to make that show up :) This will work for any code in wiki (brackets, templates, tables, etc.) Dmcdevit·t09:30, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In 720p and 1080p there is a external link in the middle of the article referencing to a windows shareware. They were added by 154.20.85.214 and 220.253.45.200. They both (he?) added more things to the articles, very relevant.
Although relevant, those links propably do not have place inside an encyclopedia. Should they be removed or added to external links with reference to other software? I don't know how to handle the matter exactly, could someone help?
--Pieleric14:48, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A better idea would be to download the full sized image (from the image description page), resize if necessary, and upload it to your own webspace, making sure you comply with the terms of the licence. For example an image licenced under the Creative Commons "cc-by-sa" licence requires that the creator of the work be credited and any other uses (such as derivative works) use the same licence.
Why do people continue to use offensive language and shout at discussion pages?
Sorry about that; I apologise on behalf of my fellow humans.
The answer has been debated by philosophers for millennia. Basically, people have difficulty seeing other points of view, especially if they were raised in an intolerant family. We have strict rules against personal attacks and incivility, but we can't promise anything.
In addition, there are people who do not use offensive language or shout, but who are skilled at annoying other people, by very politely implying that they are an idiot or worse. Many people aren't wise to this, and get upset, and sadly get offensive with it. This makes the original (polite but annoying) person happy, because it makes them look better by comparison. Don't give in to baiting! Notinasnaid10:43, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am just curious if everyone makes/has a user page, or if it's a thing that only people that have been on for a long time and are well known on wikipedia that do so?
-Demosthenes-21:28, 12 November 2005 (UTC) --thank you[reply]
When you create an account (or even make an edit anonymously), a link to your (uncreated) user page is automatically made. You can edit more or less however you want (no ethnic slurs, no advertising). So everyone has one, and anyone can make one. Deltabeignet21:32, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Just click on Create account/log in (upper right) and follow the instructions by entering your User name (Demosthenes if you like) and a password. After you are logged in you can sign your comments by typing four tildes like this ~~~~. That's what I'm going to do right now. Good luck, hydnjotalk01:19, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Edit- Yes, I am fluent in polish, and It means free as in liberty. I meant post bondage as in after jail, no sexual meaning, but it certainly does not mean cost wise.
To whom it may concern:
Please note that in English, it says Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. In Russian, Japanese, and Polish, probably other languages but I cannot understand them, it says The Free Encyclopedia, in the sense that free means liberty. In Polish it says Wolna encykolpedia. That means: Post bondage Encyclopedia.
Just thought I would let you guys know.
-Surge
The problem is that free means different things in different languages so when "the free encyclopedia" was translated when the other language wikipedias were created some translations varied from the original intention. The French Wikipedia however, includes both meanings of the word. Are you sure wolna means "post bondage" and is not just a bad babelfish translation? - Mgm|(talk)12:43, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that the original comment was off topic, it certainly sounds like a machine back translation to me. I suspect, also, that the complainer didn't understand that the sexual use of the word is a modern hijacking of the term and the definition given at the head of the bondage disambiguation page is probably what is meant here.
It's not supposed to mean cost free. It's supposed to mean free as defined here as libre. I'm not clear whether you are saying there is a third meaning in Polish, or that you thought the intended meaning was gratis. --David Woolley
this is the first time that i am using this web site.
please tell me about editing.
i can see that i am able to go and edit any thing article but what does that mean?
does it mean that ater that i have edited it every one will see it like that?
if so what if sick people just come in and edit every thing and make stupid enteries?
please some one answer me and clearfy me about editing.
thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.141.167.86 (talk • contribs)
Yes, everyone else will see it the way you save it. But... Anyone who is watching that article will see that it has been changed and may revert it back to the way it was. So if you put something that is clearly false or nonsense it will be changed back, often in a matter of minutes for more popular articles. For instance, I edited the article on Nicole Richie a while back and it's on my watchlist. I saw just now that it had been edited by an anonymous user. Vandals usually don't have accounts so I checked what the change was. It was vandalism and I reverted the article back to the way it was. The vandalism was present for 2 minutes before I saw it and removed it. For more info please see Wikipedia:Replies to common objections and Wikipedia:FAQ. Dismas|(talk)07:57, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is all true, but it does mean that at any moment, something you read might be nonsense. This is of course true of anything you find on the internet. The most important thing to learn is never to take anything for granted. Or, if you believe everything you read, you will not only take away incorrect information from the internet, you will soon be the victim of tricksters or criminals. Notinasnaid10:40, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I actually have two questions. How can I create a new category so I can add categories to them? and Is there a way I can search solely the Wikipedia help/community portal sections? Thanks. --GfloresTalk07:55, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For the second question, type what you want to search for in the search box and hit "Search". When the results page comes up it will have check boxes at the bottom. Click or unclick those that would refine your search and hit "search" again this time using the search button at the bottom of the page near the check boxes. As for the first question, the page Wikipedia:Categories should help. Dismas|(talk)08:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For the first question: Simply edit the category page (example Category:some_name, add a quick intro about what's in the cateogory and start adding articles to it by adding the category to the bottom of relevant articles. Just make sure you're not duplicating an existing cateogry with another name and that you are following naming conventions for categories. - Mgm|(talk)12:51, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How do the founders of Wikipedia pronounce its first syllable--as "Wee-" or "Wai-"?
Thanks,
Simone Schede
Freising/Bavaria/Germany
According to the entry for Wikipedia, there are two possible pronunications of the first syllable. The first is with a short, pure /i/, which does not occur in its short form in standard British English. The alternative is with the /ɪ/, typical of standard British English is and in. The w is /w/, not the German sound for this character.
I am new to wikipedia and i use it on a local server. When i edited the main starting page and i put a image (.jpg) on it, everything worked. But the image is too big so i added |150px. That worked partly. The image was not shown (red cross upper left corner), but it seemed as it was scaled to 150 pixels. Does anyone know what happened? I changed localsettings.php by turning the rescaling line to "true".
TIA Martin
It's a common problem at the moment. Basically when you create a "thumbnail" image it is resized and saved as a new file by the Wiki software. This new file is cached on one of the many servers so it doesn't have to be re-sized every time the image is viewed as a thumbnail. When this is done for the first time there can be a delay before it appears, because Wikipedia is growing at a very fast rate and the servers become overloaded. The solution is to get more servers but this takes time and costs money.
Secondly, when adding an image, it is preferred that |thumb| only be used instead of a pixel size. This means that the thumb is displayed according to each individual user's preferences (set in Special:Preferences).
Also, check that when you added the |150px| you didn't accidentally delete one of the characters in the filename, or something "silly" like that. It's often a small mistake which gets overlooked.
I am one of your new users and I'm interested in the opportunity you provided here extremely. In fact I benefit Wikipedia and appreciate you a lot.
I found that the articles and context of the site are editable. I would be grateful if you explain me how editions are controlled and how much the information are reliable?
If you are reading an article and see a red link simply click on it. This will take you to a page which states that no such article exists, and gives you the option to create it.
No red links? Create a link with the title you wish it to have, either in an existing article or the sandbox. It is preferable to use an existing article, as the new one will have at least one link to it.
You can also edit the URL in your browser which will take you to the page described above. for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New Article Title Here
Molecules weren't invented. They existed since the universe was created. Our article on molecules states: Although the concept of molecule was first introduced in 1811 by Avogadro, the existence of molecules was still an open debate in the chemistry community until the work of Perrin (1911). Please refer further factual questions to the reference desk. - Mgm|(talk)16:10, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Some have pages in the Mediawiki namespace which alter text at the top. Generally, it would probably be best to put a comment on the relevant talk page (of the Mediawiki page) and then a link from the Village Pump to there. If you feel the change would be uncontroversial, leave the message on an administrator's talk page and they will probably make the change for you. [[Sam Korn]]16:07, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
But how do you tell which is the relevant Mediawiki page, or whether the change needs to be done by a programmer? I was looking for advice to give to users that would make feedback easier. I've also posted on the WikiEn mailing list, asking whether a "Talk" or "Feedback" tab can be added to the top of Special Pages in the default skin, so we'll see how things go. -- Creidieki16:25, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In MDH, anon users keep inserting commercial links to the article. To avoid a external link farm (i.e., a list of external links), I wrote a redlink farm. Unfortunately, at the moment, through quick inspection, none of these companies/websites are notable as per WP:WEB. So anything that turns blue, like Million Pixel Music, anyone can send off to AfD.
I have a similar situation in Freecycle. See Sharing is Giving, which has an 4,500,000 Alexa rating. In Freecycle's case, I removed the "Freecycle alternatives" link farm. But User:Rhobite restored it, saying, "In the interest of NPOV we should recognize that some people oppose Freecycle and provide links to them..." (See its Talk for this discussion.)
I'm about to look at Cyberbegging, but I expect to find a similar situation.
I've read your question three times and I still don't know for sure what you're asking. If it's: Is it Wikipedia's job to "promote" alternatives, even if non-notable? then the answer is no. --hydnjotalk19:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think for good or for bad we only provide articles on notable players. If there is actual opposition to an entity (ie if they are controversial), then that should be discussed in the article, and external links about opposition should be given. If we are simply talking about competition, I don't think that belongs on its page. But there should probably be an article on that type of entity or their activity and external links may be appropriate there. Not a really good answer. =) jnothmantalk01:34, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have made changes to one or more articles both before and after establishing a user account.
While I posted a reminder to myself regarding my user name, I did not store the password as well.
Would you be able to convey my password, or establish a new one, once I verify my user name to you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.208.227.30 (talk • contribs)
I have to make a works citied page for this website for school
But i can't find the copyright of this website
can you please help me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.247.169.150 (talk • contribs)
I uploaded a corrected image to Wikimedia Commons: Images for cleanup [[4]]. It showed up right away in the file history, but the lighting was still awful (I thought), so I uploaded another, lighter one. I didn't realize that the image would take so long to show up. Well the first one (20:59, Nov 2005) was the right one. Would someone delete 23:00, Nov 2005?
I suspect the reason for not updating is that you didn't force a cache flush (some variation of control and shift with F5 for Windows IE). For performance reasons, the browser and ISP caches are allowed to store out of date images.
I'm not sure about reverting the image, but the obvous thing to try would be the rev against the image you want to return to.
The actual problem with the picture is a very specific technical one that is rather prevalent on web sites but which one would have hoped that the art museum people would have known about. The key is the number 2.2. The sensor in a camera or scanner measures the actual light intensity (energy), but CRT displays produce an output that is approximately the 2.2th power of signal fed to them. To keep PC hardware cheap, images on the web compensate for that. It's called gamma correction. (Macs use a correction that needs more complex hardware, but better matches the human eye.) In this case, the image was uncorrected (gamma 1.0); in other cases of dark iamges, the Macintosh correction is applied.
I'm not familiar with Photoshop, but in Gimp, in Image | Colors | Levels, the middle slider controls gamma, and you will get the best colours, in this case, by setting the value to 2.2. For Macintosh images, around 1.6 tends to be the right value.
If you see sRGB in the metadata for an image, and assuming that an image processing program hasn't inserted the wrong value, that means tht it has been corrected for a gamma of 2.2, for PC and web use. Some sorts of image manipulation, are best done on a gamma = 1.0 image, and Macintosh corrected images, on a Macintosh, will show the least subjective colour banding.
"I suspect the reason for not updating is that you didn't force a cache flush..."
I reloaded. which Safari & Firefox at least don't get from the cache. When I still got the old picture I flushed the cache for good measure. No dice, so I quit for a couple of hours. RembrandtNightwatch was still really dark so I uploaded a lighter one - too light as it turns out, since I was still seeing the original picture. I had already checked it by uploading it to my own website.
I can't revert the image because the rev option is not selectable. Take a look: [[6]]. Ideally 23:00, 7 November 2005 should be deleted; it was just a newby mistake.
NancyS00:21, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have an account on Wikicommons, so, of course, those options won't be enabled for me; they're not enabled on Wikipedia (for an image with some back history) when I'm not logged in.
There are at least four levels of refreshing a page (If-Modified-Since to the immediate upstream cache, unqualified fetch from the immediate upstream server, If-Modified-Since to the origin server, and a forced end to end reload). Did you use the highest option available?
Thanks David for "...those options won't be enabled for me; they're not enabled on Wikipedia (for an image with some back history) when I'm not logged in."; this is just the kind of stupid mistake that trips me up for days. Ordinarily I'm auto logged by WC or my browser, but it still needs to be glanced at for verification.
As well as the above, note that in non-specific cases, articles tend to be written in the style of whoever gets there first - so we have the odd effect that articles on various aspects of labor relations are alternately "labor" and "labour". Using specific terminology that causes confusion between the two is discouraged, though - the verb "to table" probably shouldn't be used, for example, since it means one thing in American English and exactly the opposite in British English. Shimgray | talk | 15:30, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've discovered a very obvious mistake on the Adolf Hitler biography page. Under the "Legacy" section, the text that begins with "Adolf Hitler is the greatest..." has clearly been added as a prank. When I try to edit the article, the text does not appear in the code. It seems that editing this article is beyond my capabilities. If anyone knows how to remove the text, I encourage you to do so as soon as possible, as this kind of language has no place in a scholarly work.
Hi, When I just viewed my watchlist, it added 10 items which I had never seen before, much less watched. It seems that my watchlist seems to be adding pages to itself at random. Also, its adding them under incorect dates. When I do add a page, it's talk page goes on the list, and says it was added in 1970, and when I add a talk page it adds the article and says it was added in 1960. For each item I add, more random junk keeps poping up on the watchlist. What is going on? Tobyk77705:56, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is for help, the other is for assistance, of course! :-)
Seriously though, I get the impression that this page is for advice, the other is for actually asking someone to do something, but there does seem to be a large overlap between the two pages. Redundancy isn't always a bad thing though. <nowiki></nowiki> — [[User:PhilHibbs|PhilHibbs]] | [[User talk:PhilHibbs|talk]] 17:30, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I made a favicon for Wikipedia based on the globe (pictured at right). Because Wiktionary and Wikipedia currently have the same favicon, one or the other should change it. For the following reasons it makes sense to use a globe for Wikipedia's favicon: 1. Wikipedia seems to use the globe rather than the W as its main logo. 2. It makes sense for Wiktionary to have a letter for its logo because Wiktionary deals with words whose main components are of course letters. 3. A favicon based on Wiktionary's logo (which look likes a dictionary entry) might not be very recongizable at a smaller size. 4. W is a Latin character and as such is culturally associated with Western civilizations. Thus using a symbol like a globe without any inborn cultural associations is more international-friendly.
I want to make a little correction on the term of office of 5 years (re election)mentioned in his biography. actually he is re elected for a term of 4 years
There is a dispute between two parties concerning the article St Volodymyr's Cathedral. I proposed to apply for mediation. Two opponents agreed, but the third one does not answer my messages.
If they're inactive, wait for a week or so, but feel free to start mediation with the others. Solving disagreements quickly stops disputes from growing out of control. If the person is active but not responding, try contacting them again. If they don't get back to you assume they don't want to discuss your differences. - Mgm|(talk)13:45, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am confused. How can we trust anything, if anyone can edit? I am new to this site. It was given as a source for a paper I was reading. Would someone please help me understand? Thanks so much.
anon.
See Wikipedia:Replies to common objections and Wikipedia:FAQ. It is never possible to automatically trust any source, and particuarlly any internet source, You always need to check the refernces cited, or chek the source agaisnt another. Any source may contain bias or error. In the case of wikipedia, there are many eyse watching changes and watching most articles, and usually bias or error is corected fairly promptly when it occurs. But you should examine the sources that our articles cite (and they should cite sources see our citation policy and possibly the disccsion on an article's talk page and the list of conttributiors on the history page to determins how much to trust any particualr article. Any source has the same problems, and most internet sources don't give you as many ways to look into the basis and support for their information. DES(talk)15:27, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
When you have created a page how long does it take to come up on the search? —The preceding unsigned comment was added byDbotnick (talk • contribs) 13:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC-5)
It varies. The sesarch operates off a cached list of page titles, to improve performance. New pages are visible right away, but are not instantly returned as search targets. In any case the search feture is not wikipedia's strongest part. You might consider using google search of wikipedia instead. Even that will not find a new page instantly, of course, but only when google re-indexes the site. DES(talk)18:31, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is a very good reason to link to and from the article in several related issues, so it's reachable even though it's not in the search system. - Mgm|(talk)22:02, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How are "fair use" images compatible with the GDFL?
Are we liable for usages other people make of "fair use" images when reusing content? If not, should we tighten the disclaimer in this area? Hidingtalk19:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we are. We clearly state use "wikipedia at your own risk" and that some trademarks belong to other people. It would help though if we add a line or two to a disclaimer telling people to check image description pages before reusing them. Make sure you discuss this with as many people as possible before having it changed, though. - Mgm|(talk)20:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please help me. I can't find any infor on the "partie system" which envolved during the early 1900s and particularly under the influence of Escoffier, revolutionised the way in which kitchen staff (or bregades) were organised. The work in the kitchen was sub-divided into working groups or parties.
What is defenition of "partie system " Graphics anything will help
I need it for an assignment for better scores
Thnx
Bertie Viljoen
<email removed>
The limited info we have seems to be in Auguste Escoffier. You might ask on Talk:Auguste Escoffier, or at our Reference Desk (which is where this question should have gone), but you will probably do better going to the library to do resertach on this, or perhaps finding info elsehere on the net. If you do find reliable info, please come back and add it to Auguste Escoffier or some other approprite article on wikipedia, please. That will help the next person with such a problem. DES(talk)21:26, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I created an article called 16th Amendment Intent and Purpose last week and now it has disappeared. Can someone delete it? I was never informed. Can you check to see what happen?
i want to know this because i want to edit so i can answer people questions on the question and answer page i`ve asked so many questions on this page and now i want to repay you by answering questions just you guys do.
It actually does just what it sounds like -- cleans up html. Sometimes people, especially in their signatures, may not use the correct html syntax and leave a tag hanging open, causing the problems you're seeing. The HTML tidy usually cleans this up but was causing some performance problems earlier and has been turned off until the problem can be located and resolved. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish00:07, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Last I heard the people who need to look at it won't be back around until sometime tomorrow and after that, they still have to figure out whats wrong and come up with a fix. P.S. Close the HTML tags in your sig ;) .:.Jareth.:. babelfish01:03, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is not that the HTML tags in your sig are hanging open but that some of the wiki-syntax characters inside your sig are being converted into text. If you look at the edit view above, you'll see, for example, that [ is being inserted as [. I've deleted my signature in the meantime. Rossami03:13, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The developers on IRC said it's an older HTML validator which runs when the HTML Tidy is disabled. It seems to not only close the table prematurely, but also escape all table markup outside a table. --cesarb00:42, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed templates used on Krakatoa by converting HTML table syntax to wiki table syntax. Looking now for related templates that may still need to be fixed. --Tabor01:25, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone look at my talk page? It's showing up as very small text towards the bottom and I have no clue why. I've tried going to older versions of my talk page and it does the same thing. It basically does it about halfway down the page no matter what. It's not a HTML issue. HELP! :) --Woohookitty(cat scratches)01:34, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it is an html issue, see virtually any thread for reference, or even see the brightly colored banner on recent changes if you're still confused--Hello fromSPACE01:37, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm a member of Wikipedia. Throughout the year, my bar (with the watchlist, contributions, etc.) have been working quite well. However, today, I switched my skin back to normal, but whenever I want to press "My Contributions", or any other button, the bar just automatically moves behind the Wikipedia logo. I can't still press the buttons, but my username is behind the logo. It moves every single time. What should I do? -F.T.
That happened to me back in September. It kept on doing it for about a week, then it stopped. I don't think there's anything you can do about it. Thelb408:11, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
My name is Roberta. I am owner of CPAP Supplies Plus/Direct. We provide some very good articles on our site and illustrations of cpap masks etc. I was wondering how I can appear on External Links such as cpap.com and apnea therapy.com?
It is a general guideline not to link to your own site on Wikipedia. The thought goes, if your site is good enough, someone else will add it. However, this is just a guideline, not a rule. If your site isn't that good (I wasn't convinced it was all that after just checking it out myself) it will probably removed from any article it is added to as a spam link. As long as you do not keep adding it in once removed, you should be ok. --Quasipalm03:51, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sir, i 'm an engineering student ihave apaper on this subject i need info as a foot notes for exam on the following sub topics
image enhancement:background,enhancement by point processing,histogram processing,spatial filtering and enhancement in frequency domain, image smoothening,image sharpening,colour image processing
image restoration:degradation models,inverse filtering,least mean square filtering,constrained least squares restoration-interactive restoration
image segmetaion:detection of discontinuities,edge linking and boundary detection,thresholding,region oriented segmentation
i need this info today very urgent.
my email address is (removed)
Factual questions go to the reference desk. Are you sure you need the information for today? Is your assignment due today? And I find it strange that an engineering student would have such sloppy spelling. — JIP | Talk07:41, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
D'oh, I didn't think of that. I'm not from an English speaking country either, so I tended to generalise my own spelling skills over others too. — JIP | Talk10:50, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Today my signature stopped working for some reason. When I wrote my signature with ~~~~, it inserted the signature's wiki source code, instead of the signature's rendered form, into the article. I checked the source code and saw that all the HTML elements had been escaped, for example — (an ampersand followed by mdash;) had been turned into &mdash; (an ampersand followed by amp; then by mdash;). I tried to fix the signature source code in my preferences but it didn't work. I had to make it a raw signature and insert the wikilinks to my user and user talk page by hand. Is this a bug or a new "feature" in the MediaWiki software? — JIP | Talk07:40, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's definitely a bug; search for HTML Tidy elsewhere in this page. I think there's still a notice way up at the top that relates to it. Basically, the software is supposed to clean up various HTML errors and is now either not doing it at all or not doing correctly. The devs are very aware of the problem. :)—HorsePunchKid→龜07:43, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
And just now, above, at Toolbar Problems, my signature went to [[User:Thelb4|Thelb4]] instead of the extremely long <span class="user-sig user-Thelb4">[[User:Thelb4|<font color=00CD00>Thelb</font>]][[User talk:Thelb4|<sup style="color:#FF8247;">4</sup>]]</span> (produces Thelb4). Thelb408:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The messages regarding HTML tidy are gone, so why is my sig suddenly not working? It worked fine 2,5 hours ago. - Mgm|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 08:36, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Adding the automatic code at the beginning and end, and turning on raw signatures seems to fix it. Why, the code is still the same. Why did my faulty sig suddenly codes like
Just to add my comment, I noticed a similar problem this morning. I can enter the link to my profile page User:IainP without a problem, but linking to my talk page IainP just displays the text in bold. Note that both of those links were added by hand, not from my sig. However, if I link to someone else's talk, the link seems be added and functions fine even if that user doesn't exist! I'd put my sig on the end here, but I don't see the point ;)
Flipping heck. I've been trying to get it to work for an hour on my talk page and now it works on here! IainP [[User_talk:IainP|(talk)]] 11:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What you found is actually a "feature". Your signature will always do that on your user page because you're putting a link to the page on that page itself. The bold instead of a blue-link is a way of showing that you've created a self-referential link. For example, here is a link to this page: Wikipedia:Help desk. Self-referential links are bad because they create confusion for readers who may not try to click the link. When the link does nothing, they think the link is broken, not realizing that they are already on the page. It looks a little odd on a user-page but is a very useful tool for keeping the article-space clean. Rossami(talk)14:30, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I asked the developers, and they said that both wiki markup and html markup are no longer allowed on non-raw signatures. If you want to use both, you need to use raw signatures (which do not automatically link to the user page). --cesarb15:36, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oddly, my raw signiture (smurrayinchester(User), (Talk)) has been working just fine, yet now, without making any changes to the preferences, I now get a message telling me that I now have an 'Invalid raw signature; check HTML tags' in ugly red letters. I have tried checking my signiture and the code; it works when typed normally, but when used as a signiture, reverts to the standard 'Smurrayinchester15:41, 15 November 2005 (UTC)'[reply]
Until they fix this I guess I'll use {{subst:User:Texture/sig}} ~~~~~. (I hope they realize that this does need fixing.) - Tεxτurε16:09, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am president of an NGO Namely "Friends of Bhittai Colony".Our jurisdiction is limited to Bhittai Colony, Korangi Crossing, Karachi, which is administered by the Cantonment Board Korangi Creek, PAF Korangi Creek. We sought a clarification regarding Assessment of Taxes by Cantonment Board, under the "Freedom of Information Ordinance 2002. The C.B.K.C. first of all refused flatlyto provide the information. When pressurised the department further they have opted the delaying tactics by varios method as they say that they dont have a copy of the Ordinance. Is it our fault and is this can be delayed due to this reason.
Please guide us in this matter.
[email removed]
This kind of question should be asked on the reference desk, I've copied it there, but please be aware that Wikipedia does not give legal opinions. As stated on the legal disclaimer: "legal information provided on Wikipedia is, at best, of a general nature and cannot substitute for the advice of a licensed professional." But either way, good luck :-) Akamad10:08, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Add the {{subst:afd}} like usual and go back to edit the link that points to the debate and replace {{PAGENAME}} with the name of the subpage it has on AFD. - Mgm|(talk)08:47, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
To expand on what Mgm said: Add {{subst:afd}} to all the pages you plan to delete. Then pick one of them, and click on the "this article's entry" link. This should take you to the edit page for the AfD entry. Add {{subst:afd2|pg=Pagename|text=}} (where Pagename is the name of the page you were on when you clicked the "this article's entry" link) and submit. Then immediately edit the page and change the header section (==[[Pagename]]== in the previous example) and change it to be ==[[Pagename]], [[Pagename2]] and [[Pagename3]]== where Pagename2 and Pagename3 are the other two pages you want to put up for deletion together with Pagename (expand this as necessary, of course). Then add {{subst:afd3|pg=Pagename}} to the log as per usual. Finally, go back to all the other articles you marked for AfD and edit them as Mgm said (you should only need to edit the first instance of {{PAGENAME}} though; the one that creates the "this article's entry" link). --Locke Cole10:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm an avid user, and I can't seem to get images to load quickly or at all for some pages that I have worked on, while other seem to load very fast. The images are in JPEG format, but for some reason, they sometimes never load. Example: The Maltese Falcon page. There's a left-handed photo of Mary Astor I added but I can't get it to load, but the movie poster in the info box loads quickly. Any ideas? Very frustrating for me. Steve-O15:25, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia text and Wikipedia images are actually stored on different servers. If the image server is heavily loaded or intermittently down then you might have trouble loading images even if the articles are being served up quickly. Short of donating a whole pile of cash and server equipment to the Wikimedia Foundation, there's not a lot that you can do. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:51, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It does seem that the servers for the photos are not working right, however. Just a week ago, it was fine. Also, some photos load much faster than others. Is there someone who works on the servers that could at least be notified? Steve-O20:40, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Just stubled across the article: |reference.com site which seems word for word with our article (Battle of Iwo Jima). I never have figured out who to alert on these, so tell! Is there a list of mirror sites one can check as well?
User:fabartus
Only the target of the redirect can be in a category. Redirect only work when the redirect is the only code on the page. Categorizing a redirect will break it. - Mgm|(talk)22:28, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually that is not quite true. You can add a category tag to a redirect, or even more than one such category, provided that you do so after the redirect link, and on the same line. Anything after that line is deleted when the page is saved. so
works just fine. Whether it is a good idea or not is another matter. (Often it is not, IMO.) And you cannot redirect one category to another and have it work properly, as I understand matters. DES(talk)22:54, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've read Wikipedia:Picture Tutorial, image use policy and Wikipedia Commons, and cannot understand, in simple language, how to upload some pictures that I took. Sorry, I'm a novice when it comes to computer programming. Please walk me through this step by step: I took a picture with my camera and had a friend scan it and send it to my e-mail. Now it's sitting here in jpeg format. What do I do next? I think I understand how to place it in the article in the double brackets, as I've edited a few picture captions. Thank you, Yoninah17:22, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The difficult problem with pictures is not physically uploading them, but getting the copyright issues right. It's not possible to give simple rules as that would be legal advice, and can only be given by a qualified lawyer who has interviewed you to understand exactly what you want to achieve. The two extremes of what can go wrong are that the uploader doesn't understand what rights they are giving away and then get annoyed when they discover they have lost some of their ability to earn money from the picture, and the risk that uploading copyright violations may cause legal problems for Wikipedia, or cause mirror sites to stop using it. (Most people don't realise how extensive copyright is.) If you took the pictures yourself, it is probable, but not certain, that only the first issue applies.
In principle, you can update the pages that your found difficult to make them easier, but you mustn't do that in a way that removes responsibility from the uploader for making the licensing decisions, and documenting the source of the picture, or which simplifies the wording of any of the licence option descriptions in a way that changes their meaning. In particular, you mustn't make them say: "if you took the pictures yourself, select this licensing option". A better option is to propose new wording on the respective talk pages.--David Woolley23:38, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
--
OK, lets go. Open a separate window or tab so you can refer to this list.
Visit the Wikimedia Commons. Images uploaded here can be used on any Wikimedia project, including all the language versions of Wikipedia, plus Wiktionary, Metawiki and others. Go here: Commons Main Page.
You will need to register as a new user if you have not done so already. Each Wikimedia project has a separate user account, even if you are already a Wikipedia user on .en you will need to register on Commons. Do this here: Commons:Special:Userlogin.
Assuming you are using the default monobook skin, down the left hand side of your page will be a link saying 'Uplaod file - it is below the search box. Click that link, or click here: Commons:Special:Upload.
The first box is marked Source filename. Click the Browse button on the right and find the file on your hard disk. Example: "tower.jpg"
Choose a name. For example "Church tower, Anytown.jpg" - make it relevant to the subject of the picture.
Summary: Add information about when and where the photograph was taken, and the photographer's name. For illustrations note who drew it and with what software, or say that it was drawn by hand or whatever. Use Wiki links to relevant information:
[[Church Tower]] in High Street [[Anytown]]. Built in [[1863]] by [[Herbert R. Johnson]].
Photo by [[User:John Smith|John Smith]], taken on [[1 April]] [[2005]].
Choose a licence. If you want to release your work into the Public Domain choose Own work, all rights released (Public Domain). You could also licence under the GFDL or Creative Commons.
You may choose to Watch this page (add to your watchlist)
Check your information is correct and click Upload
WAIT...
If you have done everything correctly, a page will now load, containing the image and the information you have entered. To add to or modify any of this information you can click "edit this page" just like a Wikipedia article. The actual image stays the same, you just edit the "description page".
Remember the name of your image, or even better copy and paste the title, e.g. [[Image:Church tower, Anytown.jpg]]. Find a relevant article and put in your image, which you already know how to do.
I spotted while writing this you already found it but I'll leave it here for anyone else. P.S. remember to close your tags, while HTML Tidy is off!
I submitted the material for Charming Hostess(my first on Wikipedia) and am unsure what the violation problem is. The material is original material written by the band's composer (Jewlia Eisenberg) and posted by me (AnMarie). I have posted it on both Wikipedia and the page referenced on the band's website [8] -- hence the alleged copyright violation. However, since the author (Jewlia) gives her permission to use the material and has written it herself I don't understand alleged the copyright violation.
I'm sure the problem is due to my ignorance of Wikpedia procedures. Is there anyway to clear this up?
Don't bite the newbies, Phil. To resolve the copyright question, follow the instructions on the copyvio template that appears on the page Charming hostess. You might consider creating a new page under the correct capitalization (Charming Hostess) with original material, however. The article as written is a bit too promotional in tone for Wikipedia, and would likely be deleted anyway.
All my edits thus far have been minor (typos, grammar edits, undoing vandalism etc.), and when I leave a summary, I almost always want to prefix it with the m: that everyone else seems to leave when they do the same, instead of actually typing something like "Minor:". The tutorials don't seem to tell me. I'm sure that I'm just being stupid, but I'd like to know.
Hi, I'm not really a contributor, but I use Wikipedia often. Someone has added some rude/offensive comments to the article on Greece: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greece
I tried editing it to remove them, but the rude comments do not appear in the editing page. Could someone look at this and correct it, or explain how I can? Thanks!
What happewnd is that between the time you displayed the article (or the version that you displayed had last been read from the main database) and the time you tried to edit it, soemone else had already fixed the problem. When you edit a page or section, the content is re-read from the database (to reduce edit conflicts) and so you may be editign a newer version than the oen you had displayed. DES(talk)23:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the notice! There are system administrators that deal with vandalism, so you shouldn't really worry about it. It usually gets "reverted" in a few minutes (or less). However, if you do wish to learn how to revert, please go here Wikipedia:Revert. Also, please sign your comments with 4 ~'s such as ~~~~ if you have an account. :) GfloresTalk23:22, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The adminstrators can do things like banning vandals, but they rely on ordinary users to revert vandalism, issue warnings to the offenders, and if that fails, add them to WIkipedia:vandalism in progress. The worst vandalism isn't the obvious vandalism, but subtle changes that can take a very long time to be discovered. --David Woolley23:50, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am trying to find the name of a country song my father use to sing to me. He has been dead 21 years and I have continued to try to find the name of the song. A verse in the song is
" I use to wear a white hat-I rode a horse so fine-I courted a pretty girl -I loved and called her mine------she sent me off to prison to wear a ball and chain. Thank you for your help. anon
In the 1946 births section Jose Carreras is listed as being born on Feb 27 and in Dec. Someone might want to check up on this.
In Google I see On 27 February 2004, the Vienna State Opera will host a José Carreras gala concert[9], otherwise all sources seem to agree on birth on 5 December, 1946. I'll remove the February entry. Thanks. user:jnothmantalk02:03, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This does not seem like a secure resource as anyone can edit the information
How do you stop just anything being changed?
People doing HSC assignments need accurate information and I will not be using this site anymore as it is not a secure site and the information may not be accurate
In general, most things that are added are looked at by someone. All of us "regulars" have our areas of expertise; for example, no one will change anything in my area of specialty without me checking it. And by the way, thank you for removing your test edit at Jadwiga of Poland; that was considerate, for many people making newbie tests leave them in the articles. Best, Antandrus (talk)05:21, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Is it actually illegal to create a pen user name? My parents told me before that it's illegal to do so. --anon
On wikipedia? No. There are some implications for copryright law but asside from that there is no downside to useing an alais.Geni07:44, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In the non-wikipedia world, it is quite common for writers to create and use a pen name for their writing. This is in no way illegal. In most cases someone ( a publisher or agent) will know the real name, the is probably required if the writer is to be paid for his or her writing. In many cases the real name is more or less widely known. Some well known cases include Mark Twain (whose real name was Samual Clemens), Ed McBain (who also writes under his real name Evan Hunter), and Donald Westlake, who also writes as "Richard Stark". In the case of James Tiptree Jr the author took considerable pains to conceal her real name (Alice Sheldon), and the name was not disclosed until after she had become a very well known writer (and at least one fellow author had famously pointed to her writing as "work that could never have been produced by a woman").
It is illegal to use a false name to defraud soemone, and under recent U.S. laws (aimed at Money laundering) you must generally give a real name when opening a bank account, taking a job, or participating in various transactions which involve money. DES(talk)16:14, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The classic example of a "figleaf" pen-name - where the identity of the author is well known - is Iain Banks, who also writes science fiction as Iain M. Banks. Completely impenetrable, that one!
Other uses for pen-names are to avoid being sued (this used to be far, far more common) or for political reasons (ditto; some of the great eighteenth-century political writers, such as Junius, are still unidentified today!) There's also marketing reasons - an acquaintance of mine writes pornography under a pen name, not so much because she worries about people finding out she writes it as because it sells better if people think it was written by a man. Sometimes a well-known author will use a pen name in order to sell books very different to what they've written before, in order to prevent people buying them on the basis of the name alone and being unhappy.
Finally, a very common use for a pen-name is to cover the use of more than one writer - Franklin W. Dixon, the "author" of the Hardy Boys series of children's books, was a number of different people using the same name, to give a feeling of continuity. Our article on the Stratemeyer Syndicate discusses the biggest single group of these, and makes interesting reading. Shimgray | talk | 16:40, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Another example: Harry Potter author J. K. Rowling chose to use her initials rather than her name, because she thought it would appeal more to boys who might not otherwise read a book written by a woman.
Well, if you want moral judgement, I would say, as an ordained minister, no, it's not bad. Here, it serves many purposes; after all, what if all the John Smiths used their real names? Our false names are no worse than e-mail addresses. Deltabeignet06:07, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What if you create an account but do not want people to talk to you?
People can talk to you regardless if you have an account or not, but will feel more easy about it when you have an account, naturally. If you don't want to talk, have a note on your talk page saying so, and then don't reply if you don't want to. — Sverdrup11:46, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Why does the Wikipedia want people to have an account? Because you can't upload pictures nor tell why you edited something in the history page. I want to do those things, but I don't really want an account. I heard that it's because people sometimes have the same IP address, but is that it? --anon
Your reasoning for editing can be given in the edit summary which is given below the edit screen when you edit pages or ask questions and is directly copied into the history. Also, people often share IP addresses. If someone is only identifiable by their IP address it's hard to determine who you're dealing with. Finally, having only logged in users upload images is a safeguard.
Anyway, why don't you want an account? It's free and you don't have to share personal information to get one (only an email address to make sure forgotten passwords can be recovered if you are prone to forgetting). It gives a number of benefits and makes talking to people a lot easier. If you still want to upload pictures, you can ask a regular Wikipedian to do so for you. - Mgm|(talk)09:13, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Mgm. However, do note that you actually don't even have to provide an email address when registering for an account. You simply have to choose a username and a password. If you wish to so, you can also record an email address: this is stored, as Mgm says, purely to send you your password should you forget it. You can find more information on this issue at Wikipedia:Why create an account? Regards encephalon10:21, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The reason for requiring accounts for images are that images are high risk items from a copyright point of view, both because they are often illegally uploaded and because the cost of correcting the problem can be high. Copyright concerns are likely to stop other sites using Wikipedia, which conflicts with the policies behind the user of the GFDL.
There is no restriction on adding edit summaries, only on marking items as minor. Everyone is strongly encouraged to provide an edit summary.
Contributions that appear to come from named, real people, are a lot more credible than anonymous ones, or even from the users of obvious screen names, and are less likely to be challenged and removed.
If someone does challenge an edit, they may ask the editor first, if they can contact them through their talk page. Without a means of contact you may just see parts of articles disappearing. Also, if the system can identify you, it can record which pages you are interested in, so, when for example, I started Article for Deletion on what I believe was one of your pages, you would have been informed that the page had been edited. Having notice of changes also means you can police articles that interest you against vandalism.
Hello,
I have put up an article on the wiki. Now from Oct onwards its showing "This article needs to be cleaned up to conform to a higher standard of quality". I have tried and still trying to review the article again and again and make changes such that its a clean article. As I am doing this may I know what is the expectation of the cleanliness on an article? If you could help me out in spotting the problems on the article, I can very well look in to it and elevate it to a higher quality. The page is "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalakat_Illam".
Please guide me,
thanking you
Shyam
Hello. It's great that you come back and care for your article! For style, we have a style manual: Wikipedia:Manual of Style, but I think it's even simpler to learn by example. Look at an established article like Albert Einstein to see how the article is laid out and how it is formatted. Some very quick specific points about the article:
First of all, is the text written by you, or is it free from copyright inhibitions? This has to be clear before it can stay on wikipedia.
You use lots of inline external links (the light blue links). Lots of wikilinks (darker blue links, typed with double square brackets [[like this]] are fine, but external links should only be used in a separate External Links section.
Pay attention to the language used; while it doesn't have to be very formal, use full sentences and unexagerrated expressions. (Four !'s is not perfect, for example.
There is a legitimate use for external links in the middle of the article, but they should, almost always be given in single square brackets so that they only appear as a small numbered reference. The reason for including them is one of the reasons that has been listed on the article's talk page, namely that the article is lacking references.
Although most articles are poor in this respect, every article should have a References section that identifies documents that confirm all the non-obvious facts in the article. This section should include links for anything accessible on the web, but should also contain title, author, organisation running the web site, when consulted, etc., so that the URLs can be rediscovered if the source document is moved.
Especially if there are lot of sources, every fact in the main text of the article should be identified with a source. There are several ways of doing this, but one is to use small external links on the individual points, and include the full details in the References section. Looking at your first paragraph, there is a claim that this group of people has particular powers; this is an obvious case where a source must be quoted.
The actual definitions of Manthravaadam, etc. ought to be in separate articles, unless they are very short, in which case they should be included where the word is used. Someone mentioned Brahmin; there is already an entry for that, so its first use should be a Wiki link.
Someone mentioned the issue of copyright. An article that has lots of external links in it but no Wiki links raises the question as to whether it was copied or literally translated from another web page. If that is the case, unless you also wrote that page, the basis on which you were given permission to use the contents needs to be made clear, and if created independently, it should be listed under the References, unless there are better sources (i.e. the ones used to create the web page).
Also note, that, whilst the claim of powers does need a source quoting, the claim would be considered sufficiently controversial, that you ought to say "According to.<insert most universally credible source of claim>.this family..". If you said something like "According to most KeralanHindus...", you would need to provide references to back that statement, rather than the actual claim of powers. --David Woolley14:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I just took a quick look at it. Here are some areas for improvement. It assumes the reader knows too much about Indian culture. Some of the Indian words, especially those in the first paragraph need explanation, but I suspect even words like Brahmin need a phrase of explanation. I and probably 5% of the non-Indian English-speaking world know that Brahmin is a high-level Hindu caste, but I don't know what theat means today in India. 95% of non-Indian English speakers may not even know that. As far as all the other Indian words that are not explained, almost no one will understand them. Second, is the article about a family or about a religious holiday? Is this article like "the Smith family and how they celebrate Easter", or should there be two separate articles? You can tell from my questions how well or how poorly the article educates a non-Indian reader. Third, the English needs to be improved. Nearly every paragraph has nonstandard article usage, agreement, punctuation or syntax. For an article with important, interesting information, other editors are often willing to polish the language of non-native English, but as it stands this appears to be a marginal topic incomprehensible to non-Indians. I wouldn't try to improve the language because I can't understand most of the subject matter. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but you asked for explanation. alteripse12:18, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the suggestions. I would try to keep the document upto the standards of Wiktionary adhering to our inputs. but, hang on I am not gonna let you guys loose, as I'll come baqck with more doubts on improving the page. thanking You --Shyam 9:35 11/25/2005
I created a page called Lee Mirecki before I created a wiki account. So, my early edits show up with an IP address. Now I am wiki user Rlevse. On the Lee Mirecki history page, is it possbile to edit the attributions so it will show I created the article? Rlevse14:30, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
As I understand, reattributing edits is no longer possible, though it used to be. I think the best thing you can do is leave a note on your user page that you used to contribute as User:140.32.75.116. I've seen a number of quite respected users do this. —HorsePunchKid→龜18:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing I've done is the same as HoursePunchKid's idea, in reverse: I've put a note on the user page for my IP addresses, saying that I am User:AndyJones. That way someone following my anonymous edits can find me. AndyJones17:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen that little "the title is incorrect due to technical limitation" text while browsing wikipedia, but I cannot for the life of me find the tag I need to include so I can put that in an article I am drafting. Can anyone help out a harmless newbie? :) --Sclozza14:51, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
When the technical limitation is that the article's initial letter should be lowercase but the Wikipedia software changes iPod to IPod the template {{lowercase|title=realtitle}} can be used to explain. --hydnjotalk15:12, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm polyhedron in many forums, as well as in Chinese and German wiki (see zh:User:Polyhedron and de:User:Polyhedron). But here I found the name is already registered by somebody, and he hasn't done anything except for the registration. May I ask to kill this id so that I can register it? And at the same time I'd like to abort my current id Biopolyhedron. -- polyhedron(古韻) Leave message16:20, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, deleting user accounts is impossible in the MediaWiki software. Once a user account is registered, it stays forever. User accounts can be renamed, though. Bureaucrats used to have the ability to do so, with a handy kiddie-friendly WWW user interface, but it's currently offline. Developers can rename accounts by poking their noses directly into the SQL database. Your best bet is to ask a MediaWiki developer about this. Administrators can't do diddly squat about this. — JIP | Talk16:27, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
i browsed the help pages but couldn't find the process for reporting this user: User talk:68.33.42.22 for repeat spamvertising of his website over multiple pages: [11]. (it has now progressed to also removing legitimate links). he has already been warned by another user but continues. i believe the user should be blocked. Niz18:06, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I wrote an free IE toolbar that allows one click login and search
for any web site. Since I really like the content here, I
made Widipedia part of the default installation. I know
there is already a WikiSearch, but seems to me that most
people would use at most one toolbar so a specialized
toolbar wouldn't get too much traction. Please take a
look at:
How does one go about editing an article title? I looked for Cicero, and the article it contains is obviously the one for Cataline. I would like to change the title to Cataline (as I don't know enough about Cicero to write a Cicero article). Would I need to create a new article for Cataline, copy and paste, then put the small amount of info I have in the Cicero article?
If the article is correct but merely misnamed, you can use the MOVE button at the top of each page (next to the edit this page button) to move it to a new location, and then recreate the Cicero article with whatever information you have and mark it as a stub. I have edited your comment to include a link to the article for ease.-Lanoitarus19:06, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please, don't move it. An anonymous user had overwritten the article about Cicero we had with the material from Catiline. I have reverted to the correct version which was quite extensive. - Mgm|(talk)19:14, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I just submitted my first article on the "Clubhouse Model of Psychosocial Rehabilitation" but cannot make it appear in any search results.
Most people who are looking for information on this topic would simply type "Clubhouse," which immediately takes them to an article about an old T.V. show with the same name. I inserted a link at the top of that article to the page on the psychosocial rehabilitation model.
However, even when I input the complete title of the article, the search does not yield any results and says that one can still create a new article with that title. Interestingly enough, if I cut and paste the title from the article itself, the search results immediately take me to the proper page.
In short: How do I get the title and content of a new article to appear in the search results?
Make sure it is wikified and linked to from relevant articles, so it can get picked up by spiders. The search index gets updated only periodically, because it's kind of a strain on the server, so the best you can do is wait. - Mgm|(talk)20:07, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, and they need to do anything they can to reduce load on that database, since they mistakenly chose MySQL over PostGreSQL or any other system which can actually handle a heavy burden. /grumble Kaz21:22, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they should bite the bullet and port it to...well...almost ANY other relational database. PostGreSQL would retain the same open source, anti-corporate feel and yet perform ten times as well and have more modern features, for example. Kaz02:32, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I know the explanation for how to do this is around, as I ran across it more than once back when I didn't need it. But I am becoming spontaneously logged out with increasing frequency, which is producing a growing number of anonymous edits by me, as I don't always notice in time.
Not posible I'm afaraid. For technical (it is not good for the database) and legal reasons (we would have a hard time proveing it was you).Geni21:27, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and if anyone wanted to explain why my login is lasting an increasingly random amount of time with an ever-diminishing half-life, it'd probably de-stress me a bit. Kaz20:46, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This won't directly help, but at least it may help you notice when you are logged in. Go to your CSS file at User:Kazvorpal/monobook.css (assuming you are using the default monobook theme) and make a simple but obvious change. For example, you might just add the line body { border: 2px solid blue; }. This will add a small blue border around the entire page, but it will only be visible when you're logged in. As a somewhat more extreme example, I can very easily tell if I'm logged in because my theme (a modification of monobook) looks very different. —HorsePunchKid→龜06:53, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. OK, I figure I'd get yelled at by politically correct types if I made a comment about functional illiteracy, so I'll simply answer your question: You put two [ symbols on each side of the name of the article to which you wish to link. Like "I blame [[public education]]". Kaz21:39, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well I don't care about being yelled at by politically correct types. An encyclopedia edited by illiterates is effectively useless. Perhaps you should learn to spell (and proof read) before you contaminate the site further. Sbz580908:15, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
I have a Nintendogs website and i added it to the links section at the bottom of the Nintendogs page and it keeps getting removed. why is this happening? am i doing something wrong? here is my site:::All Things Nintendogs::
thanks
Generally individuals' fan sites don't get linked from Wikipedia unless they have unique information of clear interest to readers. Could that explain it? -- SCZenz22:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, external links are frowned upon unless they are official pages of the company, or are of particular interest beyond information available in the article itself. Additionally, it is generally considered unacceptable to link to personal sites or for site owners to link to their own sites. If you have information to contribute to the article (and from your site, it certainly appears that you know a fair amount about the game), please do add whatever contributions to the article directly so that wikipedia can continue to expand. You can find more information about our External Links Policy at this page. Welcome! -Lanoitarus23:14, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Thank for clearing it up - it makes sense now. Thanks!!
Question about languages available on the website.
I am an active user of wikipedia.com and consider it an important reference point at work and in my personal activities. There isn't a service out there that can match the service offered by your website. I was wondering if you were considering other languages on your website namely Urdu and Arabic. I can appreciate the mammoth task of translating all the electronic material however electronic fonts are available and it would be a great service to users such as myself.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yours faithfully
Imran Sharaf
London
This lists all languages for which Wikipedia is available. However, please note that articles aren't translated directly, so an article on the English site will almost certainly be different to the equivalent article on the Arabic site. And yes both Urdu and Arabic versions are available. However, they are still rather small (Arabic for example only has roughly 7000 articles, while Urdu only has 600), you might consider expanding those yourself. Akamad22:44, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Microsoft does own part of Apple, though. They invested several hundred million dollars in that company at the end of the nineties. Kaz02:29, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Was unable to download, message came up with red x tbat the site was not available. First time I have tried your site. Could not download.
Not sure what exactly you were trying to download, but the media and pictures servers have been having some trouble the past day or so, ive noticed. I would just try again. -Lanoitarus08:33, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It took me some time to find the entry and who deleted it. Please make sure you use proper capitalization when referring to an article and link it with brackets like [[this]]. - Mgm|(talk)08:37, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It stopped working when HTML Tidy was switched off. You have to enable raw signatures and write the complete wiki source code, i.e. [[User:Bubba73|Bubba73]] [[User talk:Bubba73|(talk)]], in the signature. — JIP | Talk05:50, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I was hoping someone would be able to help me. I've had a Wikipedia account for about a year now, and have been dabbling a bit. Recently, I noticed that my signature had gone strange, and I can't understand why. When I type ~~~, the result is:
(something similar happens with ~~~~). I checked the "code" (under "Edit Page"), and found that the trouble lay in the opening brackets [[ that begin the "talk" part of my signature are being input as [.
When I type in (manually), [[User_talk:QuantumEleven|(talk)]], the results are okay (like here (talk). But do as I might, I can't seem to get the signature template to accept my typed [[ as regular square brackets instead of their code page equivalents.
Note that the first and third forms should be avoided in the main text, as articles should not rely on external references for completeness, only to identify the sources of the information in the article and to provide further reading. There are exception, but if you think that you need one of these two forms in the main text you should think very carefully about whether you are being compatible with the aims of Wikipedia. --David Woolley13:34, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Two absolutely different people have the same name. How can i name an article about one of them, if the page name is already "taken" by the other? The names are really absolutely similar, there is no pseudonym or second name i could use.
You find the main difference usually their profession and then name you page accordingly e.g. Robert Lawson (architect), and the put a link on the page titled with just the name e.g Robert Lawson. If there are lots with the same name you could make a disambiguation page, if you are new though probably best to ask an administrator to do that for you especially if it involves moving or renaming an existing page. It's quite easy to do, but can be a little tricky the first time, and could upset the original editors. Giano | talk17:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am a big Wiki fan (per say).. and feel that the site covers alot of info.. both info found in most encyclopedia's and fictional. I use this site for alot of research. I was wondering if its possible to get Wiki on CD. Possibly as an Encyclopedia like Encarta. If this is possible, please let me know how I can go about getting a CD.
Please note that Wikipedia is a wiki but not all wikis are the Wikipedia. So using "wiki" as a nickname for Wikipedia is not always thought highly of. As far as your question goes, Wikipedia is not currently available on CD but there have been articles in the news lately about some possible projects like this coming to fruition. Dismas|(talk)18:41, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A friend mentioned heidi fliess in an email i did not remember who this was. i looked on Wikipedia. It said, among other things "She is in the process of building a brothel in Las Vegas that is an exact replica of the White House." Prostitution is ILLEGAL inside of Las Vegas.
If you find information in an article that is incorrect, you can change it. Wikipedia is a wiki which means that any user can update the information on most any page. Dismas|(talk)18:54, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Prostitution is indeed illegal in all of Clark County. I did find several reliable sources which support the "white house brothel" story, but both say "Nevada", not "Las Vegas". There's also no indication that construction is actually underway; both sources say she wants to build it, but neither says she has obtained the financing. I've updated our Heidi Fleiss article accordingly. -- Finlay Mcwalter | Talk19:14, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
When I enter the search terms "Island Falls", it takes me to a page with a redirect on it to Island Falls, Maine. Okay.
But, I just added an article on Island Falls, Saskatchewan to Wikipedia. It should also be listed on the Island Falls Redirect page, but I can't figure out the syntax.
How can I make the Redirect page list two redirects, thus:
Great job on that article! By the way, when you post something to talk pages, sign it using four tildes (~~~~) so it provides a link to your user page. Titoxd(?!?)19:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How and where do I report a page that needs attention? I (and, according to the discussion page, at least one other reader) find the article on Patience Worth to be more like a rant by its author than an encyclopedia article, but I don't want to just re-write it, since I fear getting into some sort of revert war. Also, I could have sworn that this article used to be much more objective and thorough, but this earlier version of the page is nowhere to be found when you visit the page's history. Is it possible that someone tampered with the history page?
--anon
Placing {{NPOV}} at the top will indicate a dispute of the article neutrality. Adding {{cleanup}} will request that it be worked on. (Note: these templates are case sensitive). RJFJR19:56, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I added the templates. Comments about why it isn't NPOV (Non-Neutral point of view) should be left on the talk page. It is now in the category of pages needing cleanup. Eventually someone will work on it; but there are a large number of pages awaiting cleanup. RJFJR20:00, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
1. Some publications have granted me a license in writing to translate into Portuguese their articles in English, and circulate them among my 200 contacts. I do this for pleasure, without any commercial interest.
Sometimes I would like to enrich the translation. For example, if the original article in English would say "then, in the Middle Ages," maybe I would like to mark the Portuguese translation:
"então, na Idade Média(*)......."
(*) Nota (Note) A Idade Média constitui o período médio numa divisão esquemática tradicional da história européia em três "idades" a civilização clássica da Antiguidade, a Idade Média, e os tempos modernos. Vide, a propósito, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_ages
I really translated into Portuguese, as a note, the first line of the mentioned Wikipedia text, and after that I mentioned the page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_ages)
CAN I DO THAT?
2. Sometimes I wish just to translate a text from Wikipedia and send them to my contacts. That is, I would copy and paste the text from Wikipedia to my Compose email page and translate it into Portuguese, so that, in the end, the text would be entirely in Portuguese - except for the link, that I would always mention: imagine the following text would already be translated into Portuguese:
"The Middle Ages formed the middle period in a traditional schematic division of European history into three "ages": the classical civilization of Antiquity, the Middle Ages, and modern times. The Middle Ages of Western Europe are commonly dated from the end of the Western Roman Empire (5th century) until the rise of national monarchies, the start of European overseas exploration, the humanist revival, and the Protestant Reformation starting in 1517. These various changes all mark the beginning of the Early Modern period that preceded the Industrial Revolution.
The corresponding adjective, from the Latin medium aevum, is most commonly spelled medieval in both American English and British English. Less commonly it is spelled mediaeval in British English, and rarely today with the Latin letter æ (mediæval), except to emphasise its Latin origins or as an antiquated spelling."
In short, I don't have any interest in posting Wikipedia texts to any site, but I would love to translate them into Portuguese to send them to my contacts.
It appears you are asking about the copyright status of the articles. All Wikipedia articles are licensed under the GNU license, which means:
"You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially, provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License. You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies you make or distribute."
More copyright information is available here which states:
"Wikipedia content can be copied, modified, and redistributed so long as the new version grants the same freedoms to others and acknowledges the authors of the Wikipedia article used (a direct link back to the article satisfies our author credit requirement)."
So you are more than welcome to copy, translate and distribute any articles appearing on Wikipedia (in fact many people, including myself, encourage that), so long as you attach the GNU license. And as to translating to other languages, that too is something that is encouraged, in fact Wikipedia has a Portuguese version, which currently has over 80 000 articles. I am not sure if you are aware of how Wikipedia works, but basically, it's a free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit. So a fantastically helpful thing you can do is to translate articles from the English Wikipedia to the Portuguese one. To learn more about editing and creating Wikipedia articles, have a look at this introduction.
You can do so, provided that you comply with the Gnu Free Documentation Licence to the extent normally expected of people re-using material from Wikipedia. That at least includes acknowledging Wikipedia as the source and including a complete, unmodified, copy of the licence text. Strictly speaking, you should also include all the copyright owners (found by searching the History tab, and add a History section).
However, it would be much better if you contributed the translation to the Portuguese Wikipedia, or merged them with existing articles there (and merged those article back into the English ones).
Note that there already is an Idade Média article, so you wouldn't have to add a note, you could just use a Wiki link. (It seems to have been tagged as needing cleanup, and I strongly suspect the second image is a copyright violation.)
From WP:CSD: Talk pages of already deleted pages [can be speedied] unless they contain records of the deletion discussion and are linked from Wikipedia:Archived delete debates (this doesn't apply if the deletion discussion is logged elsewhere, like an AfD sub-page or other log). - Mgm|(talk)08:16, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Les raisins de la galere is a 1995 publication of TBJ. I am searching for a review or critique and or summary of the theme on migration, emigration and what it means to be an Arab in France today? help and guidance sought please.
If I use the search feature to find something, I can see the category tree from that point down, but I haven't figured out how to find out where I am in the greater scheme of things. For instance, when I searched for "Baseball" I was intrigued by the fact that I didn't see a category that would lead me to "red sox." (I'm sure there is one, though.) So I entered "Red Sox" into the search field. But I still couldn't figure out where "Red Sox" fell in the greater scheme of "baseball." I expect I'm just blind.
Thanks,
Laurel
I assume that you are referring to Category:Basketball, not the results of a search for "Basketball".
The structure isn't a tree. The structure should be a directed acyclic graph, with the reverse structure a mirror image of the forward structure. I wouldn't be surprised if there was no enforcement of either the directed or the mirror image requirements.
Most contributors put a rather low priority on categorisation, so categories are likely to be inconsistent, except where someone takes responsibility for one.
The updward links are given at the bottom of the page, in a shaded box.
I shared your interest in, and frustration with, Wikipedia's categories when I first started getting involved. In an effort to see if it might be possible to lay out a category structure so that it could be comprehended, I created the U.S. History map for the categories in one corner of the wiki, hoping it would prove useful enough that someone might undertake to write some code to generate it. The result was disappointing-- the fact that it is not a tree structure makes it messy enough that I found it didn't add much to my grasp of the categorization (though I think I may have picked a particularly messy corner to try it on).
Still, I'd love it if someone would come up with a way to add a category to one's watchlist such that one could see articles being added or dropped from the category, subcats added or deleted, etc. -- Mwanner | Talk14:26, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have edited some articles with cleanup tags, but I haven't removed the tags, even when I think the article is now OK. Is it OK to remove the tag myself, or is there a peer-review process or something? Thanks, Squiddy14:42, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to simply remove the cleanup tag if you are comfortable that the requested cleanup has been done. There is no approval process needed. It might be a good idea to put a note on the talk page saying that you removed the tag and why you thought this was proper -- that is, why you thought the needed work had been done. If others disagree, they can discuss the matter on the talk page, and possibly repalce the tag. DES(talk)16:41, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am a newbi and have recently written an article however I would like to change the name of it. Is this possible?
--LPW15:08, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is doen via a process called "moving" the article. if you are loged in and not too new you will see a "move" tab at the top of the display when you show the article. If you click mthis tab, you can simply type in the new title and the reason for the move. If this tab doesn't appear, or if you want assistance in doing the move, you can list it at our requested moves page or ask any admin or experienced user to assist you. You will need to indicate what article you want moved and what the new title should be. DES(talk)16:13, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at his edit history, I think that what he actually needs is a merge, not a move. The most obvious destination name (other than a capitalisation change) already exists, as a redirect to the an article under the most specific word in the title. I'll flag it now.... Oops it has already moved, to a re-arranged title, but still needs a merge. --David Woolley17:57, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
i'm currently a high school student in France (paris) and i'll love to go over to the u.s to continui my education. for now i'm in a classe called (1ère année de Bac Pro service)so if am to continui in the u.s what class am i goin to be in?
HAve you checked your multiple sclerosis article lately? someones been messing with it me thinks.
Thank you for the notification, the mistake appears to have been fixed. In future if you ever find a typo, spelling error, or an act of vandalism on an article such as that, please feel free to edit it yourself, because that's what Wikipedia is all about. Akamad22:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking up information on wine critic Jilly Goolden, but assumed that the spelling of her last name was GOULDEN. That spelling yielded NO results using the Search function. What's the proper procedure for including an incorrect spelling of a word or name in an article solely to help people find what they're looking for?
Simply edit Jilly Goulden (the misspelled article) by writing #REDIRECT [[Jilly Goolden]] in the edit window. If you do you will have made a redirect page which automatically points to the correct article. It will take a while to show up in the search engine, though. - Mgm|(talk)21:25, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, whilst it won't show up in search, it will show up when you press "Go" - this does a direct check on the database for the name, and if it doesn't have it goes to the search index. So redirects of misspellings, since they prevent a search having to be done, are effectively "immediately active" (well, maybe a minute's lag). Shimgray | talk | 22:21, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I just created an account and logged in successfully.
I would like to be able to use the same account when I edit in French, is this possible?
(And which steps am I to take?)
If on the other hand it is not possible, am I a priori allowed to create an account on the French wiki with the same handle and password?
At the present time, you must create a separate account on each wikimedia project (each langauge, and also wiktionary, wikibooks, etc etc). You can use the same username unlesss soemone else has already registered that name. Propoisals have been made for a "single-sign-on" to all the projects, but the fact that in many cases different users have already registered the same user name on different project causes a problewm for any such system. DES(talk)23:06, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
how do i contribute on the talk page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.160.238.25 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 18 November 2005 (UTC-5)
The same way you contribute on this page, hit "edit this page". If you are wondering how to get to the talk page; first go to the page you want to talk about. The second tab in (labelled "discussion") is what you want. - Trevor MacInnis (Talk | Contribs) 23:47, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
(after edit conflict) You click on the tab "discussion" at the top of the page you want to discuss. This will display the talk page. Then edit that page or a section of it.
To add a comment to an existing section (thread) simply click the edit link just above the start of that section, and add your comment -- usaully at the bottom. Please sign your comment with four tildas (like this ~~~~).
To create a new section click the "+" tab at the top of the talk page, and you will be presented with a box in which you can enter the section title and text for the section. The new section will be added at the bottom of the page. Again, please sign your comment with four tildas. DES(talk)23:52, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I would be interested in knowing who posted the information about the use of Kava in Tonga on your site. The reason is because I went to Tonga about a year ago and from what I could see, the information is wrong. I did not want to edit the page because I felt more research should be done first, but from my own observations women are perfectly welcomed to drink Kava with the men. Also the women do not have to be single and I never once was given the impression that any of us were treated in a sexist manner, especially the local women. May experience may have been unique, but it might be an issue worth looking into further and editing.
Thank you, --Adrienne Lear
You can find all the people who contributed to the page and what they contributed, by using the History tab.
However, please note that your eyewitness account would count as original research, and is inadmissable on the article page, though acceptable on the talk page. To be admissable, you need an independent source that can be referenced. I believe that would include a photograph, even if you took it.
Assuming you mean Kava culture, that page has no References section, although some of the extnernal links may be mis-placed references. Its author really ought to be able to cite a reference for the claim that you are challenging. However, you shouldn't remove the claim until you have given him a reasonable opportunity to provide them and have used due dillegence to find them for yourself.
I edited an entry about Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas and don't know where to put my sources. I used the Congessional Black Caucus websitehttp://www.congressionalblackcaucus.net/, The Congressional Record and the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress 1774-Present. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jazzzlover1971 (talk • contribs) 2005-11-18 23:57:58
There are several options for citing sources. The easiest thing to do, probably, will be to look at an article that cites sources and copy the format it uses. For example, Blackface cites a wide variety of sources. I can provide more detail if that isn't enough to get started. Hope that helps! —HorsePunchKid→龜2005-10-19 06:05:26Z
Here's what I'd do, given that I can't seem to trick Wikipedia into letting me edit an article with a # in its name (even with various encodings for the symbol).
Create an article with a bogus name like Pilot no. 5.
Use the {{wrongtitle}} template on the page and make it clear that it's supposed to be written Pilot #5.
List the page on the Pilot disambiguation page, since that's where people are going to get taken when they search for "Pilot #5".
I'm having problems logging into wiki. i would ordinarily just create a new account, however, I am using wiki as part of a group project on malaria that we are developing here at the University of Oxford as part of our Global Health Masters programme. This means I need access to this specific account. We were each given a piece of paper with our wiki details on, but mine don't seem to be working - the details I have are: Miss Jessica Bryan, <password deleted, but should be considered compromised> and <email deleted - see instructions>. Would anyone be able to help me out here?
Thanks,
Jess Bryan
-As I type there is no user account registered on this wiki under the name Miss Jessica Bryan. If you want to register this name, then you can create the account in the usual way. Use a different password though, as even though the one you gave above has been deleted it is still available in the page history. As a side note, don't use wiki as an abbreviation for Wikipedia. Wikipedia is awiki, but not all wikis are the Wikipedia. --Kwekubo13:01, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Note there's a reasonable possibility that the wiki you mean to access is not wikipedia, but some other wiki run at a different URL. You might want to verify you're tyring to access the right wiki. -- Rick Block (talk) 19:55, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Contributions on the topic of protection from pornography and preditors
Hi, my name is kittywaymo. I freelance for various community protection groups.
I was wondering if there is a section that I might contribute some date concerning the following topics:
1. Pornography and the Family
2. Closeted (meaning they are living a double life, as mormon men, usually married etc. seeking same-gender companionship)gay-mormon internet community
3.Protecting our children from "preditory" behavior of adult males addicted to pornography. (i.e. law enforcement agencies, state and federal, civic organizations to go to for help if you discover someone is a preditor etc.)
4. Any hard-data contributions (i.e. studies, stats etc. ) What area would I contribute this under?
RESPECTED SIR,
IN L.P.G AND L.N.G SEA TRANSPORT WHAT IS THE CORRECT PROCEEDURE OF CHANGING TANK ATMOSPHERE. I.E IF A PARTICULAR TANK HAS CARRIED PROPANE AND IMMIDIEATELY AFTER THIS METHANE HAS TO BE LOADED HOW IS THE TANK ATMOSPHERE CHANGED SO AS THE NEXT CARGO DOES NOT GET CONTAMINATED. THANKING YOU IN ANTICIPATION
Please read the instructions at the top of this page.
Please don't post in all capital letters. On the internet it signifies screaming and is considered rude.
Factual questions like this belong on the reference desk. This page is for questions about wikipedia itself.
Hi,
I feel like I should've figured this out by now, but apparently I haven't. It kind of bugs me that multiple edits to a page only appear as the most recent one. I always forget to check that there may have been edits before it, but after I last saw the page, that are thus invisible in diff's. Doesn't this bug anyone else?
I see now in preferences > Recent changes, there's an option that says "Enhanced recent changes (JavaScript)" which I don't have ticked. Perhaps this is what I want. I'm a bit way of Javscript. Is there a page that shows what the enhancements actually are, or could someone kindly tell me?
I'm not sure if this is what you are looking for but if you look at an article's history you will see radio buttons next to each edit so that you may compare different edits that may have occurred days or even months apart. Also, when you view the most recent difference there is a link above the previous version of the page (the yellow version on the left) that says "Previous edit". This will step you back one edit at a time. Dismas|(talk)19:17, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I know, but I don't want to have to manually inspect the history of every page on my watchlist to make sure only one edit was made since I last checked my watchlist. Am I explaining myself clearly? pfctdayelise23:02, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason, {{if}} isn't working correctly for me. I was trying to make a table ({{Saffir-Simpson small}}) right-aligned if the parameter align wasn't specified, or else use the parameter if specified. It didn't default to right-aligned when align was not specified - it remained left-aligned. In the template was the code align="{{if|{{{align}}}|{{{align}}}|right}}". The code with the context is at this link. Thanks for any help! --AySz88^-^20:20, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If you put a pipe symbol default after the first parameter it should work fine: align="{{if|{{{align|}}}|{{{align}}}|right}}". If you want to see a lot of {{if}}s in action, take a look at {{language}}. --Gareth Hughes20:49, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've just noticed the CSS attribute class="boilerplate metadata" in something I was editing. Could someone point me to the place where the style class is defined, so I can see if it's appropriate? --Gareth Hughes20:53, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to check out this CSS file, assuming you're using monobook. I could find the boilerplate class in any of them[15][16][17][18], but at least the main monobook one defines the metadata class. Hope that helps! —HorsePunchKid→龜2005-10-19 22:55:59Z
is it possible to delete a revision for privacy issues? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackola (talk • contribs)
I believe it is possible, but only in exceptional circumstances. It involves tinkering directly with the database, which is not something to be done lightly. —HorsePunchKid→龜2005-10-19 22:50:06Z
Any admin can do it without messing around in the database. They delete the whole article and then restore the versions with no privacy problems. If you need this done, you should probably ask at WP:AN. --GraemeL(talk)23:00, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
eg, If I do a google search for my friends band called "juju space jazz", it doesn't come up,
but if I do a search on "Simon Posford" (the producer) it comes up with "Simon Posford - Wikipedia" etc
I might have many questions since im a new user but this is a very randomn question and i feel that there should be a space for randomn questions like mines any ways can some oe tell me where i can find a page worth of inso on how does temperature effect density. Because i am not able to find it here and u guys seem smart so thnx oh and if i am doing this wrong pleaze tell mebecause i dont wanna get into a poopie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kutakente (talk • contribs)
Hi, Kutakente. I do not have a specific page to point you to, but I think you'll get a better response over at the science reference desk. There is a little bit of information at Density, but it's not a detailed discussion about how temperature can affect density. —HorsePunchKid→龜2005-10-20 02:36:59Z
Thank you, you are doing an excellent work!
You are very helpful!
However I feel the need to contact you about an issue.
While I was discussing on MSN with a French friend about an item and I asked him to have a look on Wikipedia in order to confirm which of us was right, he answered me that I should not believe what you are writing because is not always right and that you are not objective!
He also gave me an example with FYROM on this page:
He said that even though Wikipedia is referring to the fact that FYROM is the formal name of this country -which both UN and EU are accepting-, you are using the name “Republic of Macedonia” taking by this way, position in favour of one of the two parties on a name dispute with Greeks.
I don’t understand. Is that true? Are you in favour of one of the two parties then? If not why you are not using the formal name of this country as the United Nations and European Union does?
I'm looking forward to hear from you.
Thank you,
Adam (West Midlands-UK)
Hi, Adam. It's is Wikipedia's policy to not take a point of view on topics like this, though sometimes situations can come up in which it is impossible to simultaneously satisfy both parties to a dispute. For more information on this particular topic, I encourage you to read through the talk page for the article, for example, the discussion here regarding naming. —HorsePunchKid→龜2005-10-20 02:33:08Z
Can you update the Trinidad & Tobago page about it's latest accomplishment as a nation to be the smallest (least populated) country to ever qualify at the FIFA World Cup? They have qualified for the World Cup in Germany 2006.
Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs changing, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit any article by simply following the Edit this page link. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to...) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use out the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. —HorsePunchKid→龜2005-10-20 02:34:41Z
i need the answers for Thursdays soduko puzzle for a school project. if anyone has them....please email them to me at (e-mail removed) and title it sudoku. i need them for a school project (which is pretty dumb) because i missed the paper. please anyone gelp me!
~*~danny~*~
Hi Danny. We wouldn't know which Sudoku puzzle you're wanting an answer about - we're an encyclopedia, not a publisher of Sudoku puzzles. And we don't help with homework - that's something you need to do yourself. Sorry ➨ ❝REDVERS❞03:16, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, Danny, please read the notice at the top of the page- please don't post in all capitals, and please don't leave your e-mail address. Deltabeignet07:26, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any plans for Wikipedia to host OWL ontologies, to support collaborative ontology authoring? This would brilliant - imagine the possibilities of a semantic-wiki.
I know there are already sites doing this, but they are fairly inconvenient at the moment (IMO).
Please can a sysop delete the first version of this file - I made a spelling error in the licence detail. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesStewart (talk • contribs)
The actually image history is wrong in both cases, not just the first, as the image does have a licence, which is reflected in your copyright tag. The actual source wording is "There are no usage restrictions for this photo." Unfortunately the terms of use for the site from which you downloaded the image override the permissions given by the photographer and impose usage consraints that ar e incompatible with Wikipedia and, I would argue, even with uploading the image to Wikipedia. You need to obtain this image from the original copyright owner, not via the web site that you used.
The other problem is that you've uploaded the thumbnail (a rather large one), when Wikipedia images should always be at the highest resolution available, in this case 3072*2304. That's probably because you need to log in to do that.
Finally, whilst the resolution makes it difficult to be sure, I don't believe this picture illustrates the article in which it appears; I cannot see a tongue.
Is there anyway to start a counter to track the number of hits each page gets?
If so, could it possibly be used to see how many hits in the past day, week, month, year?
Thanks
Such counters are supported by teh MediWiki software but have been turned off in wikipedia for performance reasons. If we had far more server hardware we might be able to support this feature. DES(talk)19:24, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What's the best course of action to take with a user who appears to have reverted a page to a copyvio version more than once, and who appears to have already been spoken to about it on his/her talk page? See Phalia and User talk:193.251.135.126 Thanks! --Avocado17:55, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
after warnings and explanations feel free to block him (or ask for a block here). It says on the message not to revert so it's just as bad as vandalism. BrokenS18:24, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
okay, this is a weird one. recently, nine times out of ten, if i click on a wikipedia button or link (save page, my watchlist, anything), the first time i click, the little 'page progress thingie in my browser starts counting up the percentage of the page loaded, but it just stalls and the page won't load unless i wait like 30 or 40 seconds (i'm estimating). however, if i simply click the button a second time, the page will load up pretty much immediately thereafter. i played with the 'scripts' area not long ago - monobook.css, hideown.js, stuff like that - but found they seemed to slow things down a lot (but not like this). i *believe* i deleted those pages properly - but i don't know for sure. i'm baffled. i don't know where to look. this need to click a second time on links or buttons doesn't occur on any other site i visit. am i cursed? borged? possessed? help.....Anastrophe18:48, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Contact your local priest about the possesion, but I have noticed this loading problem - so your are not alone with that one. On a network with a fast internet connection, Windows XP, and Firefox about 5/10 times the page would take ~30 seconds to load on the first click, but clicking refresh would load the page instantaneously. Which browser and things were you using?--Commander Keane20:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've been having this problem, too. I don't know too much about the server architecture, but it makes me suspect that one (or sizable fraction of the total) of the load-balanced servers is (are) really, really slow, but some are still decently fast. So you click on it once, and you get a slow server, wait for it to respond, get frustrated, click again, and your second request gets sent to a different server. Just a theory. :)—HorsePunchKid→龜2005-10-21 01:34:31Z
I receive some messages telling me that I edited some pages which I didn't edit such as 'Do not add rubbish to the Page "Sex"' or "please refrain from editing wikipedia" ...etc.
How can I stop these messages?
-anonymous
This probably means that you are using a shared IP (internet protocall) address, and that someone else using the same IP address has done these things. If you have never editing the articles refered to, you can safely ignore these messages, but it would be better to register for a free account on wikipedia and to log in in future. This would give you a unique user ID, and all msgs sent to that user ID would only be for you, not some other person who shares ypur IP address. This would also mean that all your edits would be identified by your consistant user ID. DES(talk)19:39, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You avoid it by getting and using an account, or by using an ISP that will provide you with a static IP address and not using a web proxy (and your ISP should not use a transparent one).
The address you used for this question is from a range of addresses used in Saudi Arabia. Some of those addresses are used for web access proxies and the whois information hints that Saudi Arabian users have no option about using that proxy. The whois information only identifies down to a range of 256 addresses. If we knew exactly which of those were used, we could add some additional information to the talk and user pages to explain that they could relate to any user in Saudi Arabia.
If you can't avoid the proxy, your only option is to use a real user identity.
Note that, although Wikipedia doesn't know which user is accessing the page, the proxy and ISP are almost certainly maintaining logs that will make that information available to them.
I am teaching myself xhtml & css as my plan is to create web sites. In much of the books I have, they recommend a number of browsers to use during the process so all bugs and conflicts can be minimized. The Opera browser is highly recommended, however I cannot find it anywhere in this site (this site came up in a serach I did for Opera browser) to download.
One of the lessons I have specifically requires Opera as when viewing it in IE & Mozilla, the imagemap is missing but it is there in the code.
Do I have to purchase Opera? if so, what is the cost & how do I proceed?
In advance, thank you for your assistance.
Nancy Talcott
LaughingCat
ps, not to be adverse, but this site is the most difficult site I have ever looked at. which is the main reason I hardly use the internet as actually getting to a screen to email any humans that work there is, in some cases, impossible. I can't even tell if this will get to anyone because there is nothing here that says "send".
You guys gotta remember, most of us out here need it to be kept simple! All the visitors to your site are not programmers.
This won't directly help, but at least it may help you notice when you are logged in. Go to your CSS file at User:Kazvorpal/monobook.css (assuming you are using the default monobook theme) and make a simple but obvious change. For example, you might just add the line body { border: 2px solid blue; }. This will add a small blue border around the entire page, but it will only be visible when you're logged in.
...but I don't know anything about this thing, which I'm guessing is a sort of way for me to skin/style my own view of the site. Could someone point me at the link explaining all about editing it? Kaz22:34, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Post script: Does this simply mean I can create that non-existent monobook page to which he links, and add any allowed CSS code to it, and it'll be applied to my view of the site? Kaz23:11, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like something I might have said. :) Let me see if I can be of more help. The main page to get you started on customizing is at Help:User style. Unfortunately, at a glance, it is quite wordy, and may not be immediately useful. It sounds like you've basically got the right idea, though. Your monobook.css is a stylesheet that is applied to every page you view on Wikipedia, so any CSS styles you add to it will be applied to everything you see. Hope that's a little more helpful! —HorsePunchKid→龜2005-10-21 01:26:50Z
I took a look at your monobook.css. It looks like you copied the whole default monobook.css into it; not a bad thing, if you're just experimenting, but it's probably not necessary. The CSS style rules are cumulative, and even when you create your own monobook.css, the default stylesheet is still included. So in other words, all you need to add to your monobook.css are the specific properties you want to change about the default appearance. Hence my suggestion of adding a blue border: With just that one line, it will still look like the default monobook theme, but with a small (but hopefully noticeable) border around it. —HorsePunchKid→龜2005-10-21 01:32:53Z
Yeah, I eventually figured out that it's just a means of overriding the default style sheet. But when I pasted in the default sheet (on the theory that I would then have instant access to all class names, in case I wanted to change one specifically), something strange happened: all the top and left side navigation vanished. I eventually had to yank the entire thing and ONLY insert the one line I wanted to change.
Is that normal? What could cause it?
Ultimately, my solution for the idiotic login crapola was for me to only change the TEXTAREA tag. Now it's black with white text (which I think is the way text is the most readable on an active display), and being logged in really only matters when I'm trying to edit a page, so at that moment it becomes obvious if I'm not.
But what's causing the whole autologout thing to happen every few hours, anyway? It used to be every few MONTHS.
05:07, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
05:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
\(caint). I fixed it everywhere it showed up on your page. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 01:47, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:RembrandtNightwatch.jpg){kind=link}
![[5]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:RembrandtNightwatch.jpg){kind=link}
