Wikipedia:Help desk/Archive 7

This is an archive of the help desk. Please do not edit this page. To ask a new question, go to this page.

How do I archive a page?

Hello! I've looked all over the Help materials on WP, and can't seem to find the procedure for archiving a page (I'm trying to archive Talk:Palmdale, California at present). Would you be knowledgable/willing in dealing with my predicament? Please keep in mind my learning disability, which makes my mind understand words in a more literal sense than "normies". Step by step directions, clearly written, are also a great help. Thanks ever so much. . . If you'd like, you may wish to place a response here, and/or my talk page. Happy Trails, --avnative 14:23, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

Check out Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. Goplat 16:40, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the link on how to archive a talk page, Goplat! Just what the Dr. ordered. It worked very well for this first time user of its protocol. --avnative 19:49, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

Possible bug in uploading an image?

I wrote an article about Bill Tilden the tennis player, then found an old public-domain photo of him. It was stored on my computer as C:\Aspects II\Bill Tilden.jpg. A couple of days ago I uploaded it and put it into the article with no problems. Today I went back to the original picture on my computer and cropped it slightly. I then saved it under the same name in the same location. Then I came back to Wikipedia and uploaded the new image through the usual process. I got a Warning saying that the name had been changed to Bill_Tilden.jpg (as it did the first time) and a second warning saying that this new file would overwrite the existing file of the same name. So I uploaded the new file. To my surprise, however, it did not replace the existing one. I exited Wikipedia completely, then tried the same process 2 more times. Each time I was told that my new file had replaced the old one. But the same picture kept appearing in the article. And when I went to the Image page, where it shows a picture of my image, it was always still the original picture, even though the History said I had replaced it three times.

Finally I went back to my C:\Aspects II folder, renamed the picture Bill_Tilden_Hitting_a_Backhand.jpg, and moved it to C:\Aspects. I then returned to Wikipedia and imported it again under the new name. I then went to the article and changed the name of the image to be shown to the new name. Et voila, the cropped image showed up in the article.

Was I doing something wrong here, or is there some bug that prevents one image from overwriting another? Or is this some sort of security device that the editor isn't told about when he's trying to change the picture? Hayford Peirce 20:13, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Sounds to me like it might be a caching issue: the picture updated but you were looking at an old version. Isomorphic 21:37, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This is the MediaWiki picture caching bug. I submitted this at the SourceForge bug tracker but I can't find it at bugzilla.wikipedia.org, so I'll give an explanation here and maybe someone will submit it again in the proper place.

Consider the image on Wikipedia:Village pump; its URL is http://en.wikipedia.org/upload/thumb/b/ba/100px-Village_pump_clear.png. Here's what I get if I request the image (my typing in bold):

 $ telnet en.wikipedia.org 80
 Trying 207.142.131.235...
 Connected to en.wikipedia.org.
 Escape character is '^]'.
 GET /upload/thumb/b/ba/100px-Village_pump_clear.png HTTP/1.1
 Host: en.wikipedia.org

 HTTP/1.0 200 OK
 Server: Apache/1.3.29 (Unix) PHP/4.3.4
 Cache-Control: max-age=2592000
 Expires: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 18:01:38 GMT
 Last-Modified: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 05:34:34 GMT
 ...

Note the Expires header. This is telling my browser and all proxy caches between me and Wikipedia that they need not request the image again until 14 Sep 2004. So if someone changes that image today I won't see it for another month or so (unless it drops out of all the caches). Note that it does me no good to flush my browser's cache if the image remains in my ISP's proxy cache.

The solution is to incorporate the revision number into the URL for the image, for example http://en.wikipedia.org/upload/thumb/b/ba/r1-100px-Village_pump_clear.png. Then when someone changes the image my browser will fetch r2-100px-Village_pump_clear.png and I will see the change immediately. This imposes a cost on the server, as whenever anyone updates an image the server will have to flag all articles using that image as out of date, but I think that as image updates are rare this will be a supportable cost. Gdr 11:18, 2004 Aug 19 (UTC)

Copyright and permission

Question deleted after I did what I should have done in the first place and read the help pages for images. Ross-c 10:25, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Image problem

I have uploaded a small image, (Image:Conti-sig.gif) but for some reason the page has just a link to the picture, and the picture does not work at all. I uploaded the picture again to test if there was some mistake, but it still does not work. There seems to be no problem with the picture on my hard drive, so I'm wondering what's wrong with the upload? --Conti|✉ 01:05, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

I just realized that the upload didn't worked it seems. The image has a size of 0 bytes.. But I still don't know why the upload hasn't worked. --Conti|✉ 02:17, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

Watchlist Use

Firstly, apologies if this should have been directed at a more specific/technical help area.

I have accumulated a number of pages on my watchlist, and I note that some of them get vandalised by anonymous IP's. However, my first knowledge of the vandalism on my watchlist appears as a registered user's reversion of it. It seems that some anonymous IP edits *will* appear on my watchlist and others won't . . . how is that possible? Lacrimosus 08:25, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Your watchlist only shows the last change done to a watched article. If an article is edited in quick succession by a dozen different people, you'll still only see one entry (the last one) on your watchlist. So you often have to hit the "hist" link beside a watchlist item in order to see the full story of what's been happening to that article. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 10:02, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Category link opens edit unexpectedly

I have been creating and populating the Category:Architectural elements. All seems to be well except on the page Crow step. So far as I can see, I have done the same thing on this page, but the category shows up as a red link (nonexistent), while clicking on it opens an editor on the existing text for the category page. The page does appear in the category list. Did I do something wrong? Notinasnaid 09:58, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Seems fine now. Sometimes categories take a while to update properly. Angela . 12:33, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

Apologies, it seems specific to this PC, which is still doing it. But another is not. Some kind of cacheing issue, I suppose, though other pages don't seem to have had such trouble showing changes. Notinasnaid 12:43, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Categories are just weird like that. Sometimes clearing your cache will help, other times it's the server cache, so you may just need to wait a day to see if it fixes itself. The Categorisation FAQ explains this and other category bugs. Angela . 13:18, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

Linking to a category by a different name

I have found several times that I wanted the item in the category list to have a name other than the topic name.

Example: Category:Architectural elements. I would like to add Mansard roof to this category. However, Mansard Roof is a redirect, to Jules Hardouin Mansart, who invented the Mansard Roof. The article seems fine. However, I can't put Jules Hardouin Mansart into the category, because Jules is an architect, not an architectural element. I added a category to the redirect page (see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Mansard_roof&action=edit) but the edit was rejected - no change, no entry in history, no feedback to suggest failure.

Is there a resolution, without splitting the main topic? Notinasnaid 09:59, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It seems to work now. You can't add something short to the end of a redirect, but it seems that if you stop it being a redirect first (by adding something before it), you can then edit the page to add the category after it. Angela . 12:30, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

This phenomenon has caught me out before, trying to do the same thing: adding a Category to a REDIRECT. The basic problem AFAIK is that if you attempt to append to a REDIRECT, anything after the first End-of-Line is rejected. If you add your category tags or whatever so that the entire "article" is on a single line, it seems you can get away with it. HTH HAND --Phil | Talk 13:19, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

Picture captions

Can anybody explain to me why my captions for the pictures in Paul Weller aren't showing up in the article? I can't seem to work out what I've done wrong, as the coding looks right to me... Angmering 15:03, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Cheers! I feel such a fool! :-) Angmering 15:16, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Change contributor

I added some pages before I got an account and they're listed with a dynamic ip-address as contributor. Is there any way I can change it so the contributor points to my account instead of the ip-address?

Cheers Patrick, newborne wikipedian

Absolutely. Check out Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit. --Slowking Man 03:13, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

NOTE: You posted this twice, unintentionally, I'm sure. I took the liberty of removing the duplicate section.

Bots

What is a "Bot" (I assume it is an abreivation of Robot) used so frequently in the context of editing discussions on Wikipedia? Dainamo 18:13, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

A bot is a piece of code that runs through and does large scale jobs. Most of the ones nowadays are search-and-replace bots (for common spelling errors or disambiguation purposes). We have one bot (Ram-bot) that took all the US census data and wrote an article about every city in the US. →Raul654 18:15, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

Every incorporated city. I've spotted a few that are on the map but weren't in Wikipedia due to their unincorporated status. -- Cyrius|✎ 18:27, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Bots for some of the current bots. Their user pages, linked from that page, usually explain what they do. Angela . 18:36, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

What about linking to a WikipediA page?

What is the policy regarding linking to a WikipediA page from the outside world? Thank you. AlvinMGO 20:25, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

We don't have any policy against linking externally. However, note that if you link to an old version of a page, and the page is moved, that link will no longer work. The only thing we don't always allow is external use of images where it is using up a lot of our bandwidth. Angela . 21:09, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you, Angela. I understand about pages movings; it's just like links that have become orphans. AlvinMGO 22:36, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

if we move a page, then there should be a redirect, so the external link would automatically be forwarded. For example U.S.A. forwards to the article at United States -- Chris 73 Talk 11:53, Aug 22, 2004 (UTC)

That works for the current version, but linking to an old version in the page history doesn't after a page move. Angela . 14:00, Aug 22, 2004 (UTC)

Sounds like an issue to worry about in any future MediaWiki redesign. -- Cyrius|✎ 17:16, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad

Why have you turned your original definition on its head? Your new entry is the OPPOSITE of your original entry! Your original entry for Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad stated:

"Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court overturned the federal income tax of the United States by stating that the 16th Amendment did not in fact amend the constitution to allow for the income tax but just clarified federal law. The decision was handed down on January 24, 1916."

The current entry is: "Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court upheld the federal income tax of the United States by stating that the 16th Amendment prevented the re-characterization of a tax on income from the class of indirect taxes to which it inherently belonged to that of direct taxes by considering the source of the income. The decision was handed down on January 24, 1916."

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushaber_v._Union_Pacific_Railroad"

First you said Brushaber OVERTURNED the income tax, now you say Brushaber UPHELD it!

Please explain why you new entry is the opposite of your old. Were you coerced by the government into changing it? Who made you change it?

MY e-mail address is: booboo894@juno.com -Alexander Daube

This might be better dealt with at the article's talk page. --Slowking Man 21:57, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

It looks like the current version is right and corrected my original version. See http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/chapter1.htm . -- mav 06:27, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Removing Table of Contents

Is there any way I can take the Table of Contents off of a page, or at least have it closed by default? I'm working on a particular page in a WikiBooks project in which I would like to utilize headers, but the Table of Contents is not appropriate. (Booyabazooka 17:14, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC))

Use the special flag __NOTOC__ . -- Cyrius|✎ 17:15, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Is there a way to have a Table of Contents closed by default? (Booyabazooka 18:50, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC))

Yes, on your preferences, under "Misc settings", there's an option "Show table of contents (for pages with more than 3 headings)". Turn this off if you don't like the table of contents. Gdr 12:29, 2004 Aug 23 (UTC)

Keeping Copying Sites Up To Date

A number of websites copy Wikipedia pages directly into their own. I assume this is the open licence in operation. What precautions are in place to ensure they keep up with amendments? I ask because some of them have the external link on the page about Winkte to my website screwed up.

There isn't any, they operate independent of us and are responsible for keeping themselves up to date. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:26, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

strange messages

On 8/22, I was prompted to a page containing these messages:

User talk:205.188.116.135

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing. Maximus Rex 18:24, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

I was fixing the vandalization of others. Thanks for your vigilant thought police crackdown. Regards, One Who Knows The Truth

Template:Dtest2 -- user:zanimum

I have no idea what these people are talking about.

RSVP w/any thoughts...

unclesmedley@mindspring.com

Sometimes you might share an IP address with a vandal, and mistakenly get messages intended for him. HTH. Meelar (talk) 06:10, 2004 Aug 23 (UTC)

Especially when the message is months old like those are. -- Cyrius|✎ 17:49, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Contributing an article for a stub item

Hi,

I just found a location in the Wiki which does not have an article on it but has an external link. The topic is the Observer Design Pattern. I want to contribute for this topic.

Who do I email the text to?

In what format should it be sent?

Thanks in advance

With best regards,

Sayan

Sayan Mukherjee

[Email: sayan.mukherjee@iflexsolutions.com]

Instead of emailing the text to anyone, click on the "Edit this page" link beside the page about Observer Design Pattern. Try doing the Wikipedia:Tutorial. LUDRAMAN | T 09:13, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

URLs in brackets

When I add a URL in brackets, could you prevent Wikipedia from considering the closing bracket as part of the URL? Example: <http://www.google.co.in/> and (http://www.google.co.in/). —Rajasekaran Deepak 06:50, 2004 Aug 23 (UTC)

The best way to avoid it is to use a space: (http://www.google.co.in/ )

Not the prettiest solution, but it works. →Raul654 06:50, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

However, it isn't a good idea to put URLs in articles (unless talking about them as URLs, of course). In lists of external links, you should give a description of what the reader will find at the URL and why it is connected to the article. Compare

http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/news/story/0,11711,1288711,00.html

with

"Tourists see Munch's Scream stolen" from the Guardian on August 23, 2004.

Gdr 12:24, 2004 Aug 23 (UTC)

Deleting a redirect confusion

Hi. Yes, I know that I've been a d*ckh**d, but I created a stub article for a musician called "Fane Flaws", and put it under the mispelled name "Fane Faws". I've moved the page (such as it is), but the old "Fane Faws" page still exists as a redirect. I read the help page on deleting redirects, and from what is written there it almost seems that I should leave the redirect there, as it will help others who make the same mispelling, but otherwise cause no harm.

What do people think of a problem like this? Should I just leave it?

If spelling redirects are a problem, then there's another musician called "Dave McArtney". His name is rather commonly (and annoyingly to the musician himself I'm told) mispelled as "Dave McCartney". Should I add a redirect? What happens if there is another Dave McCartney, and later on someone tries to create that page?

Thanks in anticipation,

Ross-c

Redirects for common misspellings should be created. If a future user wants to create an article at that misspelling, they can click the "Redirected from Dave McCartney" link, which will take them to the redirect page itself. There they can edit to their heart's content. -- Cyrius|✎ 17:47, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Done. Ross-c 21:16, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia Stats?

Does Wikipedia offer any other realtime statistics of their site...other than the 5 minute update of current http requests? Thanks for any help! Carrie B.

Special:Statistics is what you are looking for. →Raul654 17:44, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

I am looking for "live" statistical updates...most of the special statistics are only updated weekly, monthly, yearly....ie. is there any way to get these in a more minute by minute update? The closest wikipedia statistic to realtime was the 5 minute numerical update of the current http requests...are there any others that are more frequently updated like this one?

Special:Statistics is updated after every edit. It is live. →Raul654 18:01, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

Maybe I am not looking at it correctly? When I go to say, wikistats, in the special statistics link and click on edits per article it seems like these numbers are from a monthly gathering? Or when I click on user statistics it seems to give me monthly updates as well? Is there something that I am missing? Thanks for your help....carrie

Ah, that's it. The bolded numbers on the special:statistics page are updated after every edit (number of articles, users, edits, edits/page, etc). The pages linked from there are not updated as often. →Raul654 18:17, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

Do you know of any other statistics of Wikipedia that are updated frequently like the numbers of edits? I am really wanting to know what Wikipedia pages are drawing the most attention, like in a given minute? Is that even possible? Thanks again! carrie

Sorry, no. They do offer a log of this month's hits (updated nightly), so you can see which articles are very popular this month. (It's at http://wikimedia.org/stats/en.wikipedia.org/url_200408.html but be careful - it's gigantic - dozens of megabytes) By taking the difference nightly, you can calculate how many hits partcular articles got on a day. →Raul654 18:29, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

Great! Thanks for your help!

2004

2004 has got 3 stuff of everything. How do I get it off? --Patricknoddy 20:52, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)User:Patricknoddy --Patricknoddy 20:52, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)User talk:Patricknoddy 16:50 August 23, MMVI (EDT)

See Wikipedia:How to revert a page to an earlier version.

Go to the 2004 page.
Click "history"
Click on "03:46, 23 Aug 2004", which seems to be the last good version before things started going wrong.
Click "edit this page". You'll get a warning about editing an old version.
Don't change anything in the body of the page. Just fill in a sensible edit summary, like "revert to previous good version by 216.189.186.21", and save.

—AlanBarrett 21:25, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Pictures

How do I put a picture on a picture article? --Patricknoddy 20:52, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)User:Patricknoddy --Patricknoddy 20:52, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)User talk:Patricknoddy 16:52 August 23, MMVI (EDT)

The picture tutorial explains all about how to use images in articles. →Raul654 21:24, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

PS - I wrote it :)

Is it possible to make links to pictures resident in a different national wikipedia? Or would it be possible in future? It could be useful to avoid downloading and loading the same picture on different wikis, that are all resident in the same server...

I made of mess of the pictures at Joseph Smith, Jr.. Can somebody please show me what I am doing wrong? Sorry. And thanks. I already ask a user on his talk page, but I think this is the correct place to ask. Tom 19:46, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Proper location of stub notice

I hope this is the right place to ask formatting questions... On a page with an "External Links" section at the end, which is the generally accepted place to put a {{stub}} flag... before the Links section, or after at the very end of the page? (Booyabazooka 23:38, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC))

Personally I always put it at the bottom of the page, I've also seen people put it at the very top of the page and I have no beef with that - but above the external links section -I don't like that - meta information should be apart from the main article IMO. Theresa Knott 23:46, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I tend to agree with Theresa - I think the very bottom is the appropriate place. →Raul654 23:48, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

In this case I shall concur. Case closed, thank you. (Booyabazooka 00:00, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC))

Regarding lists

Is there a way to keep text after a sub-list on the same level? For example:

* Some text
** A sub list
** another sub list item
** ditto
* don't want to start a new item but to have it at the same depth as "Some text"

I can't find an answer to this anywhere... But I might just be blind :P porge 07:44, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well a colon will indent text but probably a bit too much

* Some text
** A sub list
** another sub list item
** ditto
: don't want to start a new item but to have it at the same depth as "Some text"

Produces

Some text
- A sub list
- another sub list item
- ditto

don't want to start a new item but to have it at the same depth as "Some text"

This is a terrible hack that will only work with the monobook skin (look at the code: <font color = "ffffff"> . . </font>)

Some text
- A sub list
- another sub list item
- ditto

. . don't want to start a new item but to have it at the same depth as "Some text"

HTH Theresa Knott 11:15, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

That's dependant on font as well. This way should line up no matter what:

Some text
- A sub list
- another sub list item
- ditto

don't want to start a new item but to have it at the same depth as "Some text"

Goplat 17:07, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Ugh, it would still be much nicer to be able to do it without reverting to HTML, perhaps something along the lines of

* dudududu
** sub
** sub
** sub
*& don't start a new list item but start a new line at the correct depth

Then you'd also be able to have new paragraphs within list items easily:

* line one of list item one
*& line two of list item one

porge 04:24, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Press release

I am thinking of sending a Wikipedia press release to some Irish newspapers. Should I edit it to include a bit about the Irish Wikipedia? It would make it more specific to the audience and possibly make the papers more likely to print it, but I thought I could be going against a policy. LUDRAMAN | T 17:18, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Something about the Irish Wikipedia would certainly be good to include. Incidentally, there's probably going to be a global press release soon (sometime in September) because we're about to reach 1,000,000 articles across all Wikipedia languages. If you want to wait that long, the press release would have some current news about a major milestone. Also, as we develop this press release, hopefully we can figure out a good way to work in a paragraph or so specifically about the local language Wikipedia (whether Irish, Japanese, Kazakh, Luxembourgish, or whatever) that each Wikipedia can write for itself. --Michael Snow 20:50, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, ok Ill wait. LUDRAMAN | T 20:09, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Redirect link

Can you redirect a link? User:Patricknoddy User talk:Patricknoddy 17:59 August 24, 2004 (EDT)

What do you mean? If it's something like cat that links to dog, you can [[dog|cat]]. If you want to redirect a page to another page, use #REDIRECT [[dog]]. If you want to redirect a page to an external link (ie outside Wikipedia), you can't do that. Dysprosia 22:01, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Popularity of pages

Is there a way to see how many "hits" each page gets? I'm not talking about some massive popularity list... but is there something I can type in the URL to see the stats on individual pages? Or what is the best alternative? Thanks. Wodan 14:39, Aug 26, 2004 (UTC)

The best I can point you at is the Webalizer stats for en. If you click on a month, it'll display a page with all sorts of statistics, including the most accessed URLs. I don't know how accurate the numbers are, and they appear not to take into account hits on the squids (99.31% of hits are special and editing).

Still gives you an idea where people are going. The Olympic Games pages are popular, as are the articles on Bush and Kerry. Some "in the news" subjects like Mary Kay Letourneau, Rick James, and Jim McGreevey show up, as well as perennial favorites List of sex positions, Penis, and Pornography.

MediaWiki does have an internal hit counter, but it is disabled for performance reasons. -- Cyrius|✎ 15:10, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Red Links on a Disambiguation Page

How is it that a red link can appear on a disambiguation page?

When I apply "What links here" to the red link, this results in no hits.

So if no references exist to the red link, how did it become a red link?

A red link is just created by someone typing square brackets round a word that is not yet a title. "What links here" doesn't always work because of known bugs in the links table. Angela . 15:40, Aug 26, 2004 (UTC)

Guidelines for Table of Contents

Where can I find guidelines for TOC? What is the proper length. What defines a TOC as overwhelming? How can I create sections and subsections without them showing up in the TOC to keep the TOC smaller? etc.. Petersam 18:46, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Answering the last question: section size should not depend on how long the TOC may be, but be judged by itself. The smaller units are paragraphs and list items.--Patrick 23:16, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It is not the section size, but the number of sections in the article. Each section adds an entry in the TOC, so an article with a lot of sections will have a long TOC. One of the requirements for a featured article is that the TOC is not 'overwhelming'. There is currently no concrete guidelines on what this means. (Wikipedia:What is a featured article) Petersam 19:12, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I would not make the section larger (than suitable, judged by itself) just to make the TOC shorter. If the TOC is long, use different levels, like sections and subsections.--Patrick 23:26, 2004 Aug 29 (UTC)

Each level/sublevel adds to the TOC Petersam 03:15, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Or perhaps the page itself is too large and should be split.--Patrick 23:27, 2004 Aug 29 (UTC)

May need to do that, thanks Petersam 03:15, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

compatiability between the GNU GPL and the GNU FDL

A quick question. I want to import the open cola recipe into wikipedia. It is under the GNU GPL. Can I do this even though Wikipedia is under the GNU FDL? Thanks, --metta, The Sunborn ☸ 04:33, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The GPL and GFDL are not compatible. Also, do you think a recipe is encyclopedic? Perhaps Wikisource would be best for this since it is supposed to be a record of a source, rather than something to be edited like a normal article would be. However, you'd need to check what sort of restrictions they place on their texts there since I don't know if they accept GPL works. You can ask on the Scriptorium. If you want to use it under fair use, an extract of the recipe might be more suitable for Wikipedia than the whole thing would be, and an extract is more likely to be seen as fair use rather than a copyright violation. Angela . 05:20, Aug 27, 2004 (UTC)

You cannot copyright a recipe anyway (at least, in its simplest form, of a list of ingredients). Go ahead.

Who said that? Anyway, I think it's rightful place would be The Wikimedia Cookbook (provided you establish there's no restriction on importing it). You could do an article about it on Wikipedia and then link to the recipe. An article here could discuss the ethos behind it - who thought it up, how it came about, why such a project was started etc. --bodnotbod » .....TALKQuietly) 17:59, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)

Conflicting names

I'm interested in creating a page about Serendipity, similar to the one about WordPress. However the page name "Serendipity" is already taken, so what should I name my new page, "Serendipity weblog" or something similar? Any ideas on how to best resolve this?

Just wanted to ask the question before I started creating pages with wrong titles.

Excellent question. You should use what is known as "disambiguation" - follow the title with a word or two in parantheses describing what the subject of the article is, e.g. Serendipity (weblog software). Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 16:52, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Disambiguation for detailed instructions on this. Angela . 00:40, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)

Fish n Chips

At the bottom of the article Fish and chips someone has put a link to another language of Wikipedia but not in the usual form. I don't want to remove it, but I think it needs to be put in the language thingy format rather than the way it is now. Can someone who knows what to do...erm... do it? ;o) --bodnotbod » .....TALKQuietly) 17:53, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)

It's a known bug :) - 17:58, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC) Lee (talk)

Ah, thanks. Talk about rapid response. --bodnotbod » .....TALKQuietly) 18:07, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)

Graphs: yay or nay?

On pages such as World War I casualties with statistics, would it be appropriate to add something such as a pie graph to visually represent the data? Or would such a superfluous graphic be unwelcome? (Booyabazooka 18:21, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC))

Graphs, within reason, are very welcome indeed. The page you cite could indeed really do with a decent graph, and a pie chart sounds ideal. Don't infer from wikipedia's general lack of graphics that they're frowned upon; rather, infer that most wikipedians are rubbish at drawing. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:41, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Help with templates after redirects

I am trying to do a redirect, where I want a explination to appear on the target page, on why the page was redirected. It says at Wikipedia:Redirect#How to make a redirect

It's possible to add a text after the redirect to describe why it had been created. There is a series of messages (with titles starting with "R_") in the Template namespace that may be used for this, e.g. {{R_to_sort_name}} displays Template:R_to_sort_name, e.g. on Aasen,_Ivar_Andreas (if you click this link, you won't be redirected. When you click 'Edit this page' there, you will see how it can be used).

How come the template doesnt apear on the target page, at the top near the "(Redirected from xxxxxxxxx)" part?

If it doesnt, is there anyway I can make a explination or text line appear on the target page, only when the target page was reached with a redirect?

My specific case is [1] . And that the template doesnt apear on the target page Plantain. I also did some other spelling/spelling mistake redirects onto plantain, check the "what links here" on the plantain page if you want to my work. I can find on google all those mispellings so I think they should be included in wikipedia, although the aspect of those redirects should be discussed on my talk page or the Plantain's talk page.

Is is not possible without a software change, I think. You can replace the redirect with an inclusion like {{:Plantain}} after the message, but that gives complications, see also m:Help:Template#Redirection.Patrick 00:04, 2004 Aug 30 (UTC)

Compare Plantanos with Plantanos - demo of alternative for redirect.--Patrick 00:26, 2004 Aug 30 (UTC)

Image copyright tagging question

There are a lot of image tags which I find to be a bit confusing... how should I tag an image if:

I created it
from data that I got from Wikipedia
and am giving permission for anyone to use it, anywhere, anyhow?

(Booyabazooka 23:58, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC))

I'm guessing it's just {{PD}} ? (Booyabazooka 00:03, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC))

Yup. If you want credit, use the cc-by-sa one. If you want to prevent someone from making a change, copyrighting the change, and thus making a copyrighted derivative work, use gfdl. If you don't care then use PD. Some people (like Richard Stallman, I believe) would prefer people to GFDL rather than PD. Note that data itself can't be copyrighted, so merely taking data from a GFDLed wikipedia article doesn't make your picture necessarily GFDL. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:15, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes, it's just a pie chart of data in the Wikipedia article... so is GFDL inappropriate? It seems like the best answer to me, since the image should be available under the same license the data was under, no? (Booyabazooka 00:24, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC))

The choice as to which licence you use is yours. I tend to GFDL everything (indeed, everything you submit to wikipedia must be GFDL, but you can choose to co-licence with a more permissive licence like BSD, CC-by-SA, PD, or whatever). As the data you used wasn't (couldn't be) copyright, that has no bearing on what licence you chose to use for your image. So BSD, CC-by-SA, GFDL, PD and probably some others I don't know much about are all appropriate - the choice is entirely up to you. The only licences that aren't appropriate for wikipedia are ones that are more restrictive than GFDL: non-commercial, no-derivative-works, wikipedia-only and such licences aren't appropriate. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:33, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Correcting wrong-language content

Several times I've come across content in the wrong language, such as Adro... what are the proper steps to correct this? -- Booyabazooka 19:14, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

They are usually tagged with {{notenglish}} and, as the tag says, deleted after two week if the article is not translated. If you understand that the article is patent nonsense, regardless of language, tag it for {{deletion}} ❝Sverdrup❞ 19:20, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

For more specifics, see Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English. -- Cyrius|✎ 19:21, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It's {{delete}}, not {{deletion}} Goplat 02:43, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Help with transwikiing

Maori Creation Story clearly does not belong on Wikipedia. I've searched Google and do not believe that the article is a copyright violation. Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#What_to_do_with_a_problem_page.2Fimage.2Fcategory says that if "Article is a source text" I should "Move text to Wikisource and replace it with a stub and a link." Probably it belongs in a new category on m:wikisource:Wikisource:Religious texts. I have a few questions about this.

First, must we keep an article called "Maori Creation Story" at all? At the very least, it's improperly capitalized. More to the point, the subject can be adequately covered at Creation belief and/or Maori mythology. I don't see separate articles for other mythologies' creation stories. I'm therefore inclined to list this one at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. Would that be okay? Or is it important to leave behind some trace of its transwikification? I see people voting to "transwiki and delete" things on VfD all the time.

Second, mostly for future reference, if we do keep this article title, what should the stub and link that replace the text say? Is it sufficient to write "This article has been moved to Wikisource; see m:wikisource:Maori creation story", or is some description of the subject or moved material necessary? Is it possible/acceptable to simply make the page a redirect to the new Wikisource page?

Thank you—Triskaideka 16:25, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Roald Dahl

How do i vote to make roald dahl the article of the weik? 62.49.5.21 17:07, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Articles are voted on at Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week, its new name. Rmhermen 17:15, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

You can vote for Roald Dahl on that page by going to here and signing under support by writing # ~~~~ underneath the "support" section. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 17:15, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

Quality of Articles

I hope this is the correct place to ask this question. If not, please let me know where to ask it.

I am confused. Is it really true that anyone can edit anything? If this is true, what prevents a person with a political (or other agenda) from deliberately inserting non-factual material? For example -- suppose John Doe is running for a politcal office, and a person writes false "biographical information" about him that says he was convicted of a crime and served time in prison. Will this be checked in some way before it is allowed into the article, or does Wikipedia rely on fact checking by readers?

-- Andy Goldfinger

-- Baltimore

Yes, it's really true that anyone can edit anything, and changes take effect immediately. People can insert false information (or vulgarities, or nonsense...) into articles. In theory and often in practice, such false information is quickly discovered and removed. If there is a dispute over the accuracy of some information or the neutrality of an editor, other users may ask for sources to be cited. We have a dispute resolution process and a blocking policy for extreme cases. It is unfortunately the case that some falsification is not discovered immediately and may remain on the site for some time. Readers are well-advised to maintain a healthy degree of skepticism about information they read on Wikipedia, as they would on any other web site. If you discover falsehoods in a Wikipedia article, please don't hesitate to remove them (ideally providing your reasoning or citing your sources as you do so!). Each article has a discussion page on which you can raise questions about the veracity, neutrality, etc. of the article's content, and read previous discussions about it, so if you're unsure about something you read in an article, check its discussion page first to see if the issue has already been raised.

I hope this addresses your question. For more detailed discussions on this subject, see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Vandalism, and Wikipedia:Replies_to_common_objections (specifically Wikipedia:Replies_to_common_objections#Partisans). —Triskaideka 18:17, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Image not floating

I think I may be having a problem with images i've inserted into various articles not floating properly. Although the image placement looks fine when I view it in Safari on MAC OSX, if I use IE it does not, for an example see Subset. What I want is for the image to float to right of the text, with the supplied smaller text centered under it. I've used the following markup:

<div style="float:right;margin:1em;">[[Image:Venn_A_subset_B.png|150px|center|A is a subset of B]]<center><small> ''A'' is a subset of ''B''</small></center></div>.

As I said this seems to work in Safari, but when I look at it in IE, the image appears above all text, next to the left margin, with the caption text centered on the page, with the rest of the article's text following after. Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong? I'm afraid I've added images to several articles using this same markup, see also: Set, Union (set theory), Intersection (set theory) and Complement (set theory) all with the same results.

All that floaty div business is horribly unportable. I took the liberty of changing that page to use mediawiki's "framed" syntax (revert it of you really hate it). As long as you use "framed" and "thumb" to lay images out, the browser-specific stuff in the stylesheet should take care of floatyness problems on all browsers. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:30, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes I had tried "framed" and "thumb" but I think for diagrams frames are not right. Did the non-framed versions float correctly for you or not?Paul August 20:40, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

It floated, but looked weird, on firefox for me. I'd strongly recommend framed and thumb over html floating, because a) the look and feel will vary in the future anyway (by using mediawiki's functionality, the page will always look okay) and b) one day we'll want to output in XHTML or something (and all the html people have added to pages will break). Anyway, my grim experience with floating and browser portability is that there isn't any :) (I have a page somewhere offwiki that I need to fix, which looks great in one version of konqueror, and is utterly broken in the very next revision). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:49, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Removing images?

I'm really not up to reading the entire Images FAQ today - I saw that there are a great many variants on the type of copyright and/or public-domain-ness which can apply to the images WP uses.

Thing is, I found one which is most definitely not public domain, nor used with permission, or anything like that (it's a Kidby portrait of Havelock Vetinari). How is this removed? Does it have to be posted to VfD? DS 22:53, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

if you believe something to be a copyright violation (image or otherwise), list it on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. If you just want to suggest deletion of an image for another reason (unused, superceeded, inappropriate, erroneous, etc.) use Wikipedia:Images for deletion. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:57, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Changing username

Is there any way to change your username? Is there any way to be removed from Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits and stopping being listed without one's authorization? —John | Talk 01:08, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

I don't know if a developer could do it. Quite probably but they are all pretty busy. The simplest way might be to:

Create a new account with a new username.
At the top of the userpage write this user used to be known as User:JohnCrawford
redirect your old user page and your older user talk page to the new ones.

HTH Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 07:39, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

How to contribute

Greetings,

We would like to start a listing of Naturust hot springs and possibly a separate listing of nudist parks.

Please let us know how to create such a list.

Thank you.

Camilla Van Sickle & Bill Pennington

I think you are referring to reversals by Lucky 6.9. You can discuss with him/her what the problem is. It may have looked like an ad, and links to other articles were missing.--Patrick 14:19, 2004 Sep 1 (UTC)

Remove my modifications from the history

I just realized that I made a few modifications without login into my account and therefore the history list the author as ip-address. I am currently using someone elses' computer and I would like to help my friend to have more privacy. I wonder if there is any way to remove my edit from the history or change the author from IP address into my account.

See Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit. Meelar (talk) 04:40, 2004 Sep 1 (UTC)

Legal citations

Every country does this differently, and in multiple different ways. With Featured Articles beginning to want a properly set out reference section, could someone tell me how we handle these references? - Ta bu shi da yu 05:23, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC) Is Wikipedia:Cite sources what you are looking for? Rmhermen 14:03, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

Centering and Uncentering Text

I've found that it is possible to center text by putting the word "center" in <braces>, but how does one revert to making the text flush left? PedanticallySpeaking 15:03, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

Finish the centred section by using a closing center tag, like so:

<center>This text will be centred. It can be several paragraphs long</center>

—Michael Z. 17:07, 2004 Sep 1 (UTC)

Changing What links here?

I have been working on the Berumen page and made several changes including a name change (added middle initial). It was a new page on the cleanup list without links except some that went to discussion pages on the libertarian and economic artilces with unfriendly and personal attacks. Can those links be decoupled? I was not going to edit he pages themselves and get into a squabble or engage in censorship, but I would like to give the article a fresh start. Thanks. Ockham 23:57, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You can add links, with the additional effect of adding to the backlink list, you can remove irrelevant links from articles, but you can not control links from talk pages and user pages, hence you can not control the backlinks list; it is not supposed to be a neat, well-selected list.--Patrick 12:14, 2004 Sep 3 (UTC)

What happened?

I checked Special:Wantedpages and it was full of links to weird articles (eg. NOT SANDBOX, 657556346dgdg) with lots of links to. This is weird, and I suppose the page is a cache of some mass vandalized time. What happened and when it happened? When a new page will be up? — Kieff | Talk 08:36, Sep 2, 2004 (UTC)

Large Infobase

I have been dreaming of collecting and collating genealogies and trees of the chains of Sufi initiation overlaid over each other. I think the Wiki technology will be ideal for this. And I am talking family genealogies from all of South Asia [remember there are over a billion of us alive today]. Would it be okay to do that within Wikipedia or should I set up a separate Wiki?

I ask because this would mean a lot of little stub-style entries on a lot of people with a (relative to rest) a few that are of historic/encylopedia interest, like the Sufi Masters.

--iFaqeer 10:20, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, item 17 in the second section, specifically says that Wikipedia entries are not "a genealogical or biographical dictionary or phonebook". Please feel free to write articles here on any of these people who are of historic/encyclopedic interest, but the rest don't belong. For a project of such a large size (for reference, Wikipedia itself currently has "only" 340,000 articles) I think a separate, dedicated Wiki would be best. Good luck with your project. —Triskaideka 15:58, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for that. I will look into that. In the meantime, I will try to keep up my contribution to the Wikipedia.--iFaqeer 18:41, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Disambig/Redirect and policy

I'm a n00b. I just fixed every link pointing to [[Pulp fiction]], a redirection page to Pulp Fiction (redirected by AaronSw on grounds of it being "not ambiguous").

However, most links pointing to it really wanted to go to pulp magazine, and many pages in fact talk about novels (implying that "pulp fiction" is the correct generalized term). So I'd propose to move pulp magazine to pulp fiction (no capitals), generalize that article, and add a disambig remark to point to Pulp Fiction... But I'm totally ignorant of 'pedia policy on this. Anyone with experience care to enlighten me?

It seems to me that

People going to Pulp Fiction should get the movie.
People going to pulp fiction should not. Most casual uses of the term are not referring to the movie, which is almost always properly capitalized.

My edits redirecting to pulp magazine are not a total loss, since there is now no longer any page going to [[Pulp fiction]]. (Another thing: how do I make non-redirecting links to redirect pages?) --JRM 12:49, 2004 Sep 2 (UTC)

Based on Wikipedia:Naming conventions, Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(headings)#Capitalisation, and my own experience, I think you should always capitalize the first word in the name of an article. So "pulp fiction" should not exist, "Pulp Fiction" should exist as it is, and "Pulp fiction" should exist and contain the content currently at Pulp magazine, plus the more general information you mentioned, plus a disambiguation link to Pulp Fiction (like the one that's currently disambiguating the other way, which might as well also stay as it is). I don't know about Wikipedia policy on reciprocal disambiguation, but that seems to me the least confusing thing to do in this case. You could also move Pulp Fiction to "Pulp Fiction (movie)" if you wanted, but I don't really see a need for that since technically there's no competition for the "Pulp Fiction" name.

As for non-redirecting links to redirect pages, I guess you do this: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Pulp_fiction&redirect=no]

Wikipedia:Disambiguation discusses disambiguation policy. It doesn't really give a specific example that applies to this situation, but I think my recommendation is compliant with it. —Triskaideka 15:51, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I will implement it like that... later. If anyone wants to do it first, be my guest. Bit of a shame that non-redirecting links can't be done more directly, but still. That gives us something like Pulp fiction (no redirect). Good enough, I suppose. —JRM 09:20, 2004 Sep 3 (UTC)

The key problem here seems to be that someone took a perfectly good disambiguation page for pulp fiction, and decided that pulp magazine didn't belong there. It was clearly wrong to say that this wasn't ambiguous. It could be reverted (though made less vulnerable by rewording as Pulp fiction is the common name for a kind of fiction found in pulp magazines. (This should be the first definition, as the other was derived from it). Maybe I'll do that. Is the (remaining) issue that you want references to pulp fiction in articles to be unambiguous links to pulp magazine? Is so try pulp fiction Disclaimer: I know nothing about policy, this just seems to make some kind of sense. Notinasnaid 10:55, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Harbor seals

I am looking for someone to collaborate with in extending the article on Common seals. Being new to Wikipedia I am still fumbling with how it works. But I have been studying two Harbor seal (phoca vitulina) groups here in Maine for 24 years and would like to add my observations to a more general body of knowledge.

What is the appropriate place to link up with someone who is also studying them and would like to extend the article? -Yeimaya

Hello Yeimaya and welcome to Wiipedia. I've taken the liberty of signing your name for you so that eve3ryone can see who I am talking to. (You can sign you name and datestamp by typing 4 tildes ~~~~)

As for your question: More often than not- if you edit, they will come! If you get no takers leave a note on the article talk page or at Wikipedia:peer review We also have an Wikipedia:collaboration of the week you might suggest the article as a suitable candidate. Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 11:41, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

An excellent place to discuss any article is at its own talk page, in this case Talk:Common seal, but remember to be bold, if you're adding stuff you know to be valid to an article. —siro χ o 05:01, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)

Contents java tables

Alberto Orlandini 07:40, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC) How can I make the Contents java tables appear at the top of an article? I'm talking about those tables entitled Contents, which you can hide/show and which usually are after the introduction and before all the others sub-headings...

The contents are automatically generated on any page with at least 4 headings. If you want to have one on a page with less headings, you can place __FORCETOC__ anywhere on the page to force it to appear. If you want it to appear somewhere other than before the first heading, you can use __TOC__ which will force the contents to appear wherever you place it (you don't need to use __FORCETOC__ if you use this). - 13:01, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC) Lee (talk)

Thank You So Much!!! Alberto Orlandini 18:00, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Where is the real link to get Wikipedia in Tomeraider format?

It seems to have vanished. I downloaded it a month or so ago by following the instructions at Wikipedia:TomeRaider database - download instructions (which points to http://download.wikimedia.org/tomeraider/current/), but that link doesn't work now. You could always roll your own, following the instructions at http://members.ams.chello.nl/epzachte/Wikipedia —AlanBarrett 16:28, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This has just been fixed by Asher. Apparently, the symbolic link was broken. Angela . 01:47, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)

Can you set page-level Stylesheets?

I'd like to be able to specifiy with CSS that all my LI tags have a margin-bottom of 4pt. I can do that if I put an inline STYLE attribute in every single LI tag. Is there a page-level way of setting the style sheet for elements on pages?

If you're asking whether you can change the style as you see it on your own computer, you can, but at the site level, not the page level. See m:Help:User style for instructions.

If you're asking whether you can change the style on pages you edit so that everybody else will see a different style on those pages, I don't think you can, and I'd advise against it. Pages on Wikipedia should have a uniform style, and users should be free to set up whatever style sheet they want without their preferences being overridden. Also, when writing Wikipedia articles, you should use the wiki markup described on Wikipedia:How to edit a page in preference to LI tags or other HTML, except where there is no wiki markup for the desired effect.

Looking at the example you give... if you're just trying to get extra spacing in between list items, i.e.

not
like
this

but instead

like

this

then it looks like you can hack it by just putting extra blank lines between the list items -- but again, I'd advise against it unless you have a good reason. Hope this helps—Triskaideka 20:37, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

There is some thought to have support for page (or more likely, wikiproject) specific stylesheets in a future version of mediawiki. Used properly, these could be a valuable addition to the template system; used badly these could naturally lead to stylistic anarchy. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:55, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Suggest article

KevinJr42: Where do I suggest an article?

You can request that someone else write an article by following the directions on Wikipedia:Requested articles, but if you know a little bit about the subject, you should also feel free to start writing an article on it yourself. Just remember to mark it with {{stub}} if you can only write a couple of sentences. —Triskaideka 22:40, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

KevinJr42: Thanks. I asked this because I need something defined and I can't find it anywhere.

You can also ask a question at Wikipedia:reference desk —siro χ o 04:58, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)

Old alias?

Any way I can get my old alias (BT) back? The password is lost and I don't believe I provided an e-mail before (if I did, it's also lost/forgotten). BT

That account has not been used since June last year. Is there any way you can prove it was you? If so, try posting to m:Non-development tasks for developers to ask a developer to do this. Angela . 01:31, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)

86th Infantry Division

Kindly add the URL

www.86blackhawkdiv.org

Thank you

Keith Brooks Webmaster 319 Drayton Court Walnut Creek, CA 94598-2321

kb25sb@ca.astound.net

A couple of points

This is a wiki. You are permitted , in fact you are encoraged to edit the article yourself.
Having said that we don't appear to have an article on the 86th Infantry Division. So where do you want the link added? Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 07:51, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Julia Child picture for article -- fair use?

There's a nice article about Julia to which a number of people have contributed. But there's no picture of her. As someone writes: Does no one have a picture of Julia Child?? Rhymeless 03:59, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC) To which I replied:

Evidently it's "fair usage" to photocopy a cover of a book that one owns and then use that picture (or one from inside the book) for an article such as this? Is that correct? If so, I ought to be able to come up with a picture of Julia -- I have several of her books with photos. There ought to be a good photo somewhere. But I won't do it until I've got a little feedback on the legality of it.

Could someone here give me a definitive answer on this? Thanks Hayford Peirce 19:47, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there is no definitive answer when it comes to fair use. It's something that needs to be decided for each image. The criteria at Wikipedia:Image description page#Fair use rationale can help. See also Wikipedia:Fair use. A copy of a book cover for an article about that book is more likely to be fair use than a photo of the author from the book in my opinion. Angela . 01:29, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, this fair use seems to be a real plate of worms. I know that some magazine covers have been used for articles (the Time magazine article, for instance), and I think I've seen photos (or scanned images) of music albums that the editor apparently owns and has inserted into the article. Well, I'll see if someone can come up with a personal photo of her -- my mother had one and I'm sure that thousands of others do also. Hayford Peirce 04:05, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Translate

Hello, I want to post an article in French, but under the english website is it possible ? Do i have to publish first in English and then translate myself in French ? thanks for helping. Anthony

Hi, if you want to post in French, please post it to the French Wikipedia. You can then ask for help with translating it to English at Wikipedia:Translation into English, after which it can be placed on the English Wikipedia. If you post in French directly to the English Wikipedia, the page is likely to be deleted. Angela . 01:24, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)