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.
Hi wikipedia, I'm Gilang. I'm an Indonesian and a Javanese. As a javanese, we actually write our language in 2 writing system, which is the roman alphabet and the javanese alphabet. But in wikipedia, all the articles that is written are in roman alphabet. and it's kinda frustrate me, cause I really wanna make a records in our language using our own native writing system. If you know how it works, please kinda let me know. I just wanna fulfil my cultural obligation as a javanese to preserve our writing system, despite the loss popularity among our people so that it's not forgotten. Gilangfaturrozy (talk) 00:01, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Gilangfaturrozy: Each language Wikipedia has its own rules and guidelines for how articles are written. You will need to ask there about getting the other alphabet added for articles. We here at the English language Wikipedia can't help with that. RudolfRed (talk) 00:45, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Gilangfaturrozy: When a language has two writing systems, the usual approach it to treat is as two languages. Since the current Javanese wikipedia uses the roman alhpbet, you will need to create a separate version for the javanese-alphabet version. This is not technically difficult, but it is a lot of work. Until you attract a user community, you will be doing most of that work yourself, probably my manually transcribing articles from the existing roman-alphabet version. I wish you luck. -Arch dude (talk) 04:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is that automatic transliteration? Does anyone know of an algorithm for transliterating between Latin-alphabet Javanese and Javanese-alphabet Javanese?-- The Anome (talk) 09:50, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Update:This might be of interest. If there are simple transliteration rules, it should be possible to set up an automatic transliteration system, if you can get other editors to help, and the WMF to enable support. -- The Anome (talk) 09:57, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am the Minister General for the Order of St. Francis and we are identified on several pages here on Wikipedia. I have tried several times to correct website address links and clean up content that is relevant to our organization and now I have found that all of the changes that I have made are being labelled as "vandalism". Tell me exactly what you need me to do to make the changes that are necessary and if not, then I would like to remove us completely from this resource as we have been "vandalized" on several occasions in the past by another group that has been barred from Wikipedia for copyright infringement on our content. Zane Young73.35.189.123 (talk) 01:07, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid directly editing articles related to your order, but you may make formal edit requests(click for instructions) on the article talk page, detailing changes you feel are needed and why. If you are compensated in any way for your position(not just money), you need to make the paid editing declaration, a Terms of Use requirement. 331dot (talk) 01:41, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You have no control over the information our unpaid self-selected horde of editors choose to add to articles, and we will not honor a request for article deletion. However, we do value your input, in spite of the impression we sometimes collectively present. Since you are a "paid editor" as we define the term, you will best be served by creating an account under your own name or under a random pseudonym, but not under the name of your organization (see WP:USERNAME). Then, declare your paid status on your user page, and then make edit recommendations, with cited sources, on the talk pages of the relevant articles. Since you wish to make easily-citeable changes of simple fact, this will go quickly. If you encounter any difficulties, please come back here. -Arch dude (talk) 17:09, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Noah8799: Your userpage and responses to messages at your talk page do not indicate that you intend to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, should you wish to do so please see WP:YFA, the tutorial and you might consider the Wikipedia adventure. Editing existing articles before starting a new one would be beneficial and some more links will be left at your talk page. Please note, notability is all important and please do not write about yourself. This is not a good idea. Eagleash (talk) 03:26, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)@Ram nareshji: I have removed the line and left a note for the user. If you find unconstructive editing (this was possibly a good faith edit), please feel free to remove it yourself. This 'delayed' EC was caused by the maintenance being carried out 5AM to 5.30 AM (UTC) which caused the page not to save; but was still 'open' a few hours later! Eagleash (talk) 09:11, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
When you attempted to add the |quote= parameter here, instead of "quote=", you wrote "quote:". All that was necessary was to change the ':' to a '=', which I have done for you. —[AlanM1 (talk)]—06:56, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Lupton editor! Haven't you noticed that at the top of this page you're told If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page? -- Hoary (talk) 08:19, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's something to be said for this.@AlanM1: Refuse to do anything? (It's not as if the articles concerned ever appear to have much importance; although to be fair, this may be the most vapid I've seen.) Wikipedia is of course laden with mistakes and junk that are much worthier of our attention: example, example. (And of course pungent flatus too: example.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:07, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hoary: There have been two problems with that approach. The first is that someone usually comes along and does it anyway (not usually me). The second issue is that the IP editor in question is sometimes (maybe often?) the one that broke the article. That's the part that really needs to be resolved. If someone wants to contribute, great, but be willing (and able, as they claim, inexplicably, not to be) to fix what you break. —[AlanM1 (talk)]—00:17, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@AlanM1: Next time, shall we describe, demonstrate, or describe and demonstrate how to revert? (I have, on occasion, utterly screwed up a table while "improving" an article. I've then reverted my "improvement".) -- Hoary (talk) 00:24, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're going to have to be more specific. The two posts above are the only recent contributions from your IP address (or any near it) in the last week. —[AlanM1 (talk)]—07:51, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
you should know if you have pku (phenylketonuria) even on restricted diet you cannot develop normal brain function and will have problems its not a cure just reduces the problem your page indicates a sufferer would be normal THEY WON'T i have pku i know read NSPKU website — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:5D35:D200:DD23:E951:C870:5D43 (talk) 11:57, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WIKIPEDIA SAYS THAT OF THE 59 DAMS IN KERALA, 3 ARE UNDER TAMILNADU PWD.
MY QUESTION IS WHY? AND HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN?
THIS IS LIKE SAYING THAT MY NEIGHBOUR OWNS MY HOUSE. WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS HAPPENING? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.199.161.160 (talk) 12:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But for general knowledge questions, as this is, if the Wikipedia articles about the particular dam (eg Malampuzha Dam) don't answer the question, then the Reference Desk is the best place to ask. But that article I linked to says "The dam was constructed by Tamilnadu government but later the dam and Palakkad district belongs to Kerala state", which may be the answer to your question. --ColinFine (talk) 14:02, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I just made an article on English Wikipedia for the Montgeron-Crosne station in France. May I ask how long does it take for an article to be reviewed? And if after that period still no admin has reviewed my article, how can I get an admin's attention to tell him/her to review my article?
Thanks.A smart brainy man (talk) 13:27, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A smart brainy man You have not submitted your draft for review. I will shortly add the appropriate information to allow you to do so. Once it is submitted, there is no way to know how long it will take, as drafts are reviewed in no particular order. It depends on the amount of backlog there is(it has been reduced recently, but can change at any time). 331dot (talk) 13:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My name is Nazeem Mohamed and I was born in Guyana SA.in 1947. As a young kid I asked my Dad if he can tell me something about my grandfather. All he told me was a name “Yakub”. I really would love to have more information about those people ( including my grandfather ) who came from India, on ships, by the British. I would really like some information about my grandfather, where he came from and what happened to him. Thank you ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:9000:B90B:996B:61D4:AA6E:17A:1C93 (talk) 14:29, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
I am a professional musician and would like to change what wikipedia displays when I appear from a google search. It currently show my status as married but that is incorrect. I edited this information in my wikipedia bio, but wikipedia still displays it on a search. Please advise.
Thank you,
Wayne Escoffery — Preceding unsigned comment added by Escofferymusic (talk • contribs) 15:05, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Escofferymusic, hi Wayne. We don't control what Google put on their information boxes - you'd have to approach them about that. I guess it will get updated at some point to reflect the new content in the article, but we have no control over that. Since you have edited the article about yourself, you should review COI - there are steps you have to take, and certain things you are not supposed to do. Cheers GirthSummit (blether)15:14, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Our standard reply:
Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wording is important, and should follow the source. I believe it's a settlement of a civil lawsuit by the trustee in the Fyre bankruptcy, recouping part of the $275K she was paid to promote the venture. It's not a "fine" levied by anyone. —[AlanM1 (talk)]—23:55, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any way to generate a wikilink to a gadget's checkbox under preferences? I just suggested that somebody turn on "Preferences / Gadgets / Appearance / Change UTC-based times and dates, such as those used in signatures, to be relative to local time". It would be so much nicer if I could have just given them a link directly to the right section. -- RoySmith(talk)15:44, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to that, the anchors (values of the id= attributes) are not static. As I write this, ooui-php-293 is the anchor for the gadget described as "Display diffs with the old yellow-and-green colors and design", but that will change if another option (not necessarily a gadget) is added or removed. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:39, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The two mw- ones certainly Works for me in Firefox. From an accessibility standpoint, the method used (adding anchors inside the gadget description) is less than ideal, because they're after the relevant <input /> checkbox. There is a <label>...</label> element, but whilst that fully encloses the description it doesn't enclose the checkbox as well (it could do, it's allowed by the HTML spec, but that would require a mediawiki change). The label is associated with the input via for="ooui-php-292" and id="ooui-php-292" attributes respectively, so the descriptive text woks as a hotspot for the checkbox - but does everybody realise that? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:53, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Attn: Have all but given up on reaching you, so convoluted have I found the means to possibly do so.
I'm a freelance writer, having sold to Citadel; St. Martin's; McGraw-Hill; et al. Mostly film history but wrote the liner notes for Radio Archives "Philo Vance" CD box sets (which can be read online, appearing with the second set in the series) and sundry magazine articles. I have put on film programs for the Wistariahurst Museum and The Mark Train House. Have extensive collections of related materials; loaned films from my collection to the UCLA Film and Television Archive and The George Eastman House for restoration projects.
Reason for this email: just looked over your extensive listing pertaining to the status of early-talkies, and saw THE NIGHT PARADE (RKO; 1929) listed as "lost". I have a complete 16mm print of this feature; it was formerly in TV release via U.A.A. and most likely now owned by Turner Entertainment, who acquired the bulk of the RKO features along with those of MGM and Warner Bros.
A 16mm print in my collection which is apparently otherwise "lost" is THE LINE-UP, a two-reel talkie crime film from 1929. A clip from my copy can be viewed online by using the name VIOLA RICHARD (who has the female lead; had previously appeared in silent comedy shorts of the late Twenties, mostly with Laurel and Hardy). Said clip is mistakenly referred to as being from a segment of THE LINE-UP whereas it was obtained from my print, which is fully complete. I recently allowed Greg Luce to release it intact on DVD, available from his Sinister Cinema catalog. The subject used the Powers Cinephone system, as was then also being used by Walt Disney, Mascot Pictures, and the Harmon-Ising MGM cartoons.
I don't know where you saw TheNight Parade listed as a lost film, since there is a article on it; clearly it is not "lost" -- feel free to correct obvious errors. Wikipedia is created, updated and maintained by volunteers; you are more than welcome to improve Wikipedia yourself! Please note that original research is not allowed, and reliable sources are needed. If you'd rather not make edits yourself, leave a note on article's talk page. 107.15.157.44 (talk) 21:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ANABACCHECKERS: You've apparently misunderstood Wikipedia's organization (or rather, lack thereof). This is a volunteer-driven encyclopedia, not a publishing company. You'll want to contact the actual owners of those films' rights so they can restore and re-release it -- we have no means (either technical nor legal) do that. If the films are in the public domain, I've seen similar restored releases from companies like The Criterion Collection and Kino International (company) (and there are undoubtedly others).
You having a copy doesn't revoke any "lost" status until those films are verified by external parties (not us, don't even bother thinking of asking of sending us copies or something because, again, we're a volunteer-driven encyclopedia). Ian.thomson (talk) 22:01, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed
Page of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93Philippines_relations has vandalism in See also section. Proof Ram nareshji (talk) 04:45, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
Works for me in Firefox. From an accessibility standpoint, the method used (adding anchors inside the gadget description) is less than ideal, because they're after the relevant 
