Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 February 8

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

February 8

BIORHYTHM CYCLES

CAN YOU DIRECT ME TO A SOURCE THAT CAN EXPLAIN HOW TO CALCULATE PHYSICAL, EMOTIONAL AND INTELLECTUAL BIORHYTHM CYCLES ON AN ONGOING BASIS?

I put "biorhythm calculation" into Google and came up with this, this and this. There are loads more, and that was just page 1. Oh, and please don't use all caps - it is considered to be shouting. Thanks. Karenjc 00:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Is there any way to get Wikipedia to forget my username on the login page?

Resolved

 – ukexpat (talk) 02:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Whenever I log in, the space where I enter my username is already filled. I'm not sure of the pros and cons of this feature, but I'd rather not have the username already shown on the login page when using my computer. I may have checked the "Remember me (up to 30 days)" box at some point, because I thought it was strictly for emailing purposes, but it feels like it has been over 30 days since then. Does this have anything to do with the "Remember me" checkbox? Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fifthship (talk • contribs) 00:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry that I forgot to sign. SineBot beat me to the edit. Fifthship (talk) 00:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the automatic filling in of form fields is a Web browser feature, which you can probably disable in your browser if you want. What browser are you using? --Teratornis (talk) 00:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm using the latest version of Mozilla Firefox. Fifthship (talk) 00:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

That's an excellent choice of browser. See Tools | Options | Privacy, where you can uncheck the box: "Remember what I enter in forms and the search bar". See if that clears the field on Wikipedia's login page. --Teratornis (talk) 00:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see what the problem is now. I did not clear my cookies. I thought I had already set the browser to automatically dump cookies. I've cleared them now, and the issue is resolved. Thank you for reminding me, and happy editing. Fifthship (talk) 00:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

tupac

why is tupac's information a bunch of bull —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.114.107.223 (talk) 00:42, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Tupac Shakur had been vandalized, but has now been repaired. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. GlassCobra 00:46, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Candidates for the United States Senate seat to be vacated by Senator Mel Martinez

Dear:

Please be advised that a name that you have not included on the potential list of candidates for the United States Senate seat to be vacated by Senator Mel Martinez is Rev. Dr. Gwyndolyn McClellan, educator/consultant, publisher and evangelist.

Thank you

Rev. Dr. Gwyndolyn McClellan [email removed] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.228.76.101 (talk) 01:54, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I did some searching and guess you refer to United States Senate election in Florida, 2010. Do you have a reliable source reporting this? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Reference to Published Correspondence

Dear Sir/Madam

I am writing to ask your advice in relation to a situation arising on the Scriptural Reasoning article.

There are three users, all of whom arrived simultaneously on or around 27 November 2008, all of whom are employed by or otherwise connected to the same organisation, who have repeatedly removed material on the article which is critical of the organisation by which they are employed or connected -- I have raised the issue of "Conflict of Interest" with them repeatedly.

The specific question here today, relates to a reference to some correspondence which has been publicly circulated by its author, David Ford (a third party), and is published on the website:

http://www.cambridgeinterfaithprogramme.org/

The correspondence states:

"The solution proposed [to the dispute around faith leadership of an SR group in London] is in terms of a governance model using principles of equality, symmetry, neutrality, etc. This holds out the hope of an immediate 'fix' in legal/constitutional terms rather like the way secular modernity responded to religious conflicts...but Scriptural Reasoning in my experience has so far not been convinced by it. The "asymmetries of hospitality" (e.g. the role of Anglicans in initiating St Ethelburga's) are part of the messiness (and providence!) of actual history, which always requires making the most of particular resources and rarely conforms to our abstract principles."

Publicly Circulated Correspondence from David Ford, Director of the Cambridge Interfaith Programme, 24 January 2007

The correspondence was circulated publicly by the author. All parties agree and do not dispute that all the correspondence is true, but the other party are suggesting that it can't be referenced in the Wikipedia article because all references in Wikipedia need to come from academic journals, academic books, and the like.

From the point of view of Verifiability not only is the correspondence referenced to date and authorship, but there is also an address, telephone number, fax and e-mail to the ORIGINAL AUTHOR - in other words, it is fact-checkable:

The accuracy of all the above written statements may be VERIFIED by contacting the authors directly at:

The Cambridge Inter-Faith Programme, Faculty of Divinity, West Road, Cambridge CB3 9BS, United Kingdom Telephone: +44 1223 763013 Fax: +44 1223 763014 E-mail: cip@divinity.cam.ac.uk sr@divinity.cam.ac.uk

Furthermore, of course, in order that the published correspondence does in fact support the point being made, all the words of the reference were quoted IN FULL in the footnoted reference on the Wikipedia article.

However, the other party (who are employed or connected to the organisation in question) keep reverting and removing this reference -- primarily I believe, because this publicly circulated correspondence is an embarassment for them. The organisation The Scriptural Reasoning Society Board of Trustees cites the correspondence above, to support their assertions around "asymmetries of hospitality" in Scriptural Reasoning.

Please would you let me know that given that every means of verifiablity directly to the original author himself who publicly circulated it in the first place is made available including means of telephone/e-mail communication, that this is admissible as a third party statement which is published and which may easily be verified.

Many thanks

--Scripturalreasoning (talk) 02:13, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

There is a somewhat related problem that we solve routinely using a system we call OTRS: verifying that someone who holds the copyright of a media file (such as a photo) has released it under a free license compatible with Wikipedia. However, I don't know if OTRS would be a solution for turning an e-mail message into a reliable source. The simplest solution from the standpoint of editing on Wikipedia would be to find some reputable news organization that would publish the relevant portions of the correspondence or a summary thereof, thus converting the information into a reliable source. If no news organization would find the correspondence notable enough to publish or report on, that's another reason for someone to challenge its use on Wikipedia. Note that the degree to which dotting all the i's in this way matters is completely a function of whether a given claim comes under challenge. We don't need to cite references for a claim such as "The Amazon is a river in South America" because that claim is not controversial.

You have another problem with your username being the same as an organization in an article. See Wikipedia:Username policy#Company/group names. --Teratornis (talk) 05:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much Teratornis for taking the time and care to respond to my question - that's very helpful. In relation to the above, as is clear from the statements they have made on Talk page and elsewhere:

• None of the users on -- either side of the debate -- disputes or challenges the accuracy of the statements which were made and referred to above. Neither side disagrees that the stated emails are indeed genuine, and that they were made by the authors they purport to be, on that date -- ie. everyone agrees that the e-mail is entirely accurate and true. A major reason for this consensus is that "Scriptural Reasoning" is a tiny world, and both sides of the debate know each other very well, and we all know the author of the published e-mails in the first place, and there is no dispute on this point of factual accuracy.

• Given the above agreement, the dispute appears (in my personal opinion) to be essentially a way of the other side of the debate preventing a fact upon which we all agree, and a source whose truth upon which we all agree, coming into the public domain by the other party asserting that however much they and we are in agreement, Wikipedia rules that all references must be published in reputable academic journals, newspapers and the like only. The facts and claims are not disputed by either side, the e-mail and its authorship and content are not disputed by either side, what is being asserted by one side is that Wikipedia regulations do not allow its publication because it isn't in an academic journal or reputable newspaper.

From what you say, am I correct in saying that this isn't the case, but rather Wikipedia regulations are more fluid and guided by particular case, and the question of whether the facts are being disputed -- so if the facts/claims contained in the above reference were disputed by either party (which is not the case here), then indeed only a strongly reputable scientific journal or academic source would do?

I am very sorry to trouble you, but would really appreciate your advice on this one. Many thanks.

Thank you also for letting me know about the username issue, and will explore how to address this. Many thanks.

--Scripturalreasoning (talk) 18:48, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Reference Fix

Does anyone know how to fix the references here:

Lifeline (video game)

Another editor keeps reverting my edits; first for not including a reference, then because the references section got messed up when I added one. It's getting irritating, but I have no idea what's wrong with it, so I can't fix it. WhiteKnightLeo (talk) 03:06, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the situation, but I think I set up something that might work. Feedback? Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 03:52, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Another editor keeps reverting my edits; first for not including a reference, then because the references section got messed up when I added one.

And because the link you added was broken, and because you're putting words in the reviewer's mouth, and because those words aren't exactly "neutral", and because you kept reverting all that again and again without even acknowledging the problems (and when you did acknowledge one of them, you actually ordered me to fix the references section you had just broken again for the third time).

It's getting irritating

You don't say. And the fact you're once again evading your many blocks makes it all the more aggravating. Erigu (talk) 04:13, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, Calvin. WhiteKnightLeo (talk) 06:42, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Succession box needs editing

The Succession Box on the article on Steve Radford needs editing, since he ceased to be Liberal Party President as of 1.1.09, and Rob Wheway has taken over. I do not know how to do it - can someone either change the succession box, or tell me how to do it. Thanks. Rkb1809 (talk) 03:51, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

You can look at Template:Succession box, which has some extensive documentation. That may help. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Customizing your signature

I want to customize my signature by changing the color, font, name, size, etc. But I don't know how to do it properly, even though I tried and I'll need more help than someone linking me to this page or that page, unless of course they know a page that gives explicit instructions on how to do so. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 03:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, here is the page you need. I can do it for you if you want. Chamal ^talk 04:11, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Copying Wikipedia Content Without Attribution

I noticed that this page appears to copy this Wikipedia page. I cannot presently find the Wikipedia policy or guideline page for how to report this. Gregmg

See Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. I removed the pipes in your post. They are used for wikilinks and not for links with a url. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:39, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Since they're not complying with the GFDL, use the non-compliance process detailed at WP:MAF to deal with them. bibliomaniac15 04:48, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikitable font size

Resolved

How can I shrink the font size of the table at 2008–09 Big Ten Conference men's basketball season to avoid squeezing. It would be best if the fonts were the same size as those in the standings template. I want the table font to be small enough to avoid squeezing at 1024 width screen resolution.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Using HTML, try <font size="1"> text here </font> or <small> text here </small> —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 05:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think HTML codes in tags will work. I have tried <small> in various locations and it did not work. I would have to use it in each cell to get the desired effect. I need a command for the wikitable fontsize.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:20, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you'll find this page helpful? Chamal ^talk 05:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:38, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

story on gymkhana club

sir, could you please assist me on obtaining sir mark tully's contact number /e mail address as i want his advice on a story about to break in india

thanking you in anticipation

<name removed>

Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 2.7 million articles, and thought that we were directly affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the online free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand side of your screen. If that is not fruitful, we have a reference desk, divided into various subjects areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck.. Chamal ^talk 05:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

File not working.

Resolved

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Hygiea I uploaded that file to Wikimedia Commons, and It won't work on this page. Could I get any help? Syntheticalconnections (talk) 05:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Can you give the link to the file at commons? Maybe you had not inserted it correctly to the article. Chamal ^talk 05:34, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hygeia.GIF Syntheticalconnections (talk) 05:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have checked the history of that article :P It should be added in the format [[File:Example.jpg|150px]] Change the 150px to the number you want, so that it fits the infobox. Chamal ^talk 05:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Syntheticalconnections (talk) 05:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

featured article

Todays featured article is a absolute joke, where can I find the discussion about it being promoted? I would like to see what other people have to say.--115.166.18.180 (talk) 07:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hell Is Other Robots. – Luna Santin (talk) 07:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh that was fast, Thankyou very much.--115.166.18.180 (talk) 07:14, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

It should be noted that featured articles are not promoted on the merits of the subject matter, but rather on their adherance to the featured article criteria. Even articles about pop culture topics can be written to these standards. As long as an article uses proper writing, is well referenced, and is comprehensive to the subject matter at hand, it is likely to be able to be a featured article. This one meets all of the qualifications in spades. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Foreign language characters

When viewing articles about people in Asia there is often the persons name spelt in the local charachters (Japanese/koean/chinese etc) however having recently changed computers all that appears are some vertical lines, can anyone tell me what I need to do to get these characters showing correctly. I am currently using Opera V9.63. Waacstats (talk) 11:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Is Help:Special characters of help? PrimeHunter (talk) 13:27, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Eventually found something. If anyone else has this problem look at this. Waacstats (talk) 15:00, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Oxford United League Positions.jpg

How do i delete the following image on Commons, File:Oxford United F.C.'s league positions.jpg. I have tried adding {{db-f8}} to the top (as it is a copy of a better image i uploaded) but it doesn't work. What do i need to do ? Eddie6705 (talk) 12:08, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

This is the helpdesk for Wikipedia. You need to ask at the helpdesk at Wikimedia Commons which is a different, but related website. The Commons helpdesk is located here. Good luck! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:46, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

How to fix HTML errors

I have an addon for Firefox that automatically tries to validate the HTML of webpages.. I see that some wikipedia pages, such as Identity 2.0 are invalid because in the References they have two or more entries with the same Author and year. In the Identity 2.0 example, there are the following two references:

• Dion Hinchcliffe (2006-01-22)
• Dion Hinchcliffe (2006-07-06)

An HTML cite tag is automatically defined where the id attribute is set to: CITEREFFirstName_LastNameYear.. In this case, both will have id CITEREFDion_Hinchcliffe2006, and this causes the HTML to be invalid as:

An "id" is a unique identifier. Each time this attribute is used in a document it must have a different value. If you are using this attribute as a hook for style sheets it may be more appropriate to use classes (which group elements) than id (which are used to identify exactly one element).

I wanted to fix these errors but i'm not sure how. 81.208.106.64 (talk) 12:38, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

You could use the WikiMarkup reference tag instead. Encase the information in <ref> </ref> tags, and then at the bottom of the article, use the {{reflist}} template. See WP:CITE for more information. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The mentioned references already use <ref>{{cite web |...}}</ref>. {{Cite web}} uses {{Citation/core}} which generates id="CITEREFDion_Hinchcliffe2006" for the two different references. You could bring it up at Template talk:Citation/core. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Editing the Voicemail history page

Hi... Frankly all the rules for editing a page on your website is a bit overwhelming to someone my age.

I appreciate your comments on the changes I suggested and have made major changes to our website. My colleagues at the Voicemail Association are simply trying to set the record straight on the history of the service industry... we were there and know what happened. We plan to move the content shown on Finniganusa.com to thevma.com shortly.

Paul Finngan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pffusa (talk • contribs) 14:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that you have made the changes a few times but have not cited any sources - see WP:RS for guidance. Also, none of your edits included an edit summary so other editors have no idea why you are making your edits. – ukexpat (talk) 18:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Archive Bot

I want User:MiszaBot to archive my talk page. Filper01 (Chat, My contribs) 16:52, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

All you need to know is here. It pretty much lays it out step-by-step. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 16:55, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Troubleshooting lines not showing on WikiProject To-Do template?

WikiProject:Cutlery just started up, so I dug up the To-Do template and dropped it in. Most of the entries I made showed up, but the ones on the "image=" line simply don't show no matter how I tweak spacing, capitalisation, position on the list, etc. I've also had the one entry in "requests=" appear and disappear randomly. I can see them on the Edit page, but they don't show up on the actual list. Any ideas? Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cutlery/to_do MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:20, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The image parameter in {{Tasks}} should only be image=on or image=off, and it only controls whether File:Nuvola_apps_korganizer.svg is displayed. I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve but you will have to find another way to do it. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I was trying to have a list just like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Firearms/to_do has, and there's shows the to-do images right after a "image=" tag. On a hunch, I just changed "{{tasks" to "{{WPGUNSTASKS" and now everything shows up. I don't think it actually effect the template I copied, but I'm just using their template rather than creating a new one. I [i]think[/i] it's a workable solution, but will go check and make sure it's not conflicting. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

template:swimmingrecord problem

The Tina Gustafsson article uses template:swimmingrecord. Tina set a record in Split (city), but "Split" is named as the city and this links to the Split dab, not the article about the city. Is there a way to have "Split" appear in the template-generated table but arrange things so that it will correctly link to the article about the city? BTW, I thought about manually replacing the template on this page, but the same problem appears elsewhere in larger tables that cannot simply have the template removed. Lambtron (talk) 18:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I think someone needs to take a look at the template formatting so that it accepts piped wikilinks when needed. – ukexpat (talk) 20:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

A big hint should be the documentation where it states "THIS TEMPLATE IS CURRENTLY IN DEVELOPMENT AND SHOULD NOT BE USED ON LIVE ARTICLES". --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 23:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The documentation has been saying so since it was created 18 August 2008 [1] and the only edits to the documentation were on that day. I don't know a way to pipe the city link by using the current template without getting [[...]] displayed around the link. city = [[Split (city)|Split]] makes a piped link but it displays as [[Split]]. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Resolved

 – TN‑X-Man 19:54, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi I am doing an essay on the Red Rain in India. I was wondering if I can just copy and paste the whole article and hand it in to my teacher, or is that illegal I dont know. --Convert Free Sheet (talk) 19:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

That would be decidedly unethical, not to mention plagiarism. So no, don't do it. --Alinnisawest,^{Dalek Empress} (extermination requests here) 19:18, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

You cant tell me what to do, you are not my real father!! Im going to my room. --Convert Free Sheet (talk) 19:46, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Ask your teacher if copy and pasting an entire Wikipedia article is ok. ps as you are headed to your room: Don't forget your blanket and pacifier. 76.212.6.30 (talk) 20:40, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Do it, then get a big fat zero and fail your class... How about it? --Mixwell!^Talk 20:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, don't just copy/paste it all. Just a quote with a referrence pointing here like http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Cite&page=Red_rain_in_Kerala&id=269353042. It says cite to this page, wich should help. --Mixwell!^Talk 20:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

OK folks enough, don't feed the trolls. – ukexpat (talk) 20:54, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The article is copyrighted. If you copy it without following the rules in the GFDL licence, then you are in fact breaking the law: it is illegal in the sense of your question, and you are liable for civil penalties. To avoid this, you will need to follow the rules and add a reference back to Wikipedia. If you attribute it, then you can make the copy and give it to your teacher. It is perfectly reasonable to do this if you have written a report that uses the WP article. Separately from the legal aspect, there is the completely separate issue of plagairism. If you use a work without attribution in a way that implies that the work is your own, then you are commiting plagiarism even if the work is not copyrighted. Plagiarism is a major breach of acedemic norms and will get you in deep trouble at school or in most acedemic and many non-acedemic settings, even in cases where it is not technically illegal. And yes, I know you are a troll, but perhaps a non-troll can benefit from this answer. -Arch dude (talk) 22:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

How do I locate all articles that link to an external site?

Resolved

 – ukexpat (talk) 20:55, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Long ago someone told me about a tool that will generate a list of all Wikipedia articles that link to a specific external web site. I'm thinking of something like What links here in reverse and presumably would be called What links there. I know I could do this using Google by searching for site:en.wikipedia.org link:external-site.com but that would not give me a real-time list and may miss come articles if Google is not indexing 100% of Wikipedia. TIA. --Marc Kupper|talk 20:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Special:LinkSearch. Algebraist 20:33, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, that was fast! --Marc Kupper|talk 20:51, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Category:Images for cleanup

When uploading a cleaned - up version of an image, do I overwrite the old image or create the new image under a different name? Queenie ^Talk 21:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

There is a link at the bottom of the image page to upload a new version. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 23:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

• It's often better to upload it under a new name (if you did the cleaning for FPC for example, people will want to compare revisions) - Mgm|^(talk) 00:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - Queenie ^Talk 18:12, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

How can a user place two tables next to each other?

The title says it. I am not very table-savvy; please just paste some code if you have it available. Thanks in advance. Whatever404 (talk) 21:59, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

The simplest way is to use {{column}} or one of the templates listed there. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 23:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Are there other ways? Whatever404 (talk) 15:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Images

How exactly do you get an image onto a Wikipedia article being created? The copy/paste routine does not seem to be working :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Telemacusroxmysox (talk • contribs) 22:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Images#Using images. Hope this helps. GlassCobra 22:51, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Time lapse for Google posting of newly-created Wikipedia entry

I created a new page on "Dovey Johnson Roundtree" two days ago, and I notice that although it comes up in an internal Wikipedia search, it doesn't yet come up in a Google search. I wondered if you could tell me the time lapse between the creation of a page and its appearance on Google -- I seem to recall that it occurred within a day for another entry I created. (I apologize if this question is answered in your FAQ's -- I couldn't seem to find the answer.) Thanks so much. Megavoice (talk) 23:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Googlebot usually updates every 12 to 24 hours. GlassCobra 23:11, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

And my standard addendum: let's not forget that we are here to create an encylopedia, not rack up Google page rankings. – ukexpat (talk) 01:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC)