Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 December 6

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.

December 6

IP Address Fraud?

Please help someone is using my IP Address to make unsolicited and non-constructive changes to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.106.141.46 (talk) 01:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

You do not own an IP address. Your Internet Service Provider will often change the IP address that is assigned to you. If you want to take more responsibility for your edits, create a free account. -- kainaw™ 02:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Your ISP might allocate any address between 58.104.0.1 and 58.111.255.254 to you; if you restart your router you could get pretty much any IP address in this range. As Kainaw says, the best way to make sure your edits are your edits is to create an account. Having said that. the last edit from 'your' IP was this in January 2011, so what is your specific problem? Tonywalton ^Talk 02:32, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The original poster might have got another IP already before posting. - Tanner Lin 09:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanner Lin (talk • contribs)

Indic font rendering w Chrome

Would s.o. mind taking a look at the question at Help_talk:Multilingual_support_(Indic)#what's_up_with_Google_Chrome? — kwami (talk) 05:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

How do you edit a Reference in an article.

I am the Webmaster of a site listed in the Reference section of an article. Actually, the site referrenced is no longer active and the reference is via The Wayback Machine circa 2007. The site was renamed that year and now has the same webpage with new and more complete information than the one that is on Wayback. I was going to change the URL in the Reference section but I have been unable to. I would like to know how to do that.TZMC (talk) 06:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The short answer is to look at Help:Footnotes. It's difficult to say more than that without more specifics. Could you mention the article name and the URL at issue? Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:04, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

When you are reading an article and see a references section near the bottom populated by a series of numbered citations, you might think that if you edit the page, you will see those citations typed in that section and be able to edit them. However, normally what you will see is code similar to this:

     ==References==
   {{Reflist}} or </references>

The text of citations is actually in the body of the article, directly next to statements or paragraphs the citations support, using <ref>(citation)</ref> tags, which display as footnotes (e.g.^[1][2]) when you are reading an article. The template code shown above in the references section colates and displays all of the citations within the article in a numbered list in which the numbers correspond to the footnote numbers in the text. By clicking on the ^ symbol next to a citation display, you can easily find exactly where in the body of the article the citation text appears in order to edit it. For more, please see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:05, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

What template to use to cite an entire magazine issue?

I tried to use Template:Cite journal, leaving out the article name, but that caused some weird italics issues (italicizing date and URL instead of magazine title) and just looked generally screwed up how the template rendered it (footnote 21 in this diff). I was wondering if there was another template I could use (or a way to get that template to work correctly) so that I can cite the entire magazine in a way that matches the other refs in the article. Thanks. - Purplewowies (talk) 07:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this is the reason but you did happen to not close the italics markup: magazine =''People: Special Collector's Edition. You forgot the two apostrophes after the word Edition. Dismas|^(talk) 08:23, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The italics problem was probably my fault. I was copying various parts of the previous MLA format reference into the template, and I guess I accidentally copied the italics from the front end of the title. Oops. - Purplewowies (talk) 21:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

How about re-arranging the {{Citation}} parameters

{{Citation | title =''People: Special Collector's Edition'' | date = May 2009 | url = http://www.people.com/people/archive/issue/0,,7566090520,00.html}}

People: Special Collector's Edition, May 2009

which at least hides the ugly URL? -- John of Reading (talk) 08:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Use {{cite encyclopedia}}, which is for any edited collection:

• People: Special Collector's Edition. May 20, 2009 http://www.people.com/people/archive/issue/0,,7566090520,00.html. {{cite encyclopedia}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 08:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

or {{Citation |month = May |year=2009 | url = http://www.people.com/people/archive/issue/0,,7566090520,00.html |title=Dylan & Cole : Zack & Cody |magazine=People |issue=Special Collector's Edition}}

which renders as follows: "Dylan & Cole : Zack & Cody", People, no. Special Collector's Edition, 2009 {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

or {{cite magazine}} (which reditects to {{cite journal}}) instead of {{Citation}}, rendering as follows:

"Dylan & Cole : Zack & Cody". People. No. Special Collector's Edition. 2009. {{cite magazine}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

(I note that the article currently mixes the {{Citation}} template with {{Cite xxx}} templates.) Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:08, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

They're all {{Cite xxx}} now. I didn't realize they were both being used (even though I was the one who added them). I also didn't know they weren't supposed to be used together, so I wouldn't have changed them if you hadn't brought that up.

On which citation template to use, I hadn't even thought of using {{cite journal}} and using the magazine subject/title itself as the article. I think that's the one I'll use. (I was expecting an answer like the {{Cite encyclopedia}} example, but I'm a bit reluctant to use that one since it says it's not for magazines and that {{cite journal}} should be used instead). Thanks to everyone who helped! :) - Purplewowies (talk) 21:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

disambiguating word for electronic 'bands'?

What is the accepting disambiguating word for a group of electronic musicians? I am referring to, amongst others, Truth (Dubstep Artist). Truth (band) does not seem appropriate and I am struggling to think of another way round it. doomgaze (talk) 10:22, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

What about Truth (musical ensemble) (see Musical ensemble). Just an idea, I am not too familiar with the terminology though. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Hmm the article seems to suggest that an ensemble is one that is able to perform live music, which doesn't work for this situation. I'm stumped. doomgaze (talk) 22:43, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

You could use a general disambiguating term, such as Truth (musicians). Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 23:06, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Link to my site was removed from Wiki Article

I noticed earlier today that I started getting traffic from Wiki's page for The Roots' new album "Undun". I went there and found that my review of their album on my site had been placed there. I was kinda excited about that as that had never happened and I had no idea how to even go about that.

Not sure who put it on there, but I was appreciative. Then I noticed later on in the evening when I went there again to look up some info on the album, that the link was no longer there. It was in that little box that had the various reviews (metacritic, rolling stone, etc) and a link in the sources at the bottom. Now it's gone, and I was just wondering whether or not that was a mistake that it was removed and if not, what the reasoning behind removing it.

I'm not furious or anything like that, was just genuinely interested as it's a bit confusing for me.

Thank you for your time, and hope to hear from you.

For reference below I have linked to the wiki page as well as my review that was linked there earlier.

Gary Anderson www.searchingforchetbaker.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undun

http://www.searchingforchetbaker.com/2011/12/review-roots-undun.html 67.185.33.67 (talk) 10:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Gary. The review was removed in this edit by Dan56 (talk · contribs); as he didn't explain why he was doing what he was doing in his edit summary, I'll ask him whether he can explain here instead. I don't edit music / album articles, so I don't know what the accepted practice is for choosing which reviews to use, but it might be that blog-type reviews aren't favoured as much as reviews in magazines / newspapers / established online sites. Bencherlite^Talk 10:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia has guidelines on reliable sources, self published sources (i.e. blogs) and external links. Sites such as the above are not permitted as they are self published (anyone can resister a blogspot account write what they want in a blog) and are subject to no editorial control. Яehevkor ✉ 10:57, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I was dealing with a mess of vandalism through that article that included removal of professional reviews and addition of reviews such as this, so I did not explain my overall edit. Same sentiment as the comment above this one, and WP:Albums guidelines/policies, at least some of them, should be reviewed before making edits to them: Review sites or WP:Albums/Article body ("When choosing which reviews to include, consider the notability of the review source and keeping a neutral point of view"). Dan56 (talk) 20:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Catholic youth associations of French Algeria

Hello everybody!

Currently, the harv template is not functioning properly, regarding this specific article, given that syntax appears to be slightly different as what seems to be specifically relating to en.wp.

Is there an expert regarding this specific topic who would kindly have a look at this issue and see how it could be solved?

Thank you so much in advance!

Kindest regards!

euphonie ^breviary
11:00, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I believe my edit has fixed it; you can now jump to the "Further Reading" section by clicking on any of the "Fatès 2004" links in the references. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, John of Reading!

Great! It works perfectly fine now.

Thank you for your help!

Best wishes!

euphonie ^breviary

13:23, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

submitting article from Sandbox

I think I did something wrong and need guidance. I am a new editor intent on writing many articles on the countryside and history of France. I wrote the article Roman Villas in Northwestern Gaul in my sandbox and thought I moved it to request for permanent status at the same time that I looked for a request for review template. I never found a way to submit it and now it appears to be of permanent status. I have submitted previous article from my userpage Chateau de la Motte, Joue du Plain, and it worked fine as far as I can tell, although I have not received any acceptance notice. Are these articles accepted? and if so then in the future what should route should I take on shorter articles I anticipate writing? thank you in advance for any guidance.Mlane (talk) 13:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

There is no formal "acceptance" or "submission" process. Users are encouraged to create articles in a sandbox first, so that they can be worked on over time without fear of speedy deletion, but that is not mandatory. So your articles are now in mainspace and look pretty good. There is a little copyediting required and I will take a look in a moment. – ukexpat (talk) 14:37, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

This move is where you moved the article from your sandbox to mainspace. Unless there is something wrong with an article, that is all you need to do. (If someone had thought the article was inappropriate and should be deleted, they would notify you on your user talk page.) There is also a Wikipedia:Article wizard process: I have never used it but I understand that as a last step it submits draft articles for review at Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Even then (if I understand correctly) you are notified only if the article needs work; successful submissions are simply moved to main space. —teb728 t c 01:36, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Help with a parserfunction/Magic Word

Do we have a system variable / Magic Word / parserfunction that returns the size, in bytes, of a particular page? Something like {{PAGESINCAT}} or the like? I can't seem to find anything that would work. I have pagecounts on my userpage of various categories of article (Speedy Deletion candidates, mostly), and I'd like to replace the mostly unused Category:Articles for deletion using wrong syntax with the quite useful User:Snotbot/AfD report. But the bot report isn't category, nor does it place articles listed into a category - so I'd put the byte count (and subtract 183, that being the size when no articles are listed). Anything non-zero indicates that the bot report found a malformed or mis-closed AFD. Is there a way to make this work? UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 14:53, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, {{PAGESIZE:Wikipedia:Help desk}} displays as 54,811. See Help:Magic words. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Embarassingly, I had - and skimmed right past it. Thanks! UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 15:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Another "Request for feedback" (should be quick i think!)

I created a draft for Unicoi Systems, a company in Cumming, GA: draft of "Unicoi Systems". Currently, only Dirk Beetstra and myself have worked on it. My biggest concern is notability. Dtate888 (talk) 16:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I just see how it meets WP:CORP, our standards for notability of companies. Recognition by local groups like TAG don't add up to notability as we measure it. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for looking into it. But I guess I'll keep the page in case the notability increases sometime in the future. Dtate888 (talk) 17:01, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Help with templates

All the pages here (the ones about projection) all have Template:Views on them, which has File:Example.jpg on it. I got my bot to revert this but they all seem to still have it on somewhere, and I can't work out where, but they stay on the WhatLinksHere. Any suggestions? Rcsprinter123 (rap) 16:45, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The results from "WhatLinksHere" are not necessarily up to date; those articles will disappear from the list eventually when the servers catch up. If you wish, you can make it happen sooner with a null edit on each of those articles. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:59, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Upload Company Logo?

My account is less than 4 days old and I am wanting to add a company logo to my first page I am attempting to wikify, any help would be appreciated. The subject is "PretoSkills Alliance" Thanks in advance and I look forward to many more edits! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Limerick1988 (talk • contribs) 16:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

What does the logo look like? In order to add the logo to PetroSkills Alliance it has to be uploaded first. However, it is necessary to determine the copyright status of the image. Can you perhaps point to a website, where the logo can be seen? It is important to know, whether the logo is just a simple text logo or if it contains more complex shapes. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 17:14, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

www.petroskills.com it is in the top left of the page, thanks!

(Limerick1988 (talk) 20:50, 6 December 2011 (UTC))

Request for help with new article

I'd appreciate if someone would please review GlowCode, provide any feedback, and remove the "New unreviewed article tag." GlowCode is a performance analysis tool, aka "profiler," used by software engineers, programmers. (Previously, there had been a link to GlowCode on the following page: List of performance analysis tools, but the GlowCode page itself had no content.) Thank you! Esigc (talk) 17:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Worlds Biggest Liar Competition, 2011.

Sir, I would just like to point out that the current Worlds Biggest Liar is no longer Paul Burrows but Glen Boylan from Maryport who won the Competition in November, you can get information on the winner by going onto the Times and Star website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.122.61 (talk) 17:23, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

If you like, and if you have a source for that, you can go to World's Biggest Liar and add the information yourself. Or some kind editor can track it down for you. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 17:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I have updated the article. Though there seems to be two versions of the winning story... one involving a snail race and another involving a mayonnaise and peanut butter sandwich. The only thing they have in common is Prince Charles. :D -- Obsidi♠n Soul 18:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Something weird

Can anyone have a look at Portal:Fashion please, the image on the right I'm seeing has something to do with Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah and Indo-Pakistani peace, but when I click on the Image, I get this. I don't know if this is intentional (:|) or whatever. Lynch7 17:54, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

It was supposed to be the image of the lady, but someone had uploaded a different picture over the same filename; it was undone, but the thumbnail version didn't update (for some reason). I've now forced it to update (by changing the picture size from 200px to 199px), and I think it is OK.  Chzz  ►  17:57, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

... and I've done the same at History of fashion design which had suffered from the same problem. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks guys :) Lynch7 18:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Information to Improve Stubs

My deceased step father is the subject of several different Wikipedia stubs. My family has lots of information on the man and his work. However, there seems no way to add information to "improve the stub", since the added information would have no verifiable citation. Any way around this problem? It seems silly to add information, only to have it removed as unverifiable. Sidewise (talk) 19:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Verfiability is one of the cornerstones of Wikipedia. As a tertiary source, Wikipedia in essence collates material from other verifiable sources. If you can get the information that you have published somewhere, perhaps by donating it to a library or museum, we may be able to make use of it. – ukexpat (talk) 19:47, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Adding a 'Reference'?

Hello,

I am not by any means an expert on I.T., I was shown how to use a computer by one of my Sons, who is very far away and very busy.

The questions I wanted to ask were:

How do I add a reference to a page?

The info I wanted to add is as follows:

I was in Band as a teenager, one of the first 'Rock and Roll' Bands, it was back in the '60's', I was with the band for three years, but then left due to several differences. Later on, I met someone with an unsigned Band who later became famous, I told Him about my experiences with the Band and that I had one or two friends in the buisiness and might be able to help get them a recording contract as I thought the Band was really great and had 'original' material. They got signed and the second record they made, was the name of my Band and it became a 'Hit', their first 'Hit' and still the favorite with their fans, who don't know anything about me or the connection to the Band I was in.

Could I add a reference to the Band I was in an an explanation, plus mention the songs which have my name in?

There is a page on the famous Band, whose Singer I met before they were signed, before they used the name of the Band I was in for a single that became a 'Hit'.

Brasstapewound

I can 'verify' this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brasstapewound (talk • contribs) 20:17, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to wikipedia Brasstapewound. Wikipedia verifies information from published, reliable, secondary sources. We don't verify material from personal correspondence or life experience, as these aren't available in a fixed form for inspection, they're not reviewed through an editorial system for correctness, and they're too closely related to the topic to avoid fundamental biases. Have you considered being interviewed by a music journalist or social historian of rock who may be interested in your information, and may eventually publish it? Wikipedia could rely on that publication for the fact, as a publication in a recognised, edited music newspaper or magazine would be reliable. Fifelfoo (talk) 20:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello Fifelfoo, the Band I was in was an R.A.F./Army Band, who did get world famous and after I left, didn't get offered any more contracts, as being a Woman Rock Guitarist at the time, (1963-5,) was quite unusual. There will be records of that Band, because most of the Band were R.A.F. or Army, so both the R.A.F and the Army will hold records. Lots of people who know me have suggested I write a book or add the information to Wikepedea, but I don't kow any 'Rock Historians', perhaps you could suggest one?

So let me get this straight, you say unless there was some kind of 'Publication' about me, anyone can say they are me or were in the Band I was in or call themselves by that name or call their Band the same name and claim the 'Copyright' , ( does that mean a 'COPY'?) Anyone can call their new song by the name of the Band I was in and again claim the 'Copyright'!? I used to wear my hair in a 'Buffount', but now apperently it was an original style by another Woman? (who is now deceased.)

So anything written in the 'Wikepedea' is now Gospel? Strange there is NO mention of me on the Band's page, which is now owned by the people who have claimed 'Copyright'? The 'Star' died, much of His Music mentions MY name, but the 'Copyright' is owned by people who don't even know who I am!!!!

"May EVENTUALLY puplish it"???? I am 63, I do not want to go looking for Historians or Publishers, I do NOT need or want 'Fame', I was urged to attempt to let the truth be known, I tried.

So much for the TRUTH! 'History' is written by the winners of WAR, the losers get nothing! 'Wikipedea' is quite obviously no exception!

The BrassTapewound strings were called "____ ____" They were mine.

Brasstapewound (talk) 22:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC)--Brasstapewound (talk) 22:31, 6 December 2011 (UTC) Brasstapewound

Yes, this is unfortunately the way that things go. You could try writing a memoir and seek to get your notes, papers, and memoir deposited in a social history archive, and hope after you're dead that someone will write it up reliably. We rely on reliability, not truth. If you notice uncited material on wikipedia that you believe to be wrong, you can remove it; but, please also post to the article's Talk: page explaining why you removed the content. But you can't add material that cannot be proved from publication to be correct. Many of the publications open to publishing material from members of the public don't meet wikipedia's reliability criteria. If you contact Universities local to you, it may be possible to find a sympathetic historian. Additionally, the historians and archivists associated with the British military may have some interest in your material. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:14, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

New editors need feedback

Hey guys. I feel bad about being here because this is not the route by means of which I ought to be going for this kind of help, but I am over my head and need some assistance. Wikipedia:Requests for feedback directs here, by the way. There is a campus ambassador program on Wikipedia wherein university professors have their students edit articles as part of the classwork. I think this is a great way to introduce people to editing Wikipedia, but there are some problems with this new program.

Right now the problem I am facing is that I have a class which made articles and they are saying that they want a little more community review. I would appreciate anyone going to any of their articles and giving feedback on what should be changed - lots of short comments from different people would be great.

For the long term, if anyone has any ideas about how to get support for new users then please join/start conversations on the campus ambassador boards. I have a more full explanation here - User:Bluerasberry/jumpqueue. Thanks for any attention you can give. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Lack of citation sources

I contributed an article some time ago about a software product that was historically important in a particular technological area. The product is long dead but the architecture was sufficiently different that it influenced the industry. There is now a note on that site that says it needs citations. Unfortunately, being a dead commercial product means there is little that can be cited in the public domain. As the software architect for the organisation from 1987-2002, my knowledge is reliable. However, even though I tried to write an objective report, I understand that I cannot cite myself as a reliable source. Is that true? How should I proceed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonyproctor (talk • contribs) 20:43, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I am afraid that personal knowledge is not sufficient as it is not verifiable. Note that sources do not have to be online: articles in print magazines etc if they exist can be used as sources, preferably using the appropriate {{Cite}} template. – ukexpat (talk) 20:50, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Unable to access articles

Repeated attempts to view references under 'right to petition' resulted in (1) first a message that my search had 'timed out'-- I don't know what this means or how to respond to it; (2) nest my browser was taken over by an unidentifiable site that kept duplicating itself and would not respond to 'X' close, finally had to shut down my browser to stop it; (3) finally I reopened my browser at the last page viewed and got the message: 'error has occurred, pls try again later'. I did try again with a new search and got the same 'error' message. It feels like I am being denied access to these articles, which can't be, right? Please advise. Thanks. scate39 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scate39 (talk • contribs) 21:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry you had this trouble. Can you tell us the name or URL of the Wikipedia article that you were looking at, and the footnote number that had this unhelpful link? -- John of Reading (talk) 21:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for answering. My initial search was "Right to Petition". Sorry, I didn't get the heading etc, but the article was exactly what I was looking for. The references I was trying to access were (1) 'S.1 An omnibus 'ethics reform bill' that contained a provision Section 220 to establish federal regulations for the first time of certain efforts to encourage grassroots lobbying, ie, voluntary efforts of members of the general public', and (2) Section 220. A few minutes ago I tried once more with a new in to Wikipedia and a change in search to 'Constitutional Right to Petition' and got to Honest Leadership and Open Govt Act of 2007' but no lead from that to Section 220. I want to see what efforts Congress has made to legislate control over our right to petition. Many thanks. scate39 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scate39 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The link in footnote 3 of Right to petition is faulty: whoever added the reference must have done a search, and then just pasted the URL into Wikipedia without realising that the URL was not a permanent link to the resource they had found, but a link to the particular search they were doing which found the resource. But the particular site (http://thomas.loc.gov) doesn't keep searches forever, and has expired that particular search. You can search for it again among the 110th congress bills at http://thomas.loc.gov/home/LegislativeData.php?&n=BillText&c=110, but I don't see a way to create a permanent URL for it. --ColinFine (talk) 00:26, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Article that I edited has disappeared

Its title is not showing with the various contributions. It is an article about Henry Landau 1892 - 1968, British spy. I have checked the deleted log and it does not come up there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wlzabi (talk • contribs) 22:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

You have an incomplete draft about Henry Landau at User:Wlzabi/Enter your new article name here. -- John of Reading (talk) 22:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

How to load profile picture in Wikipedia?

Hi,

How to load profile picture in Wikipedia? Can you please help me in this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhilash.sai (talk • contribs) 23:54, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by a "profile picture". Can you explain more about what you are having trouble with? --Jayron32 23:55, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I am trying upload a free-licence picture in wiki page. How to do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhilash.sai (talk • contribs) 00:05, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

I also want to be an official editor. Can you help me?--Abhilash.sai (talk) 00:15, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, so it has articles, not profiles. To upload pictures to be used in articles, see WP:Image tutorial.

I don't know what you mean by an official editor. Anybody can be an editor, just by editing. Please read the links that somebody has put on your talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 00:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) There are no official editors. The list of official editors is the entire population of the world. You became one when you were born. As far as uploading images for use in encyclopedia articles, see Help:Files. --Jayron32 00:36, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Maybe by "official editor" they mean an autoconfirmed editor? Dismas|^(talk) 00:39, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Unlikely. The OP has been here since 2008, and has a few hundred edits. They've been autoconfirmed for a while. --Jayron32 00:46, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps they mean an administrator? - Purplewowies (talk) 00:54, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Dismas is right. Maybe since i am new to this editing work in Wikipedia, i am trying find out how Wikipedia works. But also i have seen some users who are Authors?? --Abhilash.sai (talk) 00:54, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Maybe Purplewowies is more right. I always been an Admin where ever i worked--Abhilash.sai (talk) 01:00, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Information on Administrators at Wikipedia can be found at WP:ADMIN. --Jayron32 04:12, 7 December 2011 (UTC)